D&D General What Is D&D Generally Bad At That You Wish It Was Better At?

[Micah Sweet]

WotC has been actually testing what default level of difficulty will sell the most number of books, for quite a few years now. Is there any reason to think that the conclusion they've reached is wrong?

No, not really. But I don't think what sells the most books should be the only factor worth considering. Allowing options for people with different tastes who all like to play D&D should also be in the mix.

 

[James Gasik]

What about high risk, high reward? Where's the high risk? It seems that risk goes down, but reward goes up.

I don't know. In my opinion, the rewards for play in modern D&D seem kind of...bland. The high-level abilities for classes that isn't new spells always feel lackluster or poorly thought-out. I guess it's better in 2024, but 2014 had lots of stuff like high-level barbarians getting what amounts to the Charger Feat and so on. And magic items, which used to be the most fantastical reward, are bland and highly restricted in their use by attunement.

I can pull out a sheet for one of my 2e characters and find multiple wands, a powerful ring of protection, and other goodies. My 5e character of about the same level a ring that grants lightning resistance and two wands, and precious little else that can be used thanks to attunement limits.

There's money, I suppose, but so far, the city adventure I'm in seems designed to make us part ways with our gold just to complete it, lol.

 

[James Gasik]

No, not really. But I don't think what sells the most books should be the only factor worth considering. Allowing options for people with different tastes who all like to play D&D should also be in the mix.

Something something Rule Zero or third-party products is the answer I always get when I want more from modern D&D, lol.

 

[pemerton]

I don't think what sells the most books should be the only factor worth considering. Allowing options for people with different tastes who all like to play D&D should also be in the mix.

Something something Rule Zero or third-party products is the answer I always get when I want more from modern D&D, lol.

It seems pretty logical to me that the biggest selling game will be the one that is sold by a commercially-oriented producer. If you want a non-commercially-oriented product, you are going to have to buy from a more artisanal producer. There are plenty of those in the world of RPGing.

 

[Lanefan]

And in my experience, you don't get people to accept the difficulty in the first place. Which is what I said to begin with.

Setting that floor that you and Lanefan describe would be game design suicide. It just doesn't work for a game like D&D trying to be everything to everyone.

It worked pretty well for 1e in 1979. No reason it can't work now.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

It doesn't have to be extreme (your word, not ours), just more challenging than at present.

The explicit description given above and agreed to by Lanefan included a number of things considered to be the highest difficulty possible within the D&D space. Things such as: hit point cap, level cap (possibly with the ability to exceed it only under very rare circumstances), worse ability scores, essentially no access to cantrips or anything like them. Stuff that even as a baseline would not be well-received by most players. And I would not be surprised if the "etc" at the end of that list would be filled in by several more difficulty-increasing things (in fact, I would be extremely surprised if there weren't more).

WotC has been actually testing what default level of difficulty will sell the most number of books, for quite a few years now. Is there any reason to think that the conclusion they've reached is wrong?

I'm sure they have. That's (part of) why I think it would be unwise to shift from the current state, probably a little below what the average customer wants but erring on that side is generally wise, to something that would be significantly too high for the average customer.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

It worked pretty well for 1e in 1979. No reason it can't work now.

1979 was a pretty different place. Not only that, there were no other alternatives.

There are lots and lots of alternatives now. Video games, at the very least. And those don't have the hurdles and baggage.

 

[Lanefan]

The explicit description given above and agreed to by Lanefan included a number of things considered to be the highest difficulty possible within the D&D space. Things such as: hit point cap, level cap (possibly with the ability to exceed it only under very rare circumstances), worse ability scores, essentially no access to cantrips or anything like them.

Note that I didn't agree to all of that; specifically I'd largely eschew the bolded in favour of an open-ended J-curve where each higher level (with commensurate hit point gain) takes longer to achieve than the previous one did.

Yes, I'd do away with cantrips and at-will magic as baked-in features. And while ability scores would stay largely the same (as in, use the same root 3-18 range) the associated bonuses/penalties would be less common - not linear like the WotC editions but more generous/penalizing at the very extremes with a bigger +0 range in the middle. EDIT to add: I'd make the actual stats more relevant by adding a roll-under soft-skill system.

Stuff that even as a baseline would not be well-received by most players. And I would not be surprised if the "etc" at the end of that list would be filled in by several more difficulty-increasing things (in fact, I would be extremely surprised if there weren't more).

The game would be harder on the characters, for sure, and generally expect some more caution and forethought from the players. That is to say, while it'd be easy to tweak to allow for face-charging Big Damn Heroes fantasy it wouldn't be designed specifically with that type of play as its goal.

1979 was a pretty different place. Not only that, there were no other alternatives.

There are lots and lots of alternatives now. Video games, at the very least. And those don't have the hurdles and baggage.

IMO trying to emulate video games has yet to produce much, if anything, useful in D&D design. They're very different things whose core audiences might not overlap to the extent WotC might think.

 

[Argyle King]

Vehicles and Mounts

 

[GobHag]

It worked pretty well for 1e in 1979. No reason it can't work now.

I mean that's literally a 40 years difference, you can't sell a black and white silent movie in the 80s either and have it be a smash hit.