WOTC new president on podcast. Asked about vision for D&D in the future...

[TentacleSurpris]

The new President of WOTC is Chris *****, a longtime player and fan of DND, appeared on the DnD podcast recently.

http://dnd.wizards.com/play-events/podcasts-livestream-games/chris-*****-president-wizards

His interview starts around the halfway mark.

I was both encouraged and dismayed. Here were my thoughts:

Positive:


The new president has a stated passion for the D&D brand. He played the game as a youth.
He's a tech guy who worked on the Xbox and loved the Bioware generation of games and the Pools of Radiance generation of games. These are some of myall-time favorite games, and if we see more like this, games that sought to mostly simulate DND, then we are in for some good games.




Negative

When asked about his vision for the future of the D&D brand, he only had answers about video games. He didn't state any vision for the tabletop game, which in the grand scheme of the DND brand for the last 3ish years has been an afterthought to the boardgames, miniatures, video games, and general merchandising.
He says that he wants fan feedback and wants to listen to the fans. But when asked how the fans can communicate said feedback, he all of a sudden got evasive. He doesn't have a tumblr like Mark Rosewater. He asked the fans to respond in a "chorus." So do we stand outside his office in barbershop uniforms to serenade the lack of sourcebooks and setting support? Does he even know that WOTC shut down the fan forums years ago?

[TentacleSurpris]

Hahaha, his actual name is blocked by the profanity filter. Click the link to see his name.

I guess we call him CC?

[Aett_Thorn]

The link you provided gives me a 404 error, just FYI.

[TentacleSurpris]

Hmm, the GiantITP profanity filter edited the URL because it contains the president's name. You'll have to look it up yourself I guess.

[Fflewddur Fflam]

Hey, I'd love to see some 5e D&D video games on the level of Baldur's Gate 2 or Neverwinter Nights, that would be fantastic. As for mostly just talking about video games, you can't really blame the guy, that's where the money is, especially since WOTC has decided not to spam the crap out of pen&paper D&D with a dozen books released every year. I've got no problems with what they are doing so far, it's not like they are dropping pen&paper D&D or anything.

[MaxWilson]

FYI for anyone who's wondering, his name is Chris [synonym for 'Roosters', starts with C].

I'm excited that he liked the Gold Box games! I'd love to see one of those in the 5E ruleset.

[Foxhound438]

******* filter with its ******** nonsense **** trying to **** **** *** ******** ******************************************.

[Ruslan]

You are allowed to bypass the filter for non-profanity, in-context usage. His name is Chris *****.

[TentacleSurpris]

It's not an official gitp thread until someone uses the term "logical fallacy."

The logical fallacy of excluding the middle. 5e has had one very thin printed sourcebook so far in it's 2 year run (counting to August 19, the PHB's and HODQ 2-year anniversary). It didn't meet with great reviews. That's one extreme. The other extreme is spamming the crap out of us with dozens of sourcebooks per year.

The middle would be somewhere in the middle. Like 2.5 sourcebooks per year, including setting books to flesh out the other campaign settings in the IP and theme books to give new class archetypes and backgrounds to support the modules being offered. I would buy those. I like to write my own adventures but my table, every table I've ever played at in my life (and every AL table) has a strict no-homebrew policy for player options.

Whenever I bring up the dearth of 5e official products I'm met with the same "at least it's not the dozens of useless books of filler that 3.5 had".

There is a middle way my friends, there is a middle way.

[Cybren]

I would prefer the pace of new archetypes, classes, & spells to be about where it is now, while having ~yearly releases of full setting books rather than short primers like the SCAG.

[Cybren]

Hey, I'd love to see some 5e D&D video games on the level of Baldur's Gate 2 or Neverwinter Nights, that would be fantastic. As for mostly just talking about video games, you can't really blame the guy, that's where the money is, especially since WOTC has decided not to spam the crap out of pen&paper D&D with a dozen books released every year. I've got no problems with what they are doing so far, it's not like they are dropping pen&paper D&D or anything.

Also, when discussing "D&D the brand" you're discussing explicitly the broader D&D use and not specifically the tabletop RPG. D&D the brand should be used in more videogames and official podcasts and other stuff

[TentacleSurpris]

I would prefer the pace of new archetypes, classes, & spells to be about where it is now, while having ~yearly releases of full setting books rather than short primers like the SCAG.

The pace "where it is now" is 0 (zero) ranger/druid/bard archetypes/year. I would prefer to see a pace of greater than zero. I guess we disagree :)

[Cybren]

The pace "where it is now" is 0 (zero) ranger/druid/bard archetypes/year. I would prefer to see a pace of greater than zero. I guess we disagree :)

You are entitled to being wrong, it's okay :)

[Coidzor]

Come to think of it, did 4e give us any videogames, let alone any of note?

My concern is that the simplified system might prove a detriment for videogames, seemingly like a toned down version of games with more exciting abilities out there, such as MMOs.

[Fflewddur Fflam]

Come to think of it, did 4e give us any videogames, let alone any of note?

My concern is that the simplified system might prove a detriment for videogames, seemingly like a toned down version of games with more exciting abilities out there, such as MMOs.

Meh, 5e is just great as it is, it's certainly not too simple for videogames. What makes an RPG videogame great is a combination of the graphics, interface, gameplay, story, challenge, re-playability, etc.

[MaxWilson]

The pace "where it is now" is 0 (zero) ranger/druid/bard archetypes/year. I would prefer to see a pace of greater than zero. I guess we disagree :)

That pace worked out pretty well in AD&D. Complete Fighter's Handbook came out the same year as the PHB, but the Complete Book of Bards took another three years, and the Complete Paladin's Handbook was another two years after that. (Those books were full of other stuff besides kits; equipment as I recall it, lots of roleplaying advice, and occasionally some spells.)

Over the whole course of 2nd edition, the only class I can remember being introduced was the Psionicist. Everything else was just kits, many of which were just a couple of suggested nonweapon proficiencies and some roleplaying advice.

Now get off my lawn.

[Foxhound438]

It's not an official gitp thread until someone uses the term "logical fallacy."


*nods in approval

however, we still need some straw men up in here for a full party


The pace "where it is now" is 0 (zero) ranger/druid/bard archetypes/year.

found it.

[Kurald Galain]

That pace worked out pretty well in AD&D. Complete Fighter's Handbook came out the same year as the PHB, but the Complete Book of Bards took another three years, and the Complete Paladin's Handbook was another two years after that. (Those books were full of other stuff besides kits; equipment as I recall it, lots of roleplaying advice, and occasionally some spells.)

There's a few more than that. 1989 had Fighter's and Thief's handbooks. 1990 had Priest's, Wizard's, Legends & Lore, Catacomb Guide, and Castle Guide. 1991 had Psionics, Dwarves, Tome of Magic, Arms & Equipment, and Vikings; and this is not counting settings books. And so forth; TSR put out a ludicrous amount of source material per year.

[R.Shackleford]

What people forget about 3e was that the more they put out the more interesting and balanced it usually became. Most of the 3e problems came from the core PHB.

The splat books, if kept organized and updated, would work great if they are published quickly.

Magic of Incarnum, Tome of Battle, Tome of Magic (not the truenamer though...), Complete Adventurer, Complete Arcane, Complete Warrior, ... Well actuallyrics you get the point.

They were all awesome books that may have needed some love and consistency but they weren't the real problem with 3e. The PHB 1 was the real source of most 3e problems.

