D&D 5E Volo's 5e vs Tasha's 5e where do you see 5e heading?

[Hatmatter]

Actually the fact that they repeated did very open UAs on the ranger proves a large percentage were not satisfied but they had trouble satisfying a large percentage without editing the PHB.

No one outside of WOTC really know if it was a majority or not.

I do not follow this logic, Minigiant. How do repeated efforts to revise the Ranger prove that "a large percentage were not satisfied"? Comments by Jeremy Crawford and other designers actually suggest otherwise...there were many who like the PHB version of the ranger and, as a consequence, Wizards wanted to revise the ranger while still preserving the PHB version. This takes time to get right.

 

[Marandahir]

I do not have a crystal ball and I do not know what Wizards is planning to publish. But, if they ever did publish a Dragonlance setting or a Greyhawk setting of some kind or even a Spelljammer book I would be surprised if those books included an equivalent to supernatural gifts. As Marandahir has written, I think the gifts in the Theros and Ravenlofts books have strong narrative and campaign setting reasons to exist. Marandahir's prediction that something equivalent (or even more potent) for Dark Sun also makes sense. But, I actually do honestly believe that there are setting books that will come out in the future that will not contain the equivalent to Supernatural Gifts.

But, we'll see. It's all good.

I'd 100% agree with you if it weren't for the case of Heroic Themes making the jump from 4e's Dark Sun Campaign Setting to the Nerathi Legends assumed setting in Dragon magazine (everything, including Dragon articles, were considered core in 4e).

(And don't get me wrong: I enjoyed the Dragon heroic themes as a parallel to Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies, and the additional dials and bells and whistles for building a character. I just think if it had remained a Dark Sun thing, it would have been more thematically appropriate).

So there's precedence for them doing it before. But I also think WotC have learned that this is a better toolbox item for specific types of campaign settings, so I HOPE that you're right.

 

[Marandahir]

You misunderstand. Fixing 5e for wotc by creating the modular hacks they insist are enabled by the system's simplicity doesn't break when wotc releases something to cover that. Actually doing that runs into problems when wotc adds to something that interacts with the new module in unforeseeable ways. for the gm who does the significant work to make it. That butterfly effect gets magnified because 5e lacks any real hooks where these new modules can link onto & the new module needs to create hooks somewhere else the creator hopes is future proof.

How can WotC predict what you're going to homebrew onto the system? It's the homebrewer's responsibility to playtest their own house rules, especially when it comes into contact with new core rules. We can't assume that WotC is going to develop rules that take into account potential house rules from homebrew content they've never seen before.

 

[Marandahir]

If they want to go the way of TSR they could do that. Only Zendikar would definitely sell well, and 5E would have massively overstayed its welcome by then, and the systems it uses, which looked relatively modern in a slight retro way, in 2014, by 2029 will be looking positively ancient. You'd definitely see a steady decline in sales over that period if you were spamming MtG settings like that and not innovating D&D. You might even see a scenario like that of 2E, where people actually started to move on to other RPGs, because D&D seemed so stuck in the mud. I think it's less likely now but not impossible, and if that happens, getting them back with a 6E after they've tasted various forbidden fruit re: mechanics and general game approaches will be considerably harder.

I disagree. I knew nothing of Ravnica or Theros before those settings were released, and they filled a great and fun niche for me ever since. Zendikar is the one I knew about ahead of time, yes (I also knew about Dominaria and Kamigawa from years ago when I played occasionally with a friend who was a big player), but looking through the settings, these 4 settings I mentioned would bring something completely different to the game and could potentially be blockbuster sales.

We do not need massive name-recognition crossovers. The MtG D&D books are just as important to pull D&D players to MtG as they are to pull MtG to D&D. We DO need settings that would capture the imagination of new players who had never heard of the settings before.

What was Eberron before it was released? A set of genre tropes in Keith Baker's mind, to be sharpened by working with WotC dev teams. We don't know what we want until we get it. But having settings that open up new worlds of play and genre can be very profound. WotC of course should lean on settings they already have established lore and fandoms for when choosing genres to release campaign settings, but new settings need hooks too, and D&D desperately wants more books like VRGtR to explore genre tropes and teach how to make a game in that genre.

I don't think 5e will feel ancient in 2029. I think it'll feel fresh still because they're slowly tinkering with it each year, in the same way Pathfinder slowly drifted from 3.5e without a hard break.

 

[Hatmatter]

They didn't want to errata the PHB. That's it. The Ranger satisfaction level was lowest. And people were vocally upset with the beastmater. Positivity toward the beastmaster was hard to find.

However they wanted find a solution, especially the beastmaster, that didn't rewrite or override the PHB. And they didn't print anything until they found it. So in Tasha's they just printed "overpowered" beasts designed to boost the class feature and gave the option of using druid foci.


It's simple.

I didn't see WOTC changing their design stance due to a change in design philosophy. I feel real world events changed how Tasha handled races and lineages and not a new game design philosophy. Most of the rest of Tasha's uses WOTC's old game design ideas to me.

It's still "Don't override, overshadow, or replace what's in the DMG, MM, and PHB by much." 5e barely ventured into the crazy or new like earlier editions. And from my experience, playing it safe doesn't sustain hype.

