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

[Blue]

There are lots of ideas left. How many do fans actually want that can be implemented with WOTCs light touch, refusal to make major overhauls, and the rigid system. There is only so much left they can squeeze into the current system to make a book worth buying without making big changes or going on the crazy end.

Still, citation needed. Throwing more adjectives at it does not constitute a shred of evidence.

For example, "rigid system" - what do you mean by this, and how is 5e so totally unlike the other editions that ideas can't be applied?

Refusal to make major overhauls is called "an edition". Just because 4e experimented with rewriting subsystems (and had MAJOR player pushback on how they were using their errata) doesn't mean that "keeping an edition coherent" is a bad thing.

 

[Minigiant]

Then why did they launch the edition at a slow speed?
By that logic they started with no ideas

To pad it out.

And since 5e is a nostalgia edition, they kinda did start with no new ideas.

 

[Parmandur]

The mods are rather minor. If it weren't Ravenloft, it wouldn't sell.

That's the point. There is only so many Ravenlofts left.

Doubtful statements are doubtful.

 

[Hatmatter]

I do see where people are coming from in as much as the Tasha's approach to races and the introduction of alternative class features was the first time that it felt like the designers were fundamentally unhappy with major elements of the players handbook. There are some other more minor things like the emphasis on "proficiency bonus times a day" abilities and feats that give spells now letting you know the spell and cast it with any spell slots you have that also make it clear that if the designers were writing the PHB today they would do a few things differently. I don't think it particularly adds up to anything like WotC being ready for a new edition, but it is the first point where, to me, it feels like the designers are starting to chafe at the constraints of the edition's core materials.

I see where you are coming from and respect this, although I am not sure I entirely agree (I am still contemplating).

The reason I think I disagree is that this latest edition of D&D seems predicated upon an ethos of making the game as easy to learn out-of-the-box as reasonable while meeting its other objectives. Having standard fantasy races helps facilitate that. I think the revisions that you cite here are merely part of how a game develops over time. If a sixth edition incorporated these changes, five years later there would be more tweaks they would want to make to that new edition.

I do think, though, the rules that spell slots can be used to employe feats that characters have might be something that the designers would like to incorporate from the beginning. But if anything appeals to the DIY aesthetic of D&D that the Wizards design team has embraced, it would be that super-simple-to-house rule change.

 

[Minigiant]

Still, citation needed. Throwing more adjectives at it does not constitute a shred of evidence.

For example, "rigid system" - what do you mean by this, and how is 5e so totally unlike the other editions that ideas can't be applied?

Refusal to make major overhauls is called "an edition". Just because 4e experimented with rewriting subsystems (and had MAJOR player pushback on how they were using their errata) doesn't mean that "keeping an edition coherent" is a bad thing.

Bo9S can out 6 years after 3.0.

The rigid system is the design space left for creation. There isn't a lot of design space in most classes in their subclasses to drastically change them. All races and lineages are locked into a +2/+1 plus minor race/lineage aspects system. Monster design is all wacky and don't really tailor to new playstyles. All the settings used similar assumptions and don't pull the game deep into new directions. No alternatives to feats or multiclassing to change the style of play. No new magic systems. No new combat styles. Few new equipment that alter the game genre.

 

[Disgruntled Hobbit]

To pad it out.

And since 5e is a nostalgia edition, they kinda did start with no new ideas.

And 6th Ed will be the no-nostalgia edition for all the newcomers, built for streaming and online play. Fast and streamlined and easier to run
Does that sound like something you want?

 

[Parmandur]

Bo9S can out 6 years after 3.0.

The rigid system is the design space left for creation. There isn't a lot of design space in most classes in their subclasses to drastically change them. All races and lineages are locked into a +2/+1 plus minor race/lineage aspects system. Monster design is all wacky and don't really tailor to new playstyles. All the settings used similar assumptions and don't pull the game deep into new directions. No alternatives to feats or multiclassing to change the style of play. No new magic systems. No new combat styles. Few new equipment that alter the game genre.

I doubt we will see another Xanathar/Tasha style book before they do a mild refresh for a backwards compatible 6E. But they have succeeded in making something truly evergreen here.

 

[Sithlord]

And 6th Ed will be the no-nostalgia edition for all the newcomers, built for streaming and online play. Fast and streamlined and easier to run
Does that sound like something you want?

Redoing the mistkaes of 4E

 

[Hatmatter]

The slow speed is hiding the fact that they are out of ideas that can fit in the current race, monster, and class systems.

There is no path forward with their strategy. They have at most 2 years before major slippage. And 2 years is kind. Path of the Wild Soul? They are nearing the wall. It's Go wild, Revise, or Restart time.

Respectfully, Minigiant, I do not see this logic taking into consideration the 5th edition emphasis on storylines. At the time of the 5th edition roll out, the design team (Mike Mearls, Chris Perkins, Jeremy Crawford, for example) were very clear that the emphasis is moving Dungeons & Dragons forward with storylines, rather then rules options and supplements. The rules options and supplements are published when they are ready to go, but the vacuity or fecundity of the game is not judged by the people making the game based on this rationale of "ideas that can fit in the current race, monster, and class systems." That would be an appropriate standard for 3rd or 4th edition, whose design teams held a different set of assumptions.

Also, I think that when it does come to rules, there are many areas of expansion and adaptation that go well beyond subclass and monster and even class design.

But, I have made my prediction. We'll see how it goes. Keep 'em rolling!

 

[Minigiant]

And 6th Ed will be the no-nostalgia edition for all the newcomers, built for streaming and online play. Fast and streamlined and easier to run
Does that sound like something you want?

No.

I want a modular 6th for old heads, newcomers, and everyone in between to be applied to many campaign, storylines, and settings.