[MaxWilson]

There's a few more than that. 1989 had Fighter's and Thief's handbooks. 1990 had Priest's, Wizard's, Legends & Lore, Catacomb Guide, and Castle Guide. 1991 had Psionics, Dwarves, Tome of Magic, Arms & Equipment, and Vikings; and this is not counting settings books. And so forth; TSR put out a ludicrous amount of source material per year.

Sure, but the point I meant to make is that there's nothing unusual about a year (or three) in which zero splatbook support comes out for bards, or paladins, or druids, or what have you.

[Knaight]

It's not an official gitp thread until someone uses the term "logical fallacy."

The logical fallacy of excluding the middle. 5e has had one very thin printed sourcebook so far in it's 2 year run (counting to August 19, the PHB's and HODQ 2-year anniversary). It didn't meet with great reviews. That's one extreme. The other extreme is spamming the crap out of us with dozens of sourcebooks per year.

One extreme is that you release one book and call it a day; the system is done and you're doing no more. 5e has had consistent errata, adventure paths, a sourcebook, Arcana Unearthed material, etc. It's in the middle.

[JumboWheat01]

Come to think of it, did 4e give us any videogames, let alone any of note?

My concern is that the simplified system might prove a detriment for videogames, seemingly like a toned down version of games with more exciting abilities out there, such as MMOs.

Technically Neverwinter Online is based off of 4e rules. Sure, it went its own way, but it followed the basic spirit of the rules far better than Sword Coast Legends did for 5e.

Though to be fair, 2e and 3e/3.5 had some of the best video games based on the D&D rules I've ever played, and some of my favorite RPGs of all time, so it's not like they need to simplify the core pen-and-paper game to have a great video game based off of it.

[Cybren]

What people forget about 3e was that the more they put out the more interesting and balanced it usually became. Most of the 3e problems came from the core PHB.

The splat books, if kept organized and updated, would work great if they are published quickly.

Magic of Incarnum, Tome of Battle, Tome of Magic (not the truenamer though...), Complete Adventurer, Complete Arcane, Complete Warrior, ... Well actuallyrics you get the point.

They were all awesome books that may have needed some love and consistency but they weren't the real problem with 3e. The PHB 1 was the real source of most 3e problems.

The 5E splatbooks were "better" in that they produced a load of material that, by virtue of the caster/noncaster divide, meant that it had to benefit noncasters. But let's not forget that some absurdly broken things existed outside core. Like Divine Metamagic.

[R.Shackleford]

The 5E splatbooks were "better" in that they produced a load of material that, by virtue of the caster/noncaster divide, meant that it had to benefit noncasters. But let's not forget that some absurdly broken things existed outside core. Like Divine Metamagic.

Which was only broken because of a core rules on casting and being able to abuse magic items. DMM isn't the problem there. The root issue wasn't DMM.

5e splatbooks we have are terrible and not worth the price they put on them. I bought HotDQ and read the others, no thank you.

[Anonymouswizard]

Hey, I'd love to see some 5e D&D video games on the level of Baldur's Gate 2 or Neverwinter Nights, that would be fantastic. As for mostly just talking about video games, you can't really blame the guy, that's where the money is, especially since WOTC has decided not to spam the crap out of pen&paper D&D with a dozen books released every year. I've got no problems with what they are doing so far, it's not like they are dropping pen&paper D&D or anything.

+1 here, although I have come problems with the current release schedule of 5e. Especially as the one setting they support I have zero interest in (despite loving Baldur's Gate), so a good percentage of the non-core books they have released are useless to me. Although I personally prefer NWN2 to NWN1 I'll agree that the BG-NWN generation was the best for CRPGs, with each of the D&D licenced ones being above the bar I expect now (seriously, where is my tactical gameplay? I feel cheated by the new Dragon Age being actionized).


Also, when discussing "D&D the brand" you're discussing explicitly the broader D&D use and not specifically the tabletop RPG. D&D the brand should be used in more videogames and official podcasts and other stuff

Yes, but D&D the Tabletop RPG is part of D&D the brand. It's not surprising that here they haven't mentioned it, as the future of it is very much set (one sourcebook every year or two, plus UA and such), plus it's the 'core product' so to speak, but it's still part of the brand.


One extreme is that you release one book and call it a day; the system is done and you're doing no more. 5e has had consistent errata, adventure paths, a sourcebook, Arcana Unearthed material, etc. It's in the middle.

The sort of thing is that, if you aren't interested in published adventures, 5e seems really thin on new material. I'm not asking for a new sourcebook every month, but being able to pick up a new book for the game every year even if I'm not a FR fan would be awesome.

Now, part of this would be solved if WotC hadn't decided to reduce the content of UA by half. Heck, I'd be willing to pay a few quid per month to access Unearthed Arcana just if I could feel like I'd get most of the rules content of a sourcebook over a year.

There's also the annoyance that many of us want official updates of settings, and WotC is just not giving us anything. Is it too much to ask for a book which gives basic updates to the rules content of a handful of settings? Throw some advice for making your own setting in there, but I'm sure that such a book would sell better than their 'Volo’s Guide to Monsters' they have, I just could not be bothered to it up as it gives me almost nothing (goblins and firbolgs as playable races, and that's probably it).

[Grod_The_Giant]

Which was only broken because of a core rules on casting and being able to abuse magic items. DMM isn't the problem there. The root issue wasn't DMM.
While I agree with you that the worst imbalances were found in the PHB, subsequent books were still full of stuff that was wildly off-base. DMM was a ridiculously potent metamagic reducer, which itself is about as strong as feats get, and it came out in the same book as Shining Blade of Heironeous. Complete Arcane gave us Initiate of the Sevenfold Veil and the Green Star Adept. To say nothing of stuff like Spirit Totem Barbarian, who depending on your group's general mundane optimization level was either necessary or wildly OP. 3.5's general quality and balance certainly trended upwards after, oh, I'd say the first round of Complete Arcane/Divine/Warrior/Adventurer, but balance was always pretty bad.


+1 here, although I have come problems with the current release schedule of 5e. Especially as the one setting they support I have zero interest in (despite loving Baldur's Gate), so a good percentage of the non-core books they have released are useless to me.
...
The sort of thing is that, if you aren't interested in published adventures, 5e seems really thin on new material. I'm not asking for a new sourcebook every month, but being able to pick up a new book for the game every year even if I'm not a FR fan would be awesome.
This. The 5e "vision" seems to be every group playing the same official adventure paths, buying one copy of the new path every few months. Everyone in an Adventurer's League, patiently consuming their product on a regular basis. Which is... not really my experience of the game, ever. They're certainly aiming their products at DMs-only though. SCAG? 95% a book for DMs-- it's almost entirely setting material. Even the first real mechanical sourcebook we're getting after two years (!), Volo's Guide to Monsters, is a DM book-- it looks like it's basically the Monster Manual 2, albeit with what looks like a higher fluff:crunch ratio than I'd prefer. Again, there will be a few pages for players, but pretty much the entire post-PHB publication has been for DMs. That makes the slow release schedule sting extra-hard for those who like to play-- 3.5 and 4e both had a steady mix of player-books (with race, class, spell, etc options) and DM-books (with monsters and setting info), which is an idea that looks like it's been forgotten.

[Cybren]

They probably make more money selling primarily to DMs: it's a book they know only one person per group "needs", and the average player is going to hear about an ability they like and just pirate it.