To me, 5e is still too safe. Especially wth a huge chunk of its fans being new and coming from different media and fantasy backgrounds.

Ok. We can check in a few years and see if Wizards is floundering. I hope Wizards will begin to publish the kind of books that you and others to whom you are referring desire.

 

[Hatmatter]

I'd 100% agree with you if it weren't for the case of Heroic Themes making the jump from 4e's Dark Sun Campaign Setting to the Nerathi Legends assumed setting in Dragon magazine (everything, including Dragon articles, were considered core in 4e).

(And don't get me wrong: I enjoyed the Dragon heroic themes as a parallel to Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies, and the additional dials and bells and whistles for building a character. I just think if it had remained a Dark Sun thing, it would have been more thematically appropriate).

So there's precedence for them doing it before. But I also think WotC have learned that this is a better toolbox item for specific types of campaign settings, so I HOPE that you're right.

Fascinating. Well, we'll see. Here's hoping that Wizards continues to publish great work and, hopefully, make Minigiant happy!

 

[Parmandur]

They didn't want to errata the PHB. That's it. The Ranger satisfaction level was lowest. And people were vocally upset with the beastmater. Positivity toward the beastmaster was hard to find.

However they wanted find a solution, especially the beastmaster, that didn't rewrite or override the PHB. And they didn't print anything until they found it. So in Tasha's they just printed "overpowered" beasts designed to boost the class feature and gave the option of using druid foci.

Moat people were happy with even the Beastmaster. Now after careful deliberation, they come up with some solutions to help people who were less satisfied. Job well done.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

So you're saying it changed a rule which about 5% of games used to begin with (AL rules)? Yeah, that's not major. And that change was coming for a long time anyway. Even before Tasha's a bunch of AL games being played in homes were letting that rule slip a bit here and there, particularly with spells.

Perhaps,

I disagree. I knew nothing of Ravnica or Theros before those settings were released, and they filled a great and fun niche for me ever since. Zendikar is the one I knew about ahead of time, yes (I also knew about Dominaria and Kamigawa from years ago when I played occasionally with a friend who was a big player), but looking through the settings, these 4 settings I mentioned would bring something completely different to the game and could potentially be blockbuster sales.

We do not need massive name-recognition crossovers. The MtG D&D books are just as important to pull D&D players to MtG as they are to pull MtG to D&D. We DO need settings that would capture the imagination of new players who had never heard of the settings before.

What was Eberron before it was released? A set of genre tropes in Keith Baker's mind, to be sharpened by working with WotC dev teams. We don't know what we want until we get it. But having settings that open up new worlds of play and genre can be very profound. WotC of course should lean on settings they already have established lore and fandoms for when choosing genres to release campaign settings, but new settings need hooks too, and D&D desperately wants more books like VRGtR to explore genre tropes and teach how to make a game in that genre.

I don't think 5e will feel ancient in 2029. I think it'll feel fresh still because they're slowly tinkering with it each year, in the same way Pathfinder slowly drifted from 3.5e without a hard break.

I think Kaldheim and Arcavios would make great settings because it seems clearly that they were designed for that future possibility from the get go unlike most thread MtG settings.

 

[tetrasodium]

How can WotC predict what you're going to homebrew onto the system? It's the homebrewer's responsibility to playtest their own house rules, especially when it comes into contact with new core rules. We can't assume that WotC is going to develop rules that take into account potential house rules from homebrew content they've never seen before.

They can't. the GM forced to fill gaps in wotc's product can't predict what wotc will add either. Wotc however is a multimillion dollar company with quite the staff setting it in a very different league than the average to above average gm. That is why it's so important for wotc to actually eat their own dogfood and start supplying modular rules to swap in to 5e that fill some of the gaping holes in 5e rather than saying rulings not rules & 5e was designed to be modular or 5e was designed to be easy to modify. Wy do you think it's reasonable to expect the gm forced to finish parts of 5e to do what you yourself are saying that wotc has no way of doing?

 

[Minigiant]

I do not follow this logic, Minigiant. How do repeated efforts to revise the Ranger prove that "a large percentage were not satisfied"? Comments by Jeremy Crawford and other designers actually suggest otherwise...there were many who like the PHB version of the ranger and, as a consequence, Wizards wanted to revise the ranger while still preserving the PHB version. This takes time to get right.

30% is both a large percentage AND not the majority.
Them working hard to create a solution and constantly addressing their work to fix it proves the unhappy were not an insignificant percentage.

Moat people were happy with even the Beastmaster. Now after careful deliberation, they come up with some solutions to help people who were less satisfied. Job well done.

I don't think so. People were happy with the Hunter Ranger. It was popular. Views on the beastmaster were so negative it became a meme.

It took them 5 years to fix it. Even if they didn't want to edit the PHB, there were options that doesn't take 5 years to make. Spells, beast equipment. magic items.

Ok. We can check in a few years and see if Wizards is floundering. I hope Wizards will begin to publish the kind of books that you and others to whom you are referring desire.

I don't think Wizards will flounder. I just think the new books after a few years will see a significantly noticeable drop in sales.

I hope not but I don't see the risks.