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

[tetrasodium]

Most of the genre related options depend on the setting, and belong in a setting guide.

With regard to mechanical rules, the only "modular" option that I notice some players asking for is more chess-like options for grid and miniatures.

Am I misunderstanding the modes that people are asking for?

That's usually called tactical gameplay & the fact that the dmg flanking/facing rules are so hostile to the mere existence makes it worse. I'd add "that bring subjective choices to equipment like past editions" & "that are balanced for the creation of a magic item budget & accompanying monster rework formulas" or similar to some of @Minigiant's list in #449 then toss in "a rework of phb197 & new recovery rules to strip wolverine/deadpool's mutant healing factor from the average pc". Sadly some of the dmg variant options show that wotc was at least at one point willing to create rules that check a box in name while seeming to deliberately avoid actually meeting the need to go with it.

@Parmandur I feel like I've heard that somewhen before, perhaps 2009, maybe 2008. I'm sure it's mere coincidence

 

[Parmandur]

That's usually called tactical gameplay & the fact that the dmg flanking/facing rules are so hostile to the mere existence makes it worse. I'd add "that bring subjective choices to equipment like past editions" & "that are balanced for the creation of a magic item budget & accompanying monster rework formulas" or similar to some of @Minigiant's list in #449 then toss in "a rework of phb197 & new recovery rules to strip wolverine/deadpool's mutant healing factor from the average pc". Sadly some of the dmg variant options show that wotc was at least at one point willing to create rules that check a box in name while seeming to deliberately avoid actually meeting the need to go with it.

@Parmandur I feel like I've heard that somewhen before, perhaps 2009, maybe 2008. I'm sure it's mere coincidence

In 2008, they pursued the wrong market. Now they actually use big data.

 

[Hussar]

What's disturbing is that you imply that only younger gamers are diverse. Are younger groups more diverse? Maybe. Seems like the ratio of female players is going up which is a good thing. But the groups I played with always welcomed anyone who had an interest in joining.

To be fair though, that's not a totally unreasonable depiction. Gamers pre-5e days were pretty monolithic. That was born out by WotC's own market research. Pre-5e gamers were very predominantly male (as in women made up less than 10% of gamers and now they make up about 40%), very predominantly white and suburban. This is hardly news.

 

[Yaarel]

• Character creation variants
• Divinity and Demigod Ability scores
• Weapons modules
• Armor Modules
• Equipment replacement variants
• Mass Combat
• Action rules for Action movie, Swashbuckling, Western, and Wuxia combat
• African, Asian, Australian, and American inspired classes, subclasses, races, magic and items
• Rules and Advice for Archaic or Futuristic games
• Political and Faction rules
• Stronghold rules

just for a few

The list was helpful.

• Animism is very important − and I would love to see American, Australian, African, Asian, and more accurate Norse/Sami examples of it. Even so, this is more about setting.

• Epic tier will arrive when it arrives.

• Mass combat − UAs have tried to do, but the way it was done didnt receive enough approval. It is important, but I prefer something that is as simple, sensical, fair, and effective as possible. Mass combat is already inherently complex − please avoid gratuitous complexity like dice tricks.

• We have several kinds of political faction rules now! Mostly of narrative consequence, but also mechanical benefit.

• Stronghold rules − I especially want this for Levels 9-12 − but including magical structures.

• By weapons and armor, do you mean something like complexifying damage versus resistance to slashing, piercing, and bludgeoning?

 

[Minigiant]

By weapons and armor, do you mean something like complexifying damage versus resistance to slashing, piercing, and bludgeoning?

That and more

• Armor as Pierce/Slash/Bludgeon Damage Resistance
• Armor as HP
• New Armor tables (with gambeson and brigandine)
• Multiple types of shields
• New weapons table
• Exotic weapons
• Weapon group Fighting styles
• Weapon group Maneuvers
• Parry as Defense
• Touch AC, Reach AC, and Protection AC
• Melee AC and Ranged AC

Currently it's hard to run a pure humaniod game of 5e as the weapons and armor systems are... so simple.