[gkathellar]

That pace worked out pretty well in AD&D. Complete Fighter's Handbook came out the same year as the PHB, but the Complete Book of Bards took another three years, and the Complete Paladin's Handbook was another two years after that. (Those books were full of other stuff besides kits; equipment as I recall it, lots of roleplaying advice, and occasionally some spells.)

Over the whole course of 2nd edition, the only class I can remember being introduced was the Psionicist. Everything else was just kits, many of which were just a couple of suggested nonweapon proficiencies and some roleplaying advice.

Now get off my lawn.

Yeah, but then TSR folded and had to sell D&D to Wizards, which proceeded to do not that and make a decent chunk of change.


This. The 5e "vision" seems to be every group playing the same official adventure paths, buying one copy of the new path every few months. Everyone in an Adventurer's League, patiently consuming their product on a regular basis.

Especially funny, given that they initially pitched it as highly customizable and accessible to everyone.


SCAG? 95% a book for DMs-- it's almost entirely setting material.

I actually have a list of pages that include crunch sitting next to me right now, by pure chance. There are 21, or 31 if backgrounds count (IMO, they mostly don't).


That makes the slow release schedule sting extra-hard for those who like to play-- 3.5 and 4e both had a steady mix of player-books (with race, class, spell, etc options) and DM-books (with monsters and setting info), which is an idea that looks like it's been forgotten.

It's also a financial death spiral. Without putting out new books that a majority of players are going to buy, you can't sell new books that a majority of players are going to buy. That depresses sales on the books that are put out, which makes D&D look like a brand with limited viability, which makes corporate say, "but why would we want to print more books?"

You need to put out stuff that everyone wants if you want to build brand, but that's the opposite of what they're doing. There's a reason lots of people are more interested in Sage Advice and UA right now than they are in a lot of the actual release schedule.

[TentacleSurpris]

One extreme is that you release one book and call it a day; the system is done and you're doing no more. 5e has had consistent errata, adventure paths, a sourcebook, Arcana Unearthed material, etc. It's in the middle.

Errata isn't content, it's slight tweaks that any honest construction of the text should yield. "A sourcebook." Emphasis on the "A" and it was pretty thin. It had literally the lowest page/$ ratio of any DND book in history. It was mostly information that longtime fans already knew; descriptions of the gods and places on the sword coast. The sword coast has been done to death. The book was just a product tie-in for the SCL video game, and it felt like it. You'd never know from 5e that the Forgotten Realms was an entire planet.

UA material isn't content either, it's like a teaser trailer for a movie that never gets released. Mystic? Ranger? Haven't seen them, no announcements on them, and it's been over a year since we gave feedback. None of it is official for AL play, nor playtested, nor is it "polished" or "finished". They read like MM banged them out in an afternoon just to have something. And even then, some of the UA articles are just advertisements for DMSguild content.

How about content for PLAYERS. 4/5 of every gaming group are players and WOTC sells material that only appeals to 1/5 of the gaming group. Players are specifically NOT supposed to buy the modules. How is that a viable business, to capture only 20% of your market? Even if 60% of people pirated a sourcebook, if two people in a group bought it, it would outsell the modules 2:1.

[TentacleSurpris]

Anyways we can debate the state of the 5e product line to death but the point of this thread is that the president of WOTC had NOTHING to say about the tabletop game when asked about his vision of DND.

If putting out 5e products wasn't a priority for the last president and wasn't a priority for this one, we can look forward to 5e continuing to limp along with a few modules here and there until they ask for our money in 2019 for 6th edition.

[Cybren]

Anyways we can debate the state of the 5e product line to death but the point of this thread is that the president of WOTC had NOTHING to say about the tabletop game when asked about his vision of DND.

If putting out 5e products wasn't a priority for the last president and wasn't a priority for this one, we can look forward to 5e continuing to limp along with a few modules here and there until they ask for our money in 2019 for 6th edition.

They asked in context of his experience with microsoft. What do you expect? Him to go into talking about his copy editing and book publishing experience?

[R.Shackleford]

Anyways we can debate the state of the 5e product line to death but the point of this thread is that the president of WOTC had NOTHING to say about the tabletop game when asked about his vision of DND.

If putting out 5e products wasn't a priority for the last president and wasn't a priority for this one, we can look forward to 5e continuing to limp along with a few modules here and there until they ask for our money in 2019 for 6th edition.

I've been looking forward to 6e for a while, not because I hate 5e but because I know WotC business model.

Personally I'm just going to make 6 or so classes, a ton of sub classes, and make my own 5.75 or whatever. I'm not sure I'll buy another 5e, 5.5, or even a 6e book.

5e started out with such promise and potential and they just cropped all over it and the fan base.

[Regitnui]

If I got an Eberron book. even if it was just something like the SCAG with a couple of monsters, I'd be happy. On top of everything said above, I just want to feel like there's more to D&D than Fairly-Well-Known Realms. :smallsigh: They hint at Eberron and Dark Sun, but seem content to just let us wander around in our own homebrews, without even opening up the settings for DMsG. If Eberron was on DMsG, there would be new material from Keith Baker, who seems to be left out in the cold just as much as the rest of us Khorvairans. What in the bloody name of the Mockery is taking so long that we can't step away from the tired and predictable Sword Coast into Sharn and Stormreach?

[Kurald Galain]

They probably make more money selling primarily to DMs: it's a book they know only one person per group "needs", and the average player is going to hear about an ability they like and just pirate it.
That doesn't seem right. There are many more players than DMs, so prima facie a product that appeals to players will sell better than a product that appeals to DMs.


I've been looking forward to 6e for a while, not because I hate 5e but because I know WotC business model.
Yes, based on what happened in the past, it is highly likely that 6E will appear within the next five years.

[Cybren]

That doesn't seem right. There are many more players than DMs, so prima facie a product that appeals to players will sell better than a product that appeals to DMs.

A group only needs one of any particular book, however, so they theoretically don't get more than 1 sale per group. Most RPGs I've played in, at most two people had the books for. My assumption is they view crunchy character option books are more attractive for piracy than mostly setting material useful to DMs


Yes, based on what happened in the past, it is highly likely that 6E will appear within the next five years.


Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, provided 6E is an iteration from 5E that mostly just incorporates errata, cleans up layouts, and addresses some of the rules interactions and character options that aren't Cool Enough

[R.Shackleford]

Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, provided 6E is an iteration from 5E that mostly just incorporates errata, cleans up layouts, and addresses some of the rules interactions and character options that aren't Cool Enough

That would be 5.5 which will come out a bit before 6e. Probably called something stupid like "essentials".

6e will be getting back to "the root of WotC D&D" but staying simple.

This means that there will be tons of options. Keep bounded accuracy but increase the numbers a bit (ability scores go to 30, Prof bonus goes to 16 or whatever).

You will have a ton of classes and a ton of subclasses.

The wizard will still be stupid powerful. However they will do something crazy and make the subclasses the beguiler, warmage, and dread necromancer instead of specific schools.

[Anonymouswizard]

That would be 5.5 which will come out a bit before 6e. Probably called something stupid like "essentials".

Don't be silly. They've used 'Essentials', this time it'll be '5e Required'.


6e will be getting back to "the root of WotC D&D" but staying simple.

This means that there will be tons of options. Keep bounded accuracy but increase the numbers a bit (ability scores go to 30, Prof bonus goes to 16 or whatever).

