| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
First post on this?!
If it's not appropriate to post discussion on this I understand.
Just wanted to get some thoughts on the news today.
Looks like WOTC is really focusing on digital play, both in in-person settings and online play.
I prefer PF2 over 5e by far, but tweets I've seen imply D&D One, or "6th Edition" as it will be dually called, will be tested "better" than PF2 was tested and have things that are better than PF2.
Perram, previously from Know Direction, made a comment about monsters and spells " no longer critting.". I couldn't find anything further about this big he implied this was a good thing, rather than "false machismo n his it should be."
I guess I'm really confused on his statement compared to online what was released by WOTC. The release said the system will basically stay the same but include more options, something that kills 5e for me in personally. The combat is still so slow and boring they'd have to really make some changes.
Dunno, I felt like some comments I read were implying this new D&D was on the right track to improve 5e and undo PF2's "mistakes."
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
There’s a thread I made in the 5e forum, where this belongs. Paizo has nothing to do with this project.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There’s a thread I made in the 5e forum, where this belongs. Paizo has nothing to do with this project.
If you have a moment, would you be willing to link the thread? I'd be interested to hear what people think about it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
There’s a thread I made in the 5e forum, where this belongs. Paizo has nothing to do with this project.
Silly OP. Should have known there was a separate 5E forum.
I’ve been here since 2012 and didn’t learn that until today.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, the 3D VTT was not something that was super exciting about that presentation. I don't like my tokens to look like miniatures, bases and all -- and unless they're planning on publishing a bunch of assets I can't imagine that there's going to be a lot of variety in their dungeon designs.
I'll stick to Foundry.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, what, this will be D&D's 3rd or 4th attempt at an online VTT? I'll believe that part when I see it and not a moment before.
Was there one other than the 4e iteration derailed by a murder-suicide? I never heard about another attempt.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, what, this will be D&D's 3rd or 4th attempt at an online VTT? I'll believe that part when I see it and not a moment before.Was there one other than the 4e iteration derailed by a murder-suicide? I never heard about another attempt.
Not a VTT but I remember in 3E they tried to put out their own campaign management software. The main book even came with a CD
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
TheRulesLawyer posted a video on it that I thought was pretty good.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not a VTT but I remember in 3E they tried to put out their own campaign management software. The main book even came with a CDSo, what, this will be D&D's 3rd or 4th attempt at an online VTT? I'll believe that part when I see it and not a moment before.Was there one other than the 4e iteration derailed by a murder-suicide? I never heard about another attempt.
All the WOTC digital failures all blend together, I could very well have comingled other digital endeavors as all VTTs, but thought there were at least 2 different attempts by them that were VTT or similar. And the campaign software, and character building software, etc.
The point is, WOTC has a BAD track record when it comes to digital games or digital game aids.
Oh, there was also their goblin version of civilization, called uncivilized. That actually sounded pretty cool, but it never got very far.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I thought the 4E subscription based digital tools were exceptional.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
TheRulesLawyer posted a video on it that I thought was pretty good.
Ha! I just watched that yesterday! One of my favorite rpg channels!
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
As I said in the other thread, I'm not a fan of them claiming this isn't a new edition. With the scope of changes shown so far, it's at least on par with the 3.0->3.5 transition. Personally, I don't see this ending well.
If you're going to do a new edition, then do a new edition. Instead it feels to me like they're trying to have their cake and eat it, too. Unfortunately, what they're likely to do is split their player base.
Of course WotC was overdue for driving D&D into a ditch, so...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, what, this will be D&D's 3rd or 4th attempt at an online VTT? I'll believe that part when I see it and not a moment before.Was there one other than the 4e iteration derailed by a murder-suicide? I never heard about another attempt.
