WotC WotC announces D&D Community Advisory Group

[SkidAce]

I mean I've only been a member for almost 23 years (longer then that back to the old site). I don't believe I had fully embraced the Baldman lifestyle yet then - maybe still in partial denial

I too was at the old site.

And bald.

/highfive

 

[tetrasodium]

That seems like a ... projection?

I want to agree, but I think it's something far worse. Look at the original statement "Wouldn't the existence of "tools" only constraint DM and force them to play in prescribed ways", specifically it rejects and dismisses the very idea that rules are capable of existing in. Form that mechanically supports the gm or mechanically carries setting elements to lighten the GM's load. That might have been a reasonable thing to question decades ago, but we have plenty of examples from past editions like way 3.0 Ravenloft book did so by altering baselines or the way 3.5's rules for bonus types combined with the DMs best friend sidebar∆ to allow the gm something akin to on the fly rulings within the framework of a rule

∆you might remember it as the+2/-2 DMG section

 

[Doctor Futurity]

Probably true but... we're already in the bad timeline where the current edition is one with so little concern for dms that at least one class and weapon mastery was outright designed to "frustrate dms". Having a dm advocate while allowing them to actually advocate for dm needs and listening to them are different things.. take the upcoming Ravenloft book we evidence, we've seen multiple teasers about it and there is apparently so little to hype for dms that not one of them raised anything but stuff aimed at players.

They need to sell it to players. The Raveloft book is clearly mostly for GMs from everything I've seen.

 

[Xenolith234]

They need to sell it to players. The Raveloft book is clearly mostly for GMs from everything I've seen.

I don’t have hard data, but I doubt that players buy nearly as many things as DMs no matter the material put in the books.

 

[tetrasodium]

They need to sell it to players. The Raveloft book is clearly mostly for GMs from everything I've seen.

Do tell. What content in said book do you feel is written to support GMs?


The last time someone made that claim in this thread they declared that the GM focused content in said book was the monsters players will fight with their PCs, the artwork appealing to art fans, the narrative lore appealing to readers and iirc the claimant himself. It's even been confirmed that the domains themselves are almost entirely a reprint of Vrgtr domains with slight wording changes of the sort that a gm might find reading the domain entry on the Ravenloft wiki or mistipedia and those domains are still lacking mechanical support for their themes tone or anything else.

That would be a non-issue if this were an aberration in an edition where books were regularly dripping with mechanical gm support and optional crunch aimed at GM pain points like tcoe gave to the PC's players make... But it's an almost unbroken streak going back to 2014 of exclusive player focus book after book.

 

[Xenolith234]

Do tell. What content in said book do you feel is written to support GMs?


The last time someone made that claim in this thread they declared that the content in said book was the monsters players will figure with their PCs, the artwork appealing to art fans, the narrative lore appealing to readers and iirc the claimant himself. It's even been confirmed that the domains themselves are almost entirely a reprint of Vrgtr domains with slight wording changes of the sort that a gm might find reading the domain entry on the Ravenloft wiki or mistipedia and those domains are still lacking mechanical support for their themes tone or anything else.

That would be a non-issue if this were an aberration in an edition where books were regularly dripping with mechanical gm support and optional crunch aimed at GM pain points like tcoe gave to the PC's players make... But it's an almost unbroken streak going back to 2014 of exclusive player focus book after book.

I was hoping 5.5 would be different in this regard, but so far more of the same.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Do tell. What content in said book do you feel is written to support GMs?


The last time someone made that claim in this thread they declared that the GM focused content in said book was the monsters players will fight with their PCs, the artwork appealing to art fans, the narrative lore appealing to readers and iirc the claimant himself. It's even been confirmed that the domains themselves are almost entirely a reprint of Vrgtr domains with slight wording changes of the sort that a gm might find reading the domain entry on the Ravenloft wiki or mistipedia and those domains are still lacking mechanical support for their themes tone or anything else.

That would be a non-issue if this were an aberration in an edition where books were regularly dripping with mechanical gm support and optional crunch aimed at GM pain points like tcoe gave to the PC's players make... But it's an almost unbroken streak going back to 2014 of exclusive player focus book after book.

Here the ToC, everything intended for GM's is outlined in red.