You will have a ton of classes and a ton of subclasses.

The wizard will still be stupid powerful. However they will do something crazy and make the subclasses the beguiler, warmage, and dread necromancer instead of specific schools.

To be honest, if 6e is just 5e with a book twice as thick, with tons of player options, some inflated numbers, and a decent skill system, I'd be happy. 5e seems to be stuck in the area of trying to go back to being as simple as 2e while keeping the lots of class features from 3e, which leads to something I'm half happy with (and at least in 2e you get more NWPs as you increase in level).

[R.Shackleford]

Don't be silly. They've used 'Essentials', this time it'll be '5e Required'.



To be honest, if 6e is just 5e with a book twice as thick, with tons of player options, some inflated numbers, and a decent skill system, I'd be happy. 5e seems to be stuck in the area of trying to go back to being as simple as 2e while keeping the lots of class features from 3e, which leads to something I'm half happy with (and at least in 2e you get more NWPs as you increase in level).

I was just using Essentials as an example, im.sure they will leave us in shock and awe with how absolutely stupid of of half edition name they can come up with.

I would be OK with that, I miss the sheer number of options that 3e and 4e gave me.

[Toaau]

Relevant, and much more importantly *good* article about this on Tribality today, which should clear up a couple of questions about the release structure. All conjecture, but it makes sense.
http://www.tribality.com/2016/07/21/fifth-editions-content-strategy/

[Cybren]

Relevant, and much more importantly *good* article about this on Tribality today, which should clear up a couple of questions about the release structure. All conjecture, but it makes sense.
http://www.tribality.com/2016/07/21/fifth-editions-content-strategy/

I really like that article. People don't seem to be aware or appreciative that WotC is shifting to the same model most other RPG publishers use: keep costs low with a small team, and have a lot of your content come from freelancers.

[R.Shackleford]

I really like that article. People don't seem to be aware or appreciative that WotC is shifting to the same model most other RPG publishers use: keep costs low with a small team, and have a lot of your content come from freelancers.

I don't use WotC because they are the "other guys", I use WotC because I expect their content to be top notch and better.

Or at the very least interesting and new options that I can use to change things up.

They are pushing public play but not giving options in which to play with... I mean... they are going two ways at once.

[Telwar]

I really like that article. People don't seem to be aware or appreciative that WotC is shifting to the same model most other RPG publishers use: keep costs low with a small team, and have a lot of your content come from freelancers.

Though some/lots of the other RPG publishers manage to publish more good-quality product, which can be used by players, GMs, or (gasp) both, even using freelancers. Shadowrun, for example, makes a LOT of use of freelancers, though since it's both a game and a setting, a lot of the material is easily usable by both players and GMs, and is reusable. Most WotC-branded content since the core books is not really reusable ("Let's run through that adventure again!").

I'm mildly surprised they haven't started paying someone a pittance to go through and update the classic adventures and setting material to 5e and post them as PDFs. Hell, they could probably get someone to pay them to allow updates.

[Klorox]

The beauty of an RPG is that you don't need to spend money on a lot of stuff to have a great game.

If WotC never releases another 5e product, it won't affect my enjoyment of the game.

[RedWarlock]

5e has been great for my gaming group.. by which I mean, nobody here likes it enough to run it (we've bought the PHB and MM and nothing since), and meanwhile, we've branched out into playing a bunch of other systems, and I've evolved my d20-ish-3e/4e-fix into a full-fledged standalone system I'm eventually looking to publish.

The lack of 5e material to purchase and explore (since none of us give a hoot about FR-centric setting material) has really opened us to the idea of asking, "WotC, why do we need you any more?"

I was a big 3e fan, and I enjoyed the concepts if not all the execution behind 4e (I even warmed up to Essentials after it broke down), but 5e has done nothing but feel like mis-steps in the wrong direction. I'm happy if some people like it and enjoy where it's going, but until it moves in the same direction me and my friends have been heading, we're more happy to part ways and look for new territory than limp along behind WotC's slow trudge.

[2D8HP]

we can look forward to 5e continuing to limp along with a few modules here and there until they ask for our money in 2019 for 6th edition.I quite enjoy 5e, and I really hope you're wrong (though I suspect your right).
I boycotted 2e because it was still published within a decade of 1e (and I foolishly thought it would be a mess like '85's "Unearthed Arcana"), and while I bought 3e, I felt cheated when first 3.5 and then 4e came out so soon. I hope for no new editions for at least a decade.

That pace worked out pretty well in AD&D......

Now get off my lawn.I love all "lawn" posts.
Bless you @MaxWilson

[Regitnui]

Relevant, and much more importantly *good* article about this on Tribality today, which should clear up a couple of questions about the release structure. All conjecture, but it makes sense.
http://www.tribality.com/2016/07/21/fifth-editions-content-strategy/

I sincerely hope that 5e is the version of D&D I'm teaching my future children. But I've said it before; for all the strengths in D&D's new strategy, there are those of us who like the other settings. Very little's stopping WotC from having started with a worlds-spanning setting like Sigil and branching out to their big 3 from 4e (FR, Eberron, DS). Heck, I hope every day that Volo's Guide brings in official changelings, shifters and thri-keen. They're all prominent monster player races from non-FR settings that can blend into their Adventurer's League quite happily. Hobgoblins are step in the right direction; the Darguun goblinoids are an interesting part of Eberron, but I want to officially step back into my changeling characters.

Come on, WotC. Let me have my Eberron. I know you remember us; we were the first UA given to the fanbase. We can have a book without trailing Elminster's beard and Drizzt's paws over it. More settings means more content for the DMsG and more money. Heck; just say "Dark Sun, Eberron and Dwagonlance content is now accepted on the DMsG." Boom. Fans stampede in.

*Admittedly, warforged carry a lot of setting baggage. I'd be fine with them waiting for official Eberron.

[Waazraath]

What people forget about 3e was that the more they put out the more interesting and balanced it usually became. Most of the 3e problems came from the core PHB.

The splat books, if kept organized and updated, would work great if they are published quickly.

Magic of Incarnum, Tome of Battle, Tome of Magic (not the truenamer though...), Complete Adventurer, Complete Arcane, Complete Warrior, ... Well actuallyrics you get the point.

They were all awesome books that may have needed some love and consistency but they weren't the real problem with 3e. The PHB 1 was the real source of most 3e problems.

Mhhh, dunno... in addition to what Grod the Giant already replied, and with whom I agree:
- a lot of 3.5 splat was rubbish. There are hundreds if not thousands of pages published with utterly rubbish (faar too weak) spells, prestige classes and feats, that will hardly (if ever) have been played at tables.
- a lot of the splat was also vastly overpowered. Though this is less bad than absolute rubbish, since they are usefull to some people on the higher optimization level, they also disrupt games of casual players who don't understand the game balance too well. The problems of 3.5 core have vastly been increased by all the spells, acf's, feats and items that made caster even far more powerful than they already were.
- Also late 3.5 splat was only averagely balanced. The only balanced class in Tome of Magic was the binder, the shadow magic started out far too weak, and at the late level could overshadow non-casters, like any other caster. Magic of Incarnum was also very unbalanced, the totemist at the early levels is vastly overpowering compared to most other martials. The pally-like class is even weaker than other martials. And specificly MoI has lots of spells, feats and prestige classes that are so horrible underpowered that I wonder if they have been played. And the fluff, oh my that terrible terrible terrible fluff..... (just my humble opinion of course).
- the balance of the completes is terrible. The first batch already has been mentioned, but also the second batch has terrible classes, complete scoundrel has the malconvoker (uber summoning to make the caster even more powerfull, yeah!) als pages full of horrible nonsense like luck feats, and abominable prestige classes like the master of masks, fortune's friend, etc.