There was a digital toolset for 5e before Beyond happened. That crashed and burned pretty quickly. I can't remember the name, but I remember being part of the beta.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
There’s a thread I made in the 5e forum, where this belongs. Paizo has nothing to do with this project.
helpful as usual...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As I said in the other thread, I'm not a fan of them claiming this isn't a new edition. With the scope of changes shown so far, it's at least on par with the 3.0->3.5 transition. Personally, I don't see this ending well.
If you're going to do a new edition, then do a new edition. Instead it feels to me like they're trying to have their cake and eat it, too. Unfortunately, what they're likely to do is split their player base.
Of course WotC was overdue for driving D&D into a ditch, so...
The definition of edition changed with the introduction of 3rd edition. Before that point, all monster stat blocks were more or less compatible and could be used with any pre-3E version of D&D, and the PC stats were close to compatible if you excluded the BECMI rules.
Since the beginning of 3rd edition, an edition change has been understood to mean a break in compatibility of such things. There were straightforward instructions for converting 3.0 material to 3.5, but the conversions from 2E to 3.0, 3.5 to 4E, and 4E to 5E were far more of an art form with no predictable results.
I think the 2024 iteration of D&D will most likely resemble the conversion from AD&D 1E to AD&D 2E than any of the more recent edition changes.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If characters require conversion, then it's a new edition. Regardless of what Wizards of the Coast says.
And based on what TheRulesLawyer said on his videos, his impression was that because of the changes being made to char-gen, they will require conversion.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've posted a few blog posts on One D&D.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think you’re right about the OGL. Another factor, I think is that when 5E released there was still a vocal OGL crowd who were bitter about the 4E attempt at a restrictive license.
My guess would be that given 5E’s success at bringing in genuinely new people, most current D&D players have no emotional connection to the OGL. And as you point out, it’s been functionally replaced by the DM’s Guild anyway (clearly a decent innovation, given the swiftness with which it’s been copied). So it’s not going to leave a visible hole the way the desertion of 3PPs did in 4E’s day.
I think the relevance of the OGL is much diminished from where the industry was ten years ago.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think you’re right about the OGL. Another factor, I think is that when 5E released there was still a vocal OGL crowd who were bitter about the 4E attempt at a restrictive license.
My guess would be that given 5E’s success at bringing in genuinely new people, most current D&D players have no emotional connection to the OGL. And as you point out, it’s been functionally replaced by the DM’s Guild anyway (clearly a decent innovation, given the swiftness with which it’s been copied). So it’s not going to leave a visible hole the way the desertion of 3PPs did in 4E’s day.
I think the relevance of the OGL is much diminished from where the industry was ten years ago.
I think that's dead wrong. 5e third-party products routinely make insane stacks of money on crowdfunding platforms; there's an incredibly massive ecosystem of stuff out there built on the OGL, and all of it helps keep people funneled into the game that WotC makes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think thats true too.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
3PP 5e products are so successful they were given their own listing in the ICV2 quarterly sales report, and products from the likes of Goodman Games have consistently found themselves in the top 5. That is ALL OGL content.
5e’s media strategy is built around partnerships with members of the community like B. Dave Walters, Ginny Di, Matt Colville, and of course the Critical Role team, all of whom have connections to OGL products and content.
I sincerely doubt they’ll snub that segment of the community, when the folks releasing new content have become so visible via Kickstarter in the last few years.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
After more time mulling it over, I'm even more convinced that the MAIN selling point of the whole One D&D product is going to be the integrated D&D Beyond + VTT integration with functionality across Apple and Android Mobile platforms, as well as a standalone PC and Mac Application.
They're trying to snag the iPad kid generation with the easy-to-use VTT ground-up implementation to make as easy to jump into and build characters for all the way down to the point where every Adventure they produce is going to have prebuilt assets ready to drop on day 1 that the group can explore as if they were jumping into Azeroth.
