D&D 5E Wanting more content doesn't always equate to wanting tons of splat options so please stop.

Corpsetaker

First Post
The title says it all.

There are a good many of us here who wants to see more content, and more of a variety. If you are not a fan of AP's then you aren't going to spend 35 plus on a book that contains very little else that you could probably find on the internet or in older material. What this leaves a lot of us with is no choices when it comes to D&D. I don't shop on DMsGuild because it doesn't have the official stamp of approval. It does contain the "make some money for yourself and us" approval but that's it.

There are a few on this forum who decide to put words into your mouth and start shouting about bloat and splat. Well it seems clear to me that these are obviously afraid that our voices will be heard so they try and shout over some of us or begin this giant "assumption" train that eventually goes rocketing down the rails. There is a happy medium when it comes to content and Wizards hasn't come even close. D&D has always provided it's customers with a bit of variety but this edition fails at it miserably. Again please don't interrupt with shouts of "DMS GUILD!" because fan made stuff has always been around and never has it ever been acknowledged as part of the edition's content. DMs Guild doesn't change that. I've also heard this argument about not wanting to put out the same stuff that had been around in past editions.

Two things:
  1. All you have to do is look at the AP's and you will see these have already been done.
  2. Last time I checked, WoTc has some new people working and writing for them so I would like to see what ideas they have that would expand some things from the past.
What people don't seem to realize is that not everything was covered in previous editions. You could have a lot of somethings who had some mentions here and there but were never fully explained or fully detailed. I for one and fully interested in a source book on the Feywild made for 5th edition, as well as FR regional sourcebooks for areas that were never fully covered back in the day.

We are getting less and less DM's tools that allow DM's to create their own adventures and more and more preset adventures where the DM basically just becomes a storyteller and rolls a few dice. Now mechanical options wise, there are a few classes such as the Sorcerer who could use a few more Sorcerer options that are official and not some half job someone wrote on a napkin at work. When mechanics get printed by WoTc it gives me a sense of security that I know reasonably well that this is going to not be broken. I don't want a lot of options but there are classes who could use more. I hate the whole attitude of not needing more until you've played everything that's already out. Again, this is about variety because I don't currently like all the options, just like I don't like all the AP's so I want to be able to say no thanks to that, but yes please to something else. At the moment when you say thanks to an AP you get nothing else.

Putting out reasonably more material will not cause D&D to become a bloatfest. Anyone who tells you that is just flat out wrong. Nobody is asking for the 10,000 powers of 4th edition, the 20 settings of 2nd edition, and the 50,000 feats and spells of 3rd edition. Instead of looking at what came before and decided on a happy medium that gives us some of these things in moderation, we get mediocre AP's whose quality is just that.

Wanting more content doesn't equal wanting mountains of bloat, it's wanting variety.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

JeffB

Legend
This will go 40 pages. What do I win if I guess right?

On a serious note- I agree with the gist of your post. I dont want a big production schedule and especially don't want or need splats. That said, I don't mind lots of books because I don't ever feel the need to buy anything just to keep up with Joneses or pressured to allow everything. No matter what edition, or for any other game either.

I said during the playtest my issue would be with the type and format of their DM support. EDIT- wanted to add clarification- Current DM support mostly a big swing and a miss for me. Also, I love the idea of the DMs Guild. Don't care about sanctified officialness, but I have been underwhelmed by the output, despite a few good things I picked up. its like 3.0/2002 all over again.
 
Last edited:

Prakriti

Hi, I'm a Mindflayer, but don't let that worry you
At the end of the day, I want what's best for D&D, and Wizards is the only entity with enough information to determine what that means.
 



manduck

Explorer
I get what you're saying and agree with you. I don't want to see book after book of new paladin oaths, feats, spells or whatever. Though I do always like a new monster book or anything that can add some variety to my games. I'd be more inclined to pick up a campaign world (provided it's different enough from what's out there) to make my life as a DM easier. I also tend to like books that deal with things like survival in different harsh environments, the different planes, or even a certain game theme like what Open Grave was in 4E. I'll gladly check out a book that adds something interesting and unique to my game world. Extra rules options and other crunchy bits are a bit of a pass for me. I don't need fighter maneuvers or ranger conclaves. Those kind of of books lead to bloat. Books that add something unique and interesting to D&D don't strike me as adding to the bloat of a system. So I think I'd favor more flavorful books over additional rules.
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
At the end of the day, I want what's best for D&D, and Wizards is the only entity with enough information to determine what that means.


This is true, we just have subjective opinion and public info, like the best selling status of the current plan.

Subjectively, I love it, and am having a hard time keeping up with the pace WotC is setting in publication.
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
Yep, you want more stuff. Good for you. It's a shame though you aren't going to get it, isn't it?


Also, this: what "voice" is it that is being silenced? WotC staff largely ignore this forum, they get their feedback on Twitter or via survey. Posting here has zero effect on the state of the game.
 

Mercule

Adventurer
At the end of the day, I want what's best for D&D, and Wizards is the only entity with enough information to determine what that means.
I agree, but we may have different definitions of what a "healthy" D&D brand looks like.

To me, the D&D brand is sickly if it's too tightly coupled to a specific setting. Settings are their own (sub) brands. I don't care about the health of most setting brands. Even the ones I really enjoy (Eberron, for example), are way, way down on my list of concerns. Which gets me to where the wheels come off the whole bus.

Although I agree with [MENTION=6776548]Corpsetaker[/MENTION]'s general ideas, including the DMsGuild, I specifically want a D&D that has less support for the Realms. I would enjoy it if they replaced it with elements from other settings or even train-of-thought examples that never show up in actual published settings, but I'd be fine with just leaving a void when the Realms currently sits.

I would love to see an adventure using other settings (sans the FR ties, like CoS has) and a SCAG-type book for Khorvaire (Eberron) and the Nyr Dyv (Greyhawk). I'd also like to see a something akin to a Best of Dragon book published that drew from the current Unearthed Arcana and DMsGuild to give use the best content for new races, classes, and rules modules.
 


Remove ads

Top