Oh well, I could go on for a while. The binder and ToB, as several classes from other books (warlock, spirit shaman, duskblade, beguiler, etc.) did hit the right balance point, imo. But in general, balance was horrible, also in the splat. And this comes from somebody who loves 3.5, and bought over 70 books of it.

I'd like the middle ground. I like most of what of 5e is on the marked atm, there is support, a little bit of splat, but I (and a lot of people) really wouldn't mind 1 or 2 books extra per year, with detailed and interesting settings like Dark Sun, Al Qadim, Planescape or Ebberon. I think WoTC can make good money there, as well.

[Anonymouswizard]

- a lot of the splat was also vastly overpowered. Though this is less bad than absolute rubbish, since they are usefull to some people on the higher optimization level, they also disrupt games of casual players who don't understand the game balance too well. The problems of 3.5 core have vastly been increased by all the spells, acf's, feats and items that made caster even far more powerful than they already were.

I'm going to add to this: some of the really bad imbalanced in 3.5 were in the core, but the worst use the core to improve the supplements or vice-versa. Now there's plenty of stuff in both the core and the splats that is balanced, I especially like the fact that the DMG suggests not giving PCs access to prestige classes (which existed to solve a problem that didn't exist), but what's annoying is when you want a single spell from complete Arcane, because you're a 3rd level shadow illusionist and it's the only shadow spell you have access to, and the DM insists on core only 'for balance' (yeah, we had a knight/paladin, a ranger, a rogue, and my illusionist, was me taking a spell that might be able to affect our primary opponents that bad?*)


I'd like the middle ground. I like most of what of 5e is on the marked atm, there is support, a little bit of splat, but I (and a lot of people) really wouldn't mind 1 or 2 books extra per year, with detailed and interesting settings like Dark Sun, Al Qadim, Planescape or Ebberon. I think WoTC can make good money there, as well.

I have to say that the thing that really annoys me is the focus on one setting. Sure, I liked Drizzt when I read one of the books, eight years ago, but now I'd rather adventure somewhere where I don't have to deal with powerful characters and don't have to spend a month or more worldbuilding (I hate making pantheons).

*The DM had this idea that 'encounters tailored to the party' meant 'make sure most encounters are ones the party doesn't have the tools to deal with'. I wanted to be a subtle wizard, and so blocked evocation (and enchantment, because the spells rubbed me the wrong way) and used grenadelikes for when I needed fire or acid. I ran through most of my stock in the first couple of encounters.

[Kurald Galain]

Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, provided 6E is an iteration from 5E that mostly just incorporates errata, cleans up layouts, and addresses some of the rules interactions and character options that aren't Cool Enough

I'm sure the 2E/3E/4E fans will also say this isn't necessarily a bad thing, provided 6E is an iteration from 2E/3E/4E that mostly just incorporates errata, cleans up layouts, and addresses some of the rules interactions and character options that aren't Cool Enough.


But of course, we'll get this:

6e will be getting back to "the root of WotC D&D" but staying simple.
The D&D brand name is too big to leave alone, so sooner or later there will be a game designer who wants to rewrite D&D from the ground up and can successfully pitch this to management.

[Cybren]

I'm sure the 2E/3E/4E fans will also say this isn't necessarily a bad thing, provided 6E is an iteration from 2E/3E/4E that mostly just incorporates errata, cleans up layouts, and addresses some of the rules interactions and character options that aren't Cool Enough.


But of course, we'll get this:

The D&D brand name is too big to leave alone, so sooner or later there will be a game designer who wants to rewrite D&D from the ground up and can successfully pitch this to management.

My comment is not from a "5E is the best" perspective, it's from "an edition change does not mean 'new game for the purpose of reselling 45 *books' " perspective. The recent edition jumps in 3.5->4E and Essentials->5E were not actually new editions, they were new games that used the same or similar aesthetics and mechanical lexicons. I have faith that a potential 6E won't do that provided there isn't a major upheaval at WotC's D&D team, given they also have finally started using "errata" correctly and have stopped selling dozens of *books.

[Logosloki]

I think it is telling that Plane Shift: Zendikar has been my favourite release.

And I think Plane Shift: Zendikar is somewhat a model that some bright sparks could use within Wizards to bring in some easy fluff/crunch starting points. I want a full book for a lot of campaign settings but I feel like wizards just doesn't have the team anymore to do that and if that is how it will be then I would much rather have a 40 page starter kit to Athas than wait until what seems to be heat death for an actual campaign book.

[Knaight]

I sincerely hope that 5e is the version of D&D I'm teaching my future children.

The release date of 6e doesn't actually have to affect this. The 5e books are fairly well made, and should be able to hold together for a few decades (as are most RPG books really - there are a couple of exceptions, but they generally hold up pretty well). As long as you still have the books, you're still in position to start kids off with 5e if they're interested.

[Waazraath]

The release date of 6e doesn't actually have to affect this. The 5e books are fairly well made, and should be able to hold together for a few decades (as are most RPG books really - there are a couple of exceptions, but they generally hold up pretty well). As long as you still have the books, you're still in position to start kids off with 5e if they're interested.

The contents, yes. Phyiscally, they are falling apart already, and I doubt they will survive next few years, let alone decades :smallfrown:

[Knaight]

The contents, yes. Phyiscally, they are falling apart already, and I doubt they will survive next few years, let alone decades :smallfrown:

Wow, really? The printings I've seen have held together just fine. Savage Worlds fell apart in about a month, but I've never had issues with hardbacks.

[Cybren]

Wow, really? The printings I've seen have held together just fine. Savage Worlds fell apart in about a month, but I've never had issues with hardbacks.

my PHB and Monster Manual bindings started to go after less than a year

[Waazraath]

Common problem, check the reviews on amazon if you want... almost all negative reviews say 'great contents, but the books fall apart'.

But maybe it was only a first print, and the problem is fixed.

[Knaight]

Common problem, check the reviews on amazon if you want... almost all negative reviews say 'great contents, but the books fall apart'.

But maybe it was only a first print, and the problem is fixed.

It could be - the copies I've seen aren't at all first printing.

[R.Shackleford]

The contents, yes. Phyiscally, they are falling apart already, and I doubt they will survive next few years, let alone decades :smallfrown:

Me and my friends have put them in binders :)

There ease of destruction made it easier to do this actually haha.

Edit

Also there is always the option of not putting out a new edition of D&D.

They may just say that videogames are the way to go.

[fishyfishyfishy]

I can attest to the horrendous quality of the 5e PHB. My copy has large portions of the binding coming apart and chunks of pages falling out. I've barely opened once every 3 months or so in all the time I've owned it.

[JumboWheat01]

What are you people doing to your poor books? I have a first printing, and it's in darn-near perfect condition.

[R.Shackleford]

I can attest to the horrendous quality of the 5e PHB. My copy has large portions of the binding coming apart and chunks of pages falling out. I've barely opened once every 3 months or so in all the time I've owned it.

Use a box cutter and take the pages out carefully and then put in a binder :)



What are you people doing to your poor books? I have a first printing, and it's in darn-near perfect condition.