You are also just straight up wrong about most of that stuff.

Monsters are a GM resource, artwork is for everyone including the GM, the lore is also intended for the GM. Also lots of info is original or different from Van Richten's Guide.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

That would be a non-issue if this were an aberration in an edition where books were regularly dripping with mechanical gm support and optional crunch aimed at GM pain points like tcoe gave to the PC's players make... But it's an almost unbroken streak going back to 2014 of exclusive player focus book after book.

Ok let me put out every single official book (that are not boxes)

Player's Handbook (Despite the name it's for both the Player and GM as it contains the rules to play)
Monster Manual (GM)
Dungeon Master Guide (GM)
Tyranny of Dragons (GM)
Princes of the Apocalypse (GM)
Out of the Abyss (GM)
Sword Coast Adventure Guide (Leans Player, but has GM stuff too)
Curse of Strahd (GM)
Storm King's Thunder (GM)
Volo's Guide to Monsters (GM)
Tales from the Yawning Portal (GM)
Tomb of Annihilation (GM)
Xanathar's Guide (Player, with some GM)
Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes (GM)
Dragon Heist (GM)
Ravnica (GM)
Dungeon of the Mad Mage (GM)
Ghosts of Saltmarsh (GM)
Decent into Avernus (GM)
Eberron Rising from the Last War (GM with notable player presence)
Explorer's Guide to WIldermount (GM)
Theros (GM with some notable player presence)
Rime of the Frost Maiden (GM)
Tasha's Cauldron (Player with some GM)
Candlekeep Mysteries (GM)
Van Richten's Guide (GM with some player presence)
Wild Beyond the Witchlight (GM)
Fizban's Treasury (GM with some player presence)
Strixhaven (GM with some player presence)
Call of the Netherdeep (GM)
Monsters of the Multiverse (GM with some species for players)
Radiant Citadel (GM)
Spelljammer (GM with a handful for players)
Shadow of the Dragon Queen (GM)
Keys from the Goldenvault (GM)
Glory of the Giants (GM with handful for players)
Phandelver and Below (GM)
Planescape (GM)
Book of Many Things (GM with a tiny bit of player things)
Eve of Ruin (GM)
Quests form the Infinite Staircase (GM)

5.5
Player's Handbook (same as before)
Dungeon Master Guide (same as before)
Monster Manual (same as before)
Dragon Delves (GM)
Heroes of Faerun (Player Focused with some helpful GM info)
Adventures in Faerun (GM)
Eberron Forge of the Artificer (Rough even split between Player and GM)
Ravenloft the Horrors within (GM with some player stuff like Van Richten's Guide.)

 

[Doctor Futurity]

Do tell. What content in said book do you feel is written to support GMs?

The last time someone made that claim in this thread they declared that the GM focused content in said book was the monsters players will fight with their PCs, the artwork appealing to art fans, the narrative lore appealing to readers and iirc the claimant himself. It's even been confirmed that the domains themselves are almost entirely a reprint of Vrgtr domains with slight wording changes of the sort that a gm might find reading the domain entry on the Ravenloft wiki or mistipedia and those domains are still lacking mechanical support for their themes tone or anything else.

That would be a non-issue if this were an aberration in an edition where books were regularly dripping with mechanical gm support and optional crunch aimed at GM pain points like tcoe gave to the PC's players make... But it's an almost unbroken streak going back to 2014 of exclusive player focus book after book.

I guess we will know soon. The info Ive seen references new domains, monsters and key villain stat blocks (something missing from thepriior Ravenloft guide) and what sounded to me like a player section with updated 5.5 stats for prior character options plus some new subclasses. This is what I want as a GM.

I'm not sure what the objection is....this Is very close to how most WotC books are set up these days. I suspect that the issue you have is you would like more GM facing crunch but that has not historically been how 5E works. I appreciate this desire but I am realistic in my recognition that if I want GM crunch I go to Paizo. If I just want a relaxed D&D experience I've got 5.5.

 

[Doctor Futurity]

I don’t have hard data, but I doubt that players buy nearly as many things as DMs no matter the material put in the books.

Agreed...which is why their promotional discussion highlights player facing options. They know that DMs will buy it, the historical trick is getting the other four to eight people at the table to also buy it.