D&D (2024) You're not planning on getting 2024 D&D? Why is that?

[SteveC]

no you are not, they also do not need a 100% conversion rate. 60-70% will do just fine, and I see no reason that they will not get that

It's my understanding that each edition of the game has sold more books initially than the one before it, so I think you're right: given how much D&D has grown over the last 10 years. It can still be seen as a success and a great one at those numbers.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

Have you looked at Level up advanced 5E?

I own it. It's fine at making 5e just a shade more complex and with a few more moving parts but it involves replacing the chassis you are playing on to accommodate the additional bits.

I just want more base classes, spells, magic items, monsters, etc. All the content I can plug into my existing games.

 

[mamba]

It's my understanding that each edition of the game has sold more books initially than the one before

initially possibly, long term very much the opposite until 5e

so I think you're right: given how much D&D has grown over the last 10 years. It can still be seen as a success and a great one at those numbers.

yes, converting 50% of 20M is still more than any TTRPG ever had as players (except for 5e itself), and that are pretty conservative numbers

 

[mamba]

I just want more base classes, spells, magic items, monsters, etc. All the content I can plug into my existing games.

too late I guess, but there would be

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/magehandpress/spire-of-secrets

 

[SpellObjectEnthusiast]

too late I guess, but there would be

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/magehandpress/spire-of-secrets

not too late, they're still selling it

 

[JiffyPopTart]

too late I guess, but there would be

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/magehandpress/spire-of-secrets

Thanks!

I have a whole shelf of 3rd party books. Monsters for days!

But the OP is "Why aren't you buying 2024" and my answer would be there is no indication that they are going to support their product with content I find valuable.

3rd parties help....but that's also giving credit where it isn't due to the OEM.

 

[deadman1204]

Honestly, they changed just enough to sell more books. Its not really backwards compatible at all, because it requires all sorts of dm futsing to decide how each thing works together.

Beyond that, they failed to address any real issue and just complicated things. Play above level 6 is still a joke. They once again gave zero thought to it. Further more there basic inability to even proof read what they did write. The problem spells are even worse or simply no better. Why is fireball still better than many level 5 spells? Oh yea, they don't care about play at lvl 9 because it would take a mediocum of effort to worry about the game past lvl 6.

People talk about updates and erratas to fix the glaring problems, but they had 11 years to fix basic issues in 5.0 and did nothing. Why does ANYONE think they'll be better about 5.5. The dmg wont fix anything, it'll continue the trend of giving the gm MORE work with wierdly worded rules and all sorts of wierd situations.

Then we can prepare for redos of all the other books. They'll just remake them for 5.5, because its low effort.

Lastly? Because dnd is supposed to be a table top game, not a video game. They are heavily gamifying everything, making it more like bg3 and optimized for dndbeyond. They somehow removed even more of the social/exploration pillars, because thats not fighting and rolling dice. Honestly, I'm afraid of what 6.0 would be, because they're taking the worst parts of 4.0 and promoting them. The current creators of dnd are ruining it. This isn't just wotc corporate, this is the people who do dnd making this garbage. Lets not pretend they aren't doing it on purpose and just "blame corporate".

 

[Nikosandros]

One reason publishers do that is when they've promised exclusives to reviewers. That comes with an express or implicit obligation to ensure that the exclusive really is exclusive. It happens occasionally with videogames releases. Review copies are sent by publishers under a variety of terms. It's likely the reviewers in question didn't observe some aspect of them.

So what do I think of the copyright strikes morally? Generally speaking, the reviewers may be seeking self-promotion and perhaps revenues in the form of views. Putting their actions on a commercial basis (which is the most compelling reason a company would go after them.) Is it right for the owner of an IP to defend it commercially (e.g. disallow others to profit from it)?

It's hard to form a view without know what agreements were in place among the parties, whether exclusives were promised, whether there were commercial interests pursued by the impacted Youtubers.

It's not hard at all to form a view, since the situation is really not so mysterious. Sly Flourish and Jorphdan were sent physical copies of the PHB, with no requirements, except not to discuss the contents before August the 1st. The both put videos in which they flipped through the book, as it is very common in RPG reviews. Sly Flourish was asked to blur the pages while Jorphdan got a copyright strike. After a few days, WotC apologized and the videos were once again available without the blurring.

 

[Stormonu]

well, if your definition is that it is not technically impossible, ok, they also could crank out new 2e adventures…

If you go with market forces, then they will have to focus on their new edition, because that is where the money is, just like every time this happened in the past

Hey, it's not past the realm of feasibility. During the 25th anniversary (1999), they put out Deep Dwarven Delve, a previously unpublished 1E adventure, and for the 30th (?) they reprinted the 1E, 2E and 3E core books.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

Have you looked at Level up advanced 5E?

Holy @Micah Sweet sock puppet!!!!!!