Nothing, a lot of people have have had them fall apart.

I've seen later printings fall apart so it isn't just a "first printing" issue.

I bought some 2e books a while back, just to have them, and I've read them a lot and they still haven't fallen apart. 5e PHB fell apart within a few months... like 2 or 3.

[Anonymouswizard]

My comment is not from a "5E is the best" perspective, it's from "an edition change does not mean 'new game for the purpose of reselling 45 *books' " perspective. The recent edition jumps in 3.5->4E and Essentials->5E were not actually new editions, they were new games that used the same or similar aesthetics and mechanical lexicons. I have faith that a potential 6E won't do that provided there isn't a major upheaval at WotC's D&D team, given they also have finally started using "errata" correctly and have stopped selling dozens of *books.

To be fair, 2e->3e was also essentially a new game. They could probably have gotten away with releasing essentially 2e with ascending AC and BAB, plus a roll over skill system. I'm actually not sure if I'm happy that they went further, I personally prefer 2e but agree that 3e is the better designed game.


I think it is telling that Plane Shift: Zendikar has been my favourite release.

And I think Plane Shift: Zendikar is somewhat a model that some bright sparks could use within Wizards to bring in some easy fluff/crunch starting points. I want a full book for a lot of campaign settings but I feel like wizards just doesn't have the team anymore to do that and if that is how it will be then I would much rather have a 40 page starter kit to Athas than wait until what seems to be heat death for an actual campaign book.

Agreeing completely here. Heck, they wouldn't even have to give them away for free, I'm sure many people would be willing to pay $2-5 in order to play in their favourite setting. An Eberron update with artificiers, changelings, warforged, and some spells. An Athas update with Defiling and preserving, the Mystic, and a bunch of creatures. A spelljammer update which is mostly miniature giant space hamsters. A 40 page brief overview of Grewhawk if they can. 30-50 pages should be enough for most settings, and I'm sure many of use will print them out and stick them in binders with the 2e settings.

[khadgar567]

what they need is a sorry letter then return to in universe fluff for lich thrall aka( you are lich and pathfinder is your thrall so balor up and use your thrall to resurrect your pathetic self)

[R.Shackleford]

To be fair, 2e->3e was also essentially a new game. They could probably have gotten away with releasing essentially 2e with ascending AC and BAB, plus a roll over skill system. I'm actually not sure if I'm happy that they went further, I personally prefer 2e but agree that 3e is the better designed game.

This is something people don't understand.

WotC D&D is an entirely different game than 2e and before.

3e is very much Diablo, that ain't a bad thing.

4e is very much Wow, that ain't a bad thing.

5e is very much (insert a online game cause I don't play them and have no clue... let's say Overwatch since everyone has a base competency but clerics/healers are still boss), that ain't a bad thing.

All different games with some things that are simular.

I wishhope they look to the Pokémon franchise for 6e.

Pokemon Red and Blue, Black and White, X and Y...


D&D 6e "Tactics" and "Basic" so you have two PHB.

They both use a bounded accuracy type set up and simple rules. However Tactics will gives you 20 or so dynamic classes (feat classes and spell classses) and Basic will give you bare bones classes.

Tactic Classes: Crusader, Warblade, Incarnate, Totemist, Beguiler, Binder, Warlock, Dread Necromancer, 4e Psionics (fixed), + 4e Classes (presented to look like 3e/5e classes) like the Sword Mage, Warden, and Shaman.

Basic: Will give you 4 classes which are the Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, Wizard. Subclasses will diversify these.

Base assumption of play is level 1 - 10, levels 11 - 20 are Epic Levels.

[fishyfishyfishy]

I have books that were purchased new from early on in 4e and other games that are in excellent condition. I take very great care with my books. Only my 5e PHB is in such poor condition. Many people have had similar experiences as evidenced by the multitudes of negative reviews and forums posts about it. Please do not insinuate that it is the fault of the book owner when there is ample proof that the book really is that bad.

[R.Shackleford]

I have books that were purchased new from early on in 4e and other games that are in excellent condition. I take very great care with my books. Only my 5e PHB is in such poor condition. Many people have had similar experiences as evidenced by the multitudes of negative reviews and forums posts about it. Please do not insinuate that it is the fault of the book owner when there is ample proof that the book really is that bad.

Not sure I can trust you... You seem a bit too fishy.

*puts on sunglasses*

Yeeeeeaaaahhhh

[obryn]

I sincerely hope that 5e is the version of D&D I'm teaching my future children.
I'd recommend B/X for this. It does a better job of laying foundations and scaling complexity.

[MrFahrenheit]

Regarding book quality: haven't had my phb start to fall apart on me, but my mm is.

Going back to something mentioned way early on...if "CC" is a big fan of the early gold box games, I'd hope we could see a return to that style of game, just with better graphics and the 5e mechanic. Adventuring in a first person view, turn based combat in an isometric one.

[gkathellar]

I can attest to the horrendous quality of the 5e PHB. My copy has large portions of the binding coming apart and chunks of pages falling out. I've barely opened once every 3 months or so in all the time I've owned it.

Well, now I definitely feel like my decision to buy physical books instead of PDFs that I could have printed and bound in the print shop where I work was a good decision. So glad.

So glad.

I guess I should resell them before they start to decompose.

[Kurald Galain]

For what it's worth, my 2E books are still in good shape :smalltongue:

[Regitnui]

I'd recommend B/X for this. It does a better job of laying foundations and scaling complexity.

B/X? I've not heard that acronym before.

[Telwar]

Nothing, a lot of people have have had them fall apart.

I've seen later printings fall apart so it isn't just a "first printing" issue.

I bought some 2e books a while back, just to have them, and I've read them a lot and they still haven't fallen apart. 5e PHB fell apart within a few months... like 2 or 3.

Mine hasn't fallen apart, yet. Whether this is due to random chance or my repetitive sacrifices to the Book Gods causing them to smile upon me is unclear.

But at least one of my group has had their books fall apart, and I hear about it a lot, so it definitely happens. And we never had that happen with our 3e, 4e or Shadowrun books.

[pwykersotz]

B/X? I've not heard that acronym before.

It's the Basic Set (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeons_%26_Dragons_Basic_Set).

[Anonymouswizard]

B/X? I've not heard that acronym before.


It's the Basic Set (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeons_%26_Dragons_Basic_Set).

More specifically, it refers to the 1981 version which was followed by the Expert Set (specifically it refers to both sets, Basic/eXpert).

I've not played the B/X versions, but I've played the BECM Basic Set, which is essentially the same thing and a good edition if you don't mind races as classes. It's nice and simple, and I hope to get a Rules Cyclopedia if I end up having children to teach the game to.

[2D8HP]

I hope to get a Rules Cyclopedia if I end up having children to teach the game to.@Anonymouswizard,
You might like these rules (http://www.mediafire.com/?5nzhz1ztiyx)

BTW,
While I once got my now 11 year-old to play the board game "Dungeon!", he'd rather play video games, or the "Magic: The Gathering" card game now. And my six week old refuses to roll dice!
Parenthood is for chumps!
:wink:

[Zippdementia]

Really? Books falling apart? Heck, I've TRAVELED with mine, and read them constantly as part of GMing, and they still look brand new aside from some scratches on the cover you can only see if you hold it up to the light. Maybe people are just really rough on their gaming books? I could attest to that, based on what I see at my local game shop. I treat my book like a favored nephew. I don't slap it around.