I also am even more convinced that it will replace each 5e book in terms of what the official platforms support one book at a time with NO option to buy the older editions from their store. They MAY still allow users who bought the 5e versions of those books (as in bought them outright) but for subscribers and new customer, there will be NO entry point to 5e for digital assets on their platform.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Since WotC is claiming that One D&D is not a new edition, they could simply continue using the same OGL and SRD (Basic Rules) that the 2014 version of 5E did, with or without an update to the 2024 character creation info. The OGL would not go away so much as become less relevant as the rules are revised in ways that gradually drift away from the Basic Rules. No active effort on the part of WotC wouldbe required for this to happen.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since WotC is claiming that One D&D is not a new edition, they could simply continue using the same OGL and SRD (Basic Rules) that the 2014 version of 5E did, with or without an update to the 2024 character creation info. The OGL would not go away so much as become less relevant as the rules are revised in ways that gradually drift away from the Basic Rules. No active effort on the part of WotC wouldbe required for this to happen.
Yeah, that’s what I expect. They haven’t updated it at all so far have they? (As they’ve moved away from racial essentialism and so on).
They can’t stop the OGL from existing. I’ll be (pleasantly) surprised if they release a new SRD though.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Since WotC is claiming that One D&D is not a new edition
However, they didn't say that. They said, "we are no longer in the position where we ... think ... of D&D as an 'edition.' It's just D&D." link
Just because they don't think of it as a new edition doesn't mean it won't be a new edition. It's a very marketing thing they're doing there. They're getting you used to the idea of the rules changing without instantly igniting fears that your old books will be invalid. They're hoping to keep a flame war from being instantly ignited and hoping that it will be a slow simmer instead.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
One issue is that by pre-3E standards, they have already gone to a new edition with changes in books like Tasha's Cauldron of Everything and Mordenkainen Presents Monsters of the Multiverse. I recently started running a campaign where I used those rules and extrapolated from what was in those books for the races published before them, and the result was something very different from the original publications as well as from that recent UA document.
That new book in 2024 may actually be giving the game some short term stability, as I doubt they would want to be too reckless in making further changes on a scale comparable to those two books in official (non-UA) books published between now and then.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One issue is that by pre-3E standards, they have already gone to a new edition with changes in books like Tasha's Cauldron of Everything and Mordenkainen Presents Monsters of the Multiverse.
Na, those books are the equivalent of the Book of Nine Swords, to reference 3.5. RPG companies do this all the time in the latter days of their game. They're testing the basic concept, seeing fan reaction to them before going forward with the actual playtest.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Remember to keep these 3 Things in mind during the playtest.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Remember to keep these 3 Things in mind during the playtest.
All excellent points
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Remember to keep these 3 Things in mind during the playtest.
Sorry, but what playtest? There is none currently. At the moment all we have is a poll and a page-long document with vague design goals.
That's what TheRulesLawyer has been talking about over and over.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
*Inserts an additional 2c*
It isn't a Playtest and it never will be in any meaningful way. This whole "playtest period" is merely a way for them to get people comfortable with the direction of changes they're making by exposing it to them over time and to build marketing hype.
WotC has shown time and time again that they don't actually do anything significant with the customer and playtest feedback they get and I do not see this changing any time soon because if they DID listen they would need to pull a 180 and abandon the iPad baby demographic they're clearly targeting with One. They are aiming to sell the services in the form of an integrated VTT + Book Viewer + Character creator that works on all Mobile Devices, as well as Desktops and the actual tabletop players are going to end up being an afterthought, not to mention the people who subscribed for 5e who find their library outdated and replaced with One books one supplement at a time.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*Inserts an additional 2c*
It isn't a Playtest and it never will be in any meaningful way. This whole "playtest period" is merely a way for them to get people comfortable with the direction of changes they're making by exposing it to them over time and to build marketing hype.