 

[Necrozius]

I imagine DnD will also start moving away from using Blinded, Deafened, and Paralyzed as negative conditions that can be removed by magic

I certainly hope not. There’s a difference between respectfully acknowledging characters with different disabilities versus attacks, spells and hazards that negatively impact or limit our senses or physical abilities.

I seriously doubt any disability advocates are trying to get WotC to remove the Conditions table. Maybe a few crazies on Twitter, but not in good faith.

 

[ph0rk]

I think that maybe WotC understands market demand quite well.

Everyone that has an accidental hit thinks they are suddenly market masters: The game Final Fantasy was called that because Squaresoft thought it was to be their swan song, it wasn't.

5.5e or 6e will be a fantastic cash in. Sooner or later their growth figures will dip enough that it seems like time. I wouldn't be surprised if it is soon, because the pandemic being "over" is certain to impact sales, and I don't think a board that has grown used to that kind of growth will react calmly when it doesn't happen.

This has nothing to do with what the edition needs but with what a handful of decision makers think will earn them more money.

And, further, "big data" is just data, and it isn't magic.

 

[tetrasodium]

In 2008, they pursued the wrong market. Now they actually use big data.

Through 5e up until fairly recently the vast majority of wotc's polls were so laughably bad they frequently could serve as figure 1 in a book titled "how not to word polls" with honorable mention in "how to phrase push polls for the results you want". Databases like the ddb character database can be analyzed to show use, but that database can only be mined in so many ways. That db mining can tell you things like how the most used three classes are consistently the top three at will damage dealing classes but not why or what people think about them. That bad polling leads to a problem known as garbage in garbage out(gigo).

Gigo is ok if you don't put much weight in the poll, but wotc put extreme weight in those polls without questioning the result or methods even when it went against logic. That bad data being given too much weight is how you get things like:

• grid combat tactical components for flanking & facing that scorn the very concept of grid combat tactical gameplay.
• mutant healing factor equipped PCs who might find a ring of regeneration less efficient.
• PCs equipped to handle an adventuring day that might take two three or more sessions rather than the way most people actually run their tables,.
• So on & so forth with a host of other GM facing dials & subjective elements being outright removed or optimized for the whims of what the much larger player only respondents wish their GM would give them simply because players outnumber GMs and wotc rarely ever bothered asking if someone is a gm & to what degree until very recently.

 

[Hussar]

That and more

• Armor as Pierce/Slash/Bludgeon Damage Resistance
• Armor as HP
• New Armor tables (with gambeson and brigandine)
• Multiple types of shields
• New weapons tableau
• Exotic weapons
• Weapon group Fighting styles
• Weapon group Maneuvers
• Parry as Defense
• Touch AC, Reach AC, and Protection AC
• Melee AC and Ranged AC

Currently it's hard to run a pure humaniod game of 5e as the weapons and armor systems are... so simple.

Considering that virtually none of that has ever appeared in any edition of D&D, why on earth would you expect it now?

The following things on your list have never appeared in any edition of D&D:

Armor as DR
Armor as HP
Gambeson and Brigantine
((I have no idea what a weapons tableau is))
Parry as Defense.
Melee AC that is different from Ranged AC.

So, at least half of the things that you want have never appeared in D&D before. Umm, again, why would you think they're suddenly going to make an appearance now?

 

[Minigiant]

Considering that virtually none of that has ever appeared in any edition of D&D, why on earth would you expect it now?

The following things on your list have never appeared in any edition of D&D:

Armor as DR
Armor as HP
Gambeson and Brigantine
((I have no idea what a weapons tableau is))
Parry as Defense.
Melee AC that is different from Ranged AC.

So, at least half of the things that you want have never appeared in D&D before. Umm, again, why would you think they're suddenly going to make an appearance now?

Celestial Warlock and 4 Elements Monk never appeared in any edition of D&D.

Are you saying D&D can't have new things?
Are you saying that D&D should not explore crunch element fans have criticized in the past?
Are you saying that D&D should not explore crunch elements from other IP?