As for product, I thought there wasn't that much, until I started going on DriveThru RPG and downloading all the adventurer's league stuff. There's already some decent 3rd party material out there, too, from the same site.

[pwykersotz]

Really? Books falling apart? Heck, I've TRAVELED with mine, and read them constantly as part of GMing, and they still look brand new aside from some scratches on the cover you can only see if you hold it up to the light. Maybe people are just really rough on their gaming books? I could attest to that, based on what I see at my local game shop. I treat my book like a favored nephew. I don't slap it around.

As for product, I thought there wasn't that much, until I started going on DriveThru RPG and downloading all the adventurer's league stuff. There's already some decent 3rd party material out there, too, from the same site.

Nah, there was a portion of the first printing that was really poor quality, the books fell apart right away. I haven't heard of the issue with subsequent printings though, and my collective group has 4 copies of the PHB which have all been abused by children and are still fine. And my MM, DMG, SCAG, and my adventure modules are likewise still solid.

Basically, you and I got lucky. :smallsmile:

[Anonymouswizard]

I believe my book has some obvious scratches on the cover, but the binding's still solid. It's not as solid as the 2e books I picked up second hand, but the paper for 5e is of slightly better quality (the artwork? not so much). I have a feeling that 5e will be the first of my rpg books to suffer binding issues, but that's due to the fact that it gets carried around a lot and the cover isn't as soft as some I own.

I've got a feeling that instead of an issue with the first print run or something, that there's several batches which had an issue or the like. Unfortunately I don't think WotC is going to be issuing replacement books if yours fall apart as easily as some do, which doesn't affect me as I plan to take mine out as little as I can get away with.

[Zippdementia]

Thanks for the info on that: I didn't know! I guess I wasn't the first printing crowd. I DID buy the first version of the Starter Kit, and I can say my Phandalin adventure totally got ripped apart... But then it was held together by staples, so no big surprise, right?

[CantigThimble]

I think it is telling that Plane Shift: Zendikar has been my favourite release.

And I think Plane Shift: Zendikar is somewhat a model that some bright sparks could use within Wizards to bring in some easy fluff/crunch starting points. I want a full book for a lot of campaign settings but I feel like wizards just doesn't have the team anymore to do that and if that is how it will be then I would much rather have a 40 page starter kit to Athas than wait until what seems to be heat death for an actual campaign book.

Honestly they just have so much amazing world building done for mtg they should just start harvesting that for D&D. What they have right now is just forgotten realms, which is basically what dominaria was for magic, the way overbloated and overdone setting with a bunch of demigods they don't know how to handle anymore. Which is why they dropped it and made a bunch of smaller more focused worlds. We just need some Theros, Lorwyn, Zendikar, Innistrad, Mirrodin, Tarkir, Kamigawa and Ravnica now.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Agreeing completely here. Heck, they wouldn't even have to give them away for free, I'm sure many people would be willing to pay $2-5 in order to play in their favourite setting. An Eberron update with artificiers, changelings, warforged, and some spells. An Athas update with Defiling and preserving, the Mystic, and a bunch of creatures. A spelljammer update which is mostly miniature giant space hamsters. A 40 page brief overview of Grewhawk if they can. 30-50 pages should be enough for most settings, and I'm sure many of use will print them out and stick them in binders with the 2e settings.
I can't help but wonder if this wouldn't be the best bet. Create digital-only updates for beloved past offerings-- heck, open it up for the community to vote on what comes next!-- and sell them for a few bucks each. After you've accumulated a few, offer a hardcover collection. Maybe print-on-demand to reduce costs. For each one, you have

A few pages of background, with links to previous products that still have useful info.
A few pages of crunch for vital new races, classes, and monsters.
A short (~1 session) introductory adventure to highlight what's cool about the setting.

You could do the same with old modules, too-- "you still need the book for the actual adventure, but here are updated versions of the relevant monsters, traps, and so on. $5, and if you don't have the original we'll sell you a pdf here (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=7&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjmqJmNq4rOAhWIHh4KHdAsCcwQtwIIOTAG&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DdQ w4w9WgXcQ&usg=AFQjCNEPGa2VKuL0GefK_nkQoh9csTD8OA&sig2=ASqCXOYKJbIpyDFkWctfMg)"

That can't possibly stress you too hard. I don't know what the hell Mike Mearles is doing over there-- speaking as a former homebrew addict, does not take months to write a single class.

[Regitnui]

Theros, Lorwyn, Zendikar, Innistrad, Mirrodin, Tarkir, Kamigawa and Ravnica now.

Given that the Planeshift: Magic series is appearing in time with the blocks, here's the chances I see of these happening. In order, barring the two already seen:
1. Possible. If we see one, it'll be in line with a Return to Theros block. That's likely to happen with Nicol Bolas (planeswalker elder dragon) as a villain. It is Gideon's home plane, and so can tie in neatly to the Gatewatch storyline.

2. No. OK, unlikely. The last we saw of Lorwyn/Shadowmoor, it's defining aspect of the Great Aurora that switched the two planes had disintegrated. Given that there are no humans on Lorwynmoor, the number of planeswalkers that could be involved there is small. Only Nissa (elf) of the Gatewatch.

3. Mirrodin doesn't exist. It's been compleated into Phyrexia. Though that would be an interesting world to visit, it's unfriendly to D&D's aesthetic. Phyrexia is what would happen to Eberron were it filtered through Call of Cthulu and rebuilt out of metal. It pushes magitech so far it turns around into sci-fi, and body horror sci-fi.

Instead, see Kaladesh, below.

4. This is unlikely. We don't have a reason to go back to Tarkir. It would be cool to see a Planeshift: Tarkir with the Lamassu monster, ainok race and variant dragons, but we're unlikely to see it any time soon.

5. Kamigawa isn't going to happen. Period. Mark Rosewater has stated the game's never going back there, so the Planeshift books are extremely unlikely to.

6. Ravnica seems to be the new nexus for planeswalkers. While I won't say when, we'll see a Planeshift for this plane eventually. It'll also add interesting things; the Izzet League's weirds (mixed elementals) and some new animals like indriks.

--Kaladesh is confirmed as the next plane we're visiting. As a completely original plane, or first time visit, it seems to be picking up the mantle of "artefact matters" from mirrodin via the Alara shard of Esper. Think ornithopters, filigreed metal constructs and Renaissance aether. It will share a bit of space with Eberron, so needless to say I'm looking forward to it. Though, as far as we can tell, it's much less of a outright copy than Innistrad is of the Ravenloft settings.

Planeshift: Kaladesh is all but confirmed. :smallbiggrin:

[CantigThimble]

Basically all I'm saying is that if they're having trouble wordbuilding they already have some really incredible worlds built that they already own the rights to. They need some work to mesh the two mediums but that's a lot easier than building the next Eberron from scratch. As long as people don't get too hung up on the colors (trying to make every class, race and spell fit into an mtg color philosophy) it should work really well.

Regardless of what's likely to be printed I would really like to see RPGs set in Lorwyn and Kamigawa. They're great non-traditional settings and who DOESN'T want to play a terrifying, xenophobic, telepathic halfling. (Well, kamigawa less so but the massive interactions with the spirit world are interesting)
http://orig05.deviantart.net/69d2/f/2008/203/1/a/endure_by_ralphhorsley.jpg

[Anonymouswizard]

3. Mirrodin doesn't exist. It's been compleated into Phyrexia. Though that would be an interesting world to visit, it's unfriendly to D&D's aesthetic. Phyrexia is what would happen to Eberron were it filtered through Call of Cthulu and rebuilt out of metal. It pushes magitech so far it turns around into sci-fi, and body horror sci-fi.