WotC has shown time and time again that they don't actually do anything significant with the customer and playtest feedback they get and I do not see this changing any time soon because if they DID listen they would need to pull a 180 and abandon the iPad baby demographic they're clearly targeting with One. They are aiming to sell the services in the form of an integrated VTT + Book Viewer + Character creator that works on all Mobile Devices, as well as Desktops and the actual tabletop players are going to end up being an afterthought, not to mention the people who subscribed for 5e who find their library outdated and replaced with One books one supplement at a time.
I’m not following this at all, so I don’t know how genuine it is. But they certainly incorporated player feedback from the D&D Next playtest into 5E.
For example: They didn’t want to have multiclassing (preferring to implement such from “within” each class) but there was such a large demand for it, they reluctantly included it as an optional rule (which unsurprisingly ends up being an integral part of any 5E game breaking build).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The D&D Next playtest had complete rules for playing the new edition.
This playtest is hinting at changes that probably won't be revealed for months to come.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
ok so I haven't been keeping much of an eye on this since me and my group are still fine playing PF1, but one of the guys at my table was saying part of the goal for the new D&D edition was to Eliminate Homebrew stuff, which strikes me as both ridiculous and impossible.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
WotC has shown time and time again that they don't actually do anything significant with the customer and playtest feedback they get
5e was shaped significantly by Next’s playtest feedback. They abandoned many concepts from that playtest because they did not test well.
I do not see this changing any time soon because if they DID listen they would need to pull a 180 and abandon the iPad baby demographic they're clearly targeting with One.
Are you in their offices reading the survey responses? If not why are you making the assumption that the overwhelming response is to abandon the broad segment of the 5e demographic in favor of us older players?
What are “actual tabletop players” defined as?
People who agree with him.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I guess we'll have to see but if you're really hung up on what I meant by actual tabletop players maybe you can infer some context from the rest of my post talking about how One development and support platforms that have already been paid for, staff hired, and marketing blitzed all point to them NEEDING to release it in a way that breaks into the digital market in ways and on a scale that can only be provided by making the entire self-contained product experience easy to get into and accessible via freemium Mobile App and/or Gatcha sales models.
Call me a purist or whatever you like I suppose but in-person roleplaying has always been, in every measurable way, superior from an entertainment, socialization, and hobby standpoint to me and basically everyone I currently do or have previously played with. Playing through a VTT remotely is just NOT THE SAME. That's what I'm getting at, and people who prefer face-to-face games are the ones who I believe will be getting left in the dust... because these kinds of games generate practically no revenue for the company/product compared to digital and online sales and services. They are, after all, called Tabletop RPGs and not Computer RPGs which is what One seems to be being molded into as a product.
Over the last few years, WotC has done a HARD pivot into digital assets and games to the point where between 65%-80% of their total income and profits come exclusively from them, in other words, of the approx 850m - 1.1b they made in 2021 at least 600m - 800m of that was JUST from Andriod, iOS, and Windows Application game product and pack sales. Of the remaining 200m -ish the majority was generated by Magic the Gathering and the cumulative sales of their hundreds of other non-RPG board games, toys, action figures, and assorted merch. The amount of money WotC pulled in from the MtG Arena App ALONE absolutely dwarfs the value they extracted from every branch, root, and leaf of the D&D 5e family tree of products.
In five to ten years from now, I would be willing to bet that 95% + of all One D&D games are going to be exclusively played through their proprietary app, and of those players, less than 5% of them will functionally or legally own even a single physical rulebook. This is where ALL of the money is and Hasbro is an entertainment megacorp that puts profit and shareholders above all else. The Brand of D&D is FAR more valuable to them as something they can leverage for Digital Sales than it could EVER be supporting traditional in-person roleplaying. The writing is on the wall folks, dead tree publication of RPGs is just flat out NOT nearly as profitable as it needs to be in order to make One into the kind of Brand and marketing behemoth that they're going to try to make it, them doing anything OTHER than everything in their power to push people to play on their new proprietary all-encompassing digital storefront and service would be seen as financial self-harm. They'll be able to reach 100x as many people by pushing for primary digital play and they'll make at LEAST that much more in actual income/profits as well over the traditional method.
Folks will still be able to buy books but I guarantee that will literally only be done in order to keep the rabble from throwing a giant edition war hissy fit and protesting the game in its entirety out of offense to being abandoned in favor of selling it as a kind of co-op video game.
Again, I'd love to be wrong about this but their hiring, acquisitions, and marketing all point straight north on One toward the digital App goldmine they've been milking with every other IP they hold over the least five years.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
So is it an iPad baby generation or is it a gold mine? Is it doom prognosticating or is it an actual shift in the way media is consumed?
Glad you can define what an actual table top player is. But what happens when they are all dead?
No actual table top players but millions playing the game and spending money. But I guess they'd be the actual table top players then
This is a stupid argument.
Go Team Whatever Keeps People in the Hobby and Can Bring New People In Too!!!!!!!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Call me a purist or whatever you like I suppose but in-person roleplaying has always been, in every measurable way, superior from an entertainment, socialization, and hobby standpoint to me and basically everyone I currently do or have previously played with.
Salty that we're no longer the target demographic?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The net result would not be the death of tabletop RPG books, but more likely that printed books would only be produced by "boutique" operations like Free League or Modiphius which already tend to bundle free PDF's with their books. (and Paizo, but I don't consider Paizo "boutique")
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know...I do have a fair number of PDF books but ultimately I need a physical book, it's just....easier you know.
With a physical book I just know where I need to go and flip there.
PDFs are Drag scrollbar, button,button,button,button...it's annoying
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Given that GMs are the lion's share of a given group's money spenders, moving to mostly digital is WotC's way of trying to capture more money from a larger percentage of their players. Get ready for microtransactions, because they're coming with 6e, I mean One D&D.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Isn’t this conversation about the death of physical media , as usual, an overreaction to a perceived issue by a particular type of entrenched fan?
“Their goal is to make everything a subscription and then soon print books will be dead as a component of the hobby because WOTC abandoned them.” — reactionaries in 2007 after the announcement of 4e
“If all the materials are available via a website then they no longer need to print the books, that’ll be the death of physical copies.” — reactionaries when Paizo announced even greater tool access on the PRD
“If all the character creation and sheet management is done in an app on your phone, that’s the end of physical media in this hobby because D&D provided you the ability to did it all on your phone.” — reactionaries when dndbeyond launched.
Not only did these things NOT kill print media, the company supposedly planning print medias eventual murder is selling more physical copies than ever before.
They will go where the money is, but that doesn’t mean they’ll abandon the existing sources of revenue that have proven so popular to date
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Given that GMs are the lion's share of a given group's money spenders, moving to mostly digital is WotC's way of trying to capture more money from a larger percentage of their players. Get ready for microtransactions, because they're coming with 6e, I mean One D&D.
I've said this before but between Dice, Minis, Maps, etc.... Feels like Microtransactions have always been part of D&D.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Given that GMs are the lion's share of a given group's money spenders, moving to mostly digital is WotC's way of trying to capture more money from a larger percentage of their players. Get ready for microtransactions, because they're coming with 6e, I mean One D&D.
Costume parts for your 3D mini in their 3D VTT you have to use because they won't have an SRD ain't cheap!
I've said this before but between Dice, Minis, Maps, etc.... Feels like Microtransactions have always been part of D&D.
I don't think you understand what people mean by "microtransactions". Usually they're referring to closed systems where you have to only purchase accessories from the creator because either they have an IP copyright on the design or their software won't accept mods/3rd party tweaks.
Themed dice systems like FFG's Star Wars/Genesys or Legends of the Five Rings are a good example of microtransactions. You can only purchase them from Edge, nobody else is allowed to sell them without some crafty legal-ese to make them "generic fantasy dice" and even then they could plausibly get sued over it if they impacted Edge's bottom line.
"You can't play a d20 game without some d20 dice" is not.