Nothing says we can't get a Planeshift set in a different time. Mirrodin is actually the most interesting of the Magic planes to me, from the five suns made of mana to the fact that metals combined with almost everything. It paints a picture of an alien yet understandable landscape, and would be an interesting setting to adventure in.

Actually I may go and homebrew my own 'metalworld' setting, stealing as much as I can from Mirrodin, because it'll be more interesting than 'Standard Fantasy Setting #1064'.

[2D8HP]

it'll be more interesting than 'Standard Fantasy Setting #1064'.Yeah #1064 is quite dull, but #768 & #907 just plain rock!
:wink:

[Regitnui]

Basically all I'm saying is that if they're having trouble wordbuilding they already have some really incredible worlds built that they already own the rights to. They need some work to mesh the two mediums but that's a lot easier than building the next Eberron from scratch. As long as people don't get too hung up on the colors (trying to make every class, race and spell fit into an mtg color philosophy) it should work really well.


...But they don't have to build Eberron, Dark Sun, or any established setting from scratch. They just need to update it, and since the Eberron UA was published right away, it looks like they've got that well in hand. A setting made for D&D will definitely take less work than a setting made for M:tG.


Nothing says we can't get a Planeshift set in a different time. Mirrodin is actually the most interesting of the Magic planes to me, from the five suns made of mana to the fact that metals combined with almost everything. It paints a picture of an alien yet understandable landscape, and would be an interesting setting to adventure in.

Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't object to a brief setting guide to dead Mirrodin (though besides the metal. it is practically Standard Fantasy Setting #1604). Taking the trend of the Planeshift books being cross-game marketing material, Wizards won't release one for a setting that's been transformed into a new one. The next one is likely to be Kaladesh, because that's the next block. After that, who knows? Perhaps we, M:tG fans, go back to Theros after Kaladesh block, and you, D&D fans, get a Planeshift: Theros after Planeshift: Kaladesh.

[gkathellar]

...But they don't have to build Eberron, Dark Sun, or any established setting from scratch. They just need to update it, and since the Eberron UA was published right away, it looks like they've got that well in hand. A setting made for D&D will definitely take less work than a setting made for M:tG.

+1 to this. The only reason to do MtG stuff over classic D&D stuff is for marketing reasons.

Also, cool as it is to see MtG setting material done up in TTRPG format, it honestly feels kind of ... weak, in the same way that Rokugan d20 did? Specifically, D&D is not really an ideal system to represent MtG, which has a lot of distinctive elements that deserve to be represented at the mechanical level.

[Anonymouswizard]

Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't object to a brief setting guide to dead Mirrodin (though besides the metal. it is practically Standard Fantasy Setting #1604). Taking the trend of the Planeshift books being cross-game marketing material, Wizards won't release one for a setting that's been transformed into a new one. The next one is likely to be Kaladesh, because that's the next block. After that, who knows? Perhaps we, M:tG fans, go back to Theros after Kaladesh block, and you, D&D fans, get a Planeshift: Theros after Planeshift: Kaladesh.

Yeah, in reality Wizards dropped the ball on Mirrodin, they failed to find the interesting setting in a world literally made of metal. I won't though, see the spoiler for my ideas.

I've currently named the planet Aeris, and at it's most basic it's earthlike but everything living is partially metal. So the mountain is stone but the trees growing on it has tin in it.

Now, we come to a place for an idea. For one metal is almost literally dirt cheap, there's no reason to use it for currency. I see ceramic coins being used, but that's actually a minor detail here. A bigger question is what's the society's attitude toward metal? I think we have a good chance for a difference here, which creates conflict and thus creates plot. To the majority of the world metal is metal, there is no difference between man metal, beast metal, and plant metal. But one religion sees the use of metal taken from people as akin to cannibalism, I'm making it a religious difference and having their scripture say 'though shall not abuse the flesh of your kin'. Heck, let's have a conservative faction that is unwilling to use metal taken from people, and a moderate faction willing to use metal if the person has given their permission.

Now we have one religion based conflict I'm going to add another. An old religion that says that people's place in society is based on the metal in their skin. These guys are misguided but nonviolent and nonevil, seen as mainly a nuisance.

Now what other ideas can we work in? Well what metal do people have as part of them. I'm only considering nonalloys at the moment so how about as the standard we have copper, tin, iron, and silver, with ones like gold and chromium being rarer but common enough that you've probably met someone who has one of them. Generally you inherit the metal of your mother, but there are cases of children having their father's metal, or even one different to both parents. There's no real difference between people with different metals, some people are just golds while others have a useful metal like copper or iron.

Aluminium is extremely rare. Less than one in a billion people are born with aluminium as part of their bodies. Again, it's not a marker of any inherent difference between them and other people, but it's seen as a metal of heroes, and is never passed on to offspring.

Now I also like the idea of multiple suns as the source of magic. Let's pick three suns, the red, blue, and yellow. By calling on the red sun you get fire magic, water magic for the blue sun, and earth magic for the yellow sun. You can learn multiple types of magic, but cannot cast spells from multiple suns at once.

I'm also to make the world more clannish than standard fantasy, with no cities and each village being an extended family. I'll work more on this later.

EDIT: I should specify that I'm intentionally not designing this setting for D&D.

[Temperjoke]

While I agree with you that the worst imbalances were found in the PHB, subsequent books were still full of stuff that was wildly off-base. DMM was a ridiculously potent metamagic reducer, which itself is about as strong as feats get, and it came out in the same book as Shining Blade of Heironeous. Complete Arcane gave us Initiate of the Sevenfold Veil and the Green Star Adept. To say nothing of stuff like Spirit Totem Barbarian, who depending on your group's general mundane optimization level was either necessary or wildly OP. 3.5's general quality and balance certainly trended upwards after, oh, I'd say the first round of Complete Arcane/Divine/Warrior/Adventurer, but balance was always pretty bad.


This. The 5e "vision" seems to be every group playing the same official adventure paths, buying one copy of the new path every few months. Everyone in an Adventurer's League, patiently consuming their product on a regular basis. Which is... not really my experience of the game, ever. They're certainly aiming their products at DMs-only though. SCAG? 95% a book for DMs-- it's almost entirely setting material. Even the first real mechanical sourcebook we're getting after two years (!), Volo's Guide to Monsters, is a DM book-- it looks like it's basically the Monster Manual 2, albeit with what looks like a higher fluff:crunch ratio than I'd prefer. Again, there will be a few pages for players, but pretty much the entire post-PHB publication has been for DMs. That makes the slow release schedule sting extra-hard for those who like to play-- 3.5 and 4e both had a steady mix of player-books (with race, class, spell, etc options) and DM-books (with monsters and setting info), which is an idea that looks like it's been forgotten.

One of the constant problems is that there isn't enough DMs, maybe they're trying to encourage more people to get behind the screen?

[Anonymouswizard]

One of the constant problems is that there isn't enough DMs, maybe they're trying to encourage more people to get behind the screen?

Really? My group has too many GMs, we all want to run something at once and I'm always the one who never gets to. Even when I just want to run a one shot people go with another GM.

Not annoyed that people only want to play D&D, obviously :smallmad: