D&D 5e has failed

General questions, debates, and rants about RPGs

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
angelfromanotherpin
Overlord
Posts: 9745
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by angelfromanotherpin »

OgreBattle wrote:What's the best way to push miniatures then? Is there a way for D&D to develop a 'tactical tournament game' scene (something more like Mordheim than warhammer 40k)?
They've tried a few times without much success, but I think it's totally doable, just do a mix of what Pathfinder and Heroclix do.

First, tie the minis schedule to the general product schedule. So the base set drops with some very broad and general stuff focused on lower-level things so that gaming groups can buy it to get minis for their starting games. But then you release monster-themed adventure paths and associated minis expansions and cross-promote them. So if the path is e.g. Against the Giants, the minis expansion has a lot of giants and giant-related things in it, and the minis are not only the hot new thing on the collectible front, but also tabletop support for the adventure path.

It would require some planning and discipline, but I think just having that kind of coherence between the rp and minis game elements would be a big deal.
User avatar
NineInchNall
Duke
Posts: 1222
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by NineInchNall »

maglag wrote:D&D never really got an organized gaming scene. Most people can't even fully agree how the D&D rules work for any edition. If I meet another MTG player, neither of us need to discuss shady wording interpretations or dozens of pages of houserules just to set up a game.
That's partially because the people writing the rules for RPGs have always, overwhelmingly been hacks.

Can you imagine what the reaction from the larger D&D community would be if it had to recognize something as thorough and unambiguous as Magic's comprehensive rules? Decades of being told, "the rules are just, like, guidelines, man," have fostered a culture of personal interpretation not unlike that seen in modern religion. Fuck, just over ten years ago the idea of discussing D&D rules by actually looking at what the rules say was so different from the prevailing norm that it got its own damn acronym. Those who do look at what the rules say are still denigrated as rules lawyers.
Last edited by NineInchNall on Wed May 13, 2015 5:13 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Current pet peeves:
Misuse of "per se". It means "[in] itself", not "precisely". Learn English.
Malformed singular possessives. It's almost always supposed to be 's.
Stubbazubba
Knight-Baron
Posts: 737
Joined: Sat May 07, 2011 6:01 pm
Contact:

Post by Stubbazubba »

That was my thought, too. It's a shame that this started with Gygax making everything up in his basement for his personal group of friends and then telling everyone that that is the secret to good DMing. If this had been started as a proper game, such a notion would be seen for the absurdity it is.
Gnorman
Apprentice
Posts: 99
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 2:38 am

Post by Gnorman »

Since this is veering into "how to save D&D" territory, I always wondered why WotC never tried to do any serious cross-promotions between its two major brands. Toxic, feuding corporate culture is probably a factor, and it probably didn't seem worth the MtG department's time to try and salvage D&D.

But if the D&D department didn't have its head up its ass, there might be something to work with there. A Greyhawk MtG set, for example. Or another setting, if you're trying to slough off the baggage of the ancien regime. Or go the other direction: a "Races of Ravnica" book. Et cetera. While there's probably a good deal of overlap between the two games, there are probably many more exclusively-MtG players than exclusively-D&D players. Why not leverage the popularity of one to increase the market share of the other?

EDIT: After some cursory research, this is partly why.
Last edited by Gnorman on Wed May 13, 2015 7:08 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

Hasbro just has its head up its ass in a general sense. D&D isn't the only IP they do this to. See Transformers and MLP. Actually, Sharpnel, since you're a TF fan why don't you inform the rest of the class about the company's foolishness?

Assuming that Hasbro will continue to own D&D even after 5E D&D implodes, any plan to revive the brand will have to assume that they won't be able to get any help that's not from their initial budget. MtG is doing as well as its doing in spite of its owners, not because of.
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.

In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
K
King
Posts: 6487
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by K »

Lago PARANOIA wrote:Hasbro just has its head up its ass in a general sense. D&D isn't the only IP they do this to. See Transformers and MLP. Actually, Sharpnel, since you're a TF fan why don't you inform the rest of the class about the company's foolishness?

Assuming that Hasbro will continue to own D&D even after 5E D&D implodes, any plan to revive the brand will have to assume that they won't be able to get any help that's not from their initial budget. MtG is doing as well as its doing in spite of its owners, not because of.
It's pretty clear that DnD as a brand cannot be salvaged. It needs to be relegated to the bin with all the other "games I loved when I was young" and be replaced with a decent rules-heavy fantasy RPG.
name_here
Prince
Posts: 3346
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:55 pm

Post by name_here »

Eh, it still has name recognition and drawing power and could make a strong comeback with a good team and a pile of money.

I suspect that part of why they didn't go for the crossover potential is that if they pushed it too hard and blew it the plan could backfire and damage the M:tG brand. So they could take a risk on making a considerable amount of money or they could invest in avalanche insurance on their current pile of money.
DSMatticus wrote:It's not just that everything you say is stupid, but that they are Gordian knots of stupid that leave me completely bewildered as to where to even begin. After hearing you speak Alexander the Great would stab you and triumphantly declare the puzzle solved.
User avatar
Shrapnel
Prince
Posts: 3146
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 4:14 pm
Location: Burgess Shale, 500 MYA
Contact:

Post by Shrapnel »

Lago PARANOIA wrote:Hasbro just has its head up its ass in a general sense. D&D isn't the only IP they do this to. See Transformers and MLP. Actually, Sharpnel, since you're a TF fan why don't you inform the rest of the class about the company's foolishness?
Well, I can't speak for MLP, but for Transformers...

- They are catering really hard to the "young child/intellectually challenged" set of fans by making their toys so simplified that even a two year old would say "this is too fucking simple". So people are kinda shafted if they want a toy that is more complex than "untuck legs, fold arms up, pop out head" or "shove every part into a shell". This also means that the toys are less articulated, not as show-accurate, and all around really terribad. And while the complexity (and in a lot of cases, quality) of the toys has gone down, the price really hasn't. This has alienated a lot of adult collectors and fans.

- They have also decided that widespread distribution of toys is for Communists, and don't really bother to ship out new products to stores on a timely manner, leading to many stores that are at least several months behind on new products. (Seriously, at the TRU near me, they didn't get any Age of Extinction toys until about a full two months after the movie that was meant to sell them had been released, and I still cannot find a single Combiner Wars figure anywhere but online.)

- They also shortpack the characters that everyone wants, or make them available only as exclusives (they do this really hard with GI Joe, to the point that they pretty much don't make them for mass retail anymore, and if you want to get Cover Girl (and who doesn't), who was a figure subscription service exclusive, then you have to pay $100 or more on eBay! Yay!). Exclusives are, almost always, an evil, evil thing. This is a perfect example why

- Every time Takara makes an awesome toy, they don't release it over here. Want a non-shitty Breakdown toy? Move to Japan! Want to own Masterpiece Bumblebee? Suck Takara's cock! Actually, the Masterpiece line in particular is a pretty egregious example, since they've only released 16 of close to 50 toys in the line. For instance, I had to pay out the ass to get Masterpiece Star Saber, which, funnily enough, was actually released by Hasbro... in Australia.

- Multilingual packaging.
- Envases multilingüe.
- Emballage multilingue.
- Mehrsprachige Verpackung.
- 多语种的包装。
- מאַלטיילינגוואַל פּאַקקאַגינג.
- Pecynnu amlieithog.
- Multlingva pakita.

- Transformers Energon. Nothing more needs to be said.

These are some of the things that have pissed me off, at least. Here are some more broad ones.
Is this wretched demi-bee
Half asleep upon my knee
Some freak from a menagerie?
No! It's Eric, the half a bee
K
King
Posts: 6487
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by K »

name_here wrote:Eh, it still has name recognition and drawing power and could make a strong comeback with a good team and a pile of money.
That's not going to happen because Hasbro owns DnD and has proven to be incapable of setting up good teams.

Hasbro is never going to get rid of the IP, and all reports point to a corporate culture that is radically opposed to the kind of creative freedom that a new team would need to revive the brand.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Username17 »

K wrote:
name_here wrote:Eh, it still has name recognition and drawing power and could make a strong comeback with a good team and a pile of money.
That's not going to happen because Hasbro owns DnD and has proven to be incapable of setting up good teams.

Hasbro is never going to get rid of the IP, and all reports point to a corporate culture that is radically opposed to the kind of creative freedom that a new team would need to revive the brand.
Well that might point to Mike Mearls having been more clever than we like to think of him as. He somehow convinced corporate to let him "outsource" the production of expansion material to "companies" that were really just his friends. Considering that he hired a bunch of people through these shell companies that had already been fired by WotC, I take it as given that WotC corporate wasn't looking terribly closely at what these "outsourced" projects were doing. So Mike Mearls may have successfully gotten the artistic freedom we all agree that the makers of a new D&D edition need.

Unfortunately, Mike Mearls is still a lazy fraudster who can't actually design things with moving parts and his friends seem to be no-talent hacks for the most part. So even having gotten the artistic freedom that would be needed, he squanders it on bullshit.

The people in charge at WotC don't know what they are doing, have no vision for D&D, and have been flailing about from failure to failure for an actual decade. Even if they inadvertently give creative freedom to their designers, it still isn't going anywhere good because their talent pool has turds floating in it.

-Username17
Gnorman
Apprentice
Posts: 99
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 2:38 am

Post by Gnorman »

So the real problem is that D&D has been staffed for years by a bunch of mouthbreathing fanfic writers with no concept of how "companies" or "products" work. Also "math."

So at least it's comporting with historical precedent.
Insomniac
Knight
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:59 am

Post by Insomniac »

You can't use Magic: The Gathering to cross-promote Dungeons and Dragons at this point because MTG is too big. We've got a good idea that MTG is in its financial heyday worth about 250 million dollars. Dungeons and Dragons is at a 15 year financial low point worth maybe about 10 million.

Something that helps Dungeons and Dragons 100 percent is something equivalent to hurting Magic: The Gathering by 4 percent.

You can't risk tainting a quarter of a billion dollar brand to bail out D&D. It makes no financial sense.

So something like a Dungeons and Dragons themed "crossover" block is out the window. Even something like a Dungeons and Dragons themed World in the vein of World of Greyhawk based off a popular block/saga in Magic: The Gathering lore like Urza, Weatherlight, Ravnica, could tarnish the Magic brand or steal players from Magic.

What is the upside for Hasbro? Something that even mildly hurts Magic has 25 times the financial ramifications of something that hugely helps Dungeons and Dragons.
Last edited by Insomniac on Wed May 13, 2015 10:13 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
erik
King
Posts: 5868
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by erik »

Insomniac wrote:You can't use Magic: The Gathering to cross-promote Dungeons and Dragons at this point because MTG is too big.
[...]
What is the upside for Hasbro? Something that even mildly hurts Magic has 25 times the financial ramifications of something that hugely helps Dungeons and Dragons.
If WotC wanted to make an RPG they would be best off just using M:tG branding and not even hint at D&D. So yeah, no cross-promoting, but it still could make sense to do an RPG with ties to M:tG.

The upside for Hasbro is that it can act as marketing for their shiny CCG product line and even finding more ways to make money off of it. Making minis with a tactical themed M:tG could be pretty pimp. Capture land areas use mana to summon your forces and cast spells. It lends itself to computer games better than TTRPG, except that WotC doesn't know how to use/create for computers.
ishy
Duke
Posts: 2404
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 2:59 pm

Post by ishy »

MisterDee wrote:Also, the game needs interesting, engaging settings (again, because you need the number of books just to hit the hundred-of-millions, but also because you need common ground for a community to form.) At this point, it's probably best to just to bite the bullet and let FR and Greyhawk fall to second-tier status (that's what they probably are anyway.) Honestly, there's probably a window of opportunity open to just dump them entirely, but whatever.
That is not going to happen though.
Sean K Reynolds wrote:I've taken a contract position at Wizards of the Coast to help manage lore and other content for D&D and FR, in order to make it easier for WotC and licensors to make stuff.... I'm actually not doing game design... I'm helping sort out lore and other content (primarily for FR) so WotC licensors (like videogame companies) have easy access to the info they need.
Gary Gygax wrote:The player’s path to role-playing mastery begins with a thorough understanding of the rules of the game
Bigode wrote:I wouldn't normally make that blanket of a suggestion, but you seem to deserve it: scroll through the entire forum, read anything that looks interesting in term of design experience, then come back.
CapnTthePirateG
Duke
Posts: 1545
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 2:07 am

Post by CapnTthePirateG »

From what I hear the MTG team refuses to let the D&D team anywhere near their product from fear they'll fuck it up.

It is interesting to note that there are actually a lot of Magic computer games as well as Magic Online (which is doing decently from what I hear). Magic honestly has a better community than D&D.

I am fairly certain there will be no 6e.
OgreBattle wrote:"And thus the denizens learned that hating Shadzar was the only thing they had in common, and with him gone they turned their venom upon each other"
-Sarpadian Empires, vol. I
Image
User avatar
maglag
Duke
Posts: 1912
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 10:17 am

Post by maglag »

CapnTthePirateG wrote:From what I hear the MTG team refuses to let the D&D team anywhere near their product from fear they'll fuck it up.

It is interesting to note that there are actually a lot of Magic computer games as well as Magic Online (which is doing decently from what I hear). Magic honestly has a better community than D&D.
Dunno about that. At least in D&D groups I don't have to worry about the other players trying to steal my rare books or trying to set up crappy trades.

Seriously I still remember that day when some newbie opened a Kokusho in a pack and a bunch of Spikes in the shop swarmed the poor kid, trying to convince him to trade away his super dragon for some crappy rares. I've never seen any D&D player sink so low.
User avatar
nockermensch
Duke
Posts: 1898
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 1:11 pm
Location: Rio: the Janeiro

Post by nockermensch »

I don't think WotC will ever release a RPG tie-in for MtG. Probably because they fear such a game would only hurt the profits from their cash cow, like this:

Magic is a juggernaut in no small part because there's a large mass of people alreadt invested on the game, meeting at least every Friday to play at local game stores and buying packs / cards / paying tournament fees. WotC managed to build something like a sustainable ecology that nurtures the card game.

A RPG based on Magic will necessarily attract some parcel of their player base. This parcel will then want to play the fucking RPG - where games last like 3h to 6h and tend to keep from 3 to 6 players occupied on an activity that perceptive readers already noticed that's not playing the card game.

So what this means is less people coming to the FNMs around the world, which impacts even the card game players that didn't buy the RPG: they may not find a match as easily as before. And then they start losing interest.

I think this is the nightmare scenario that plays at the WotC executives' heads everytime somebody mentions a tie-in RPG.
@ @ Nockermensch
Koumei wrote:After all, in Firefox you keep tabs in your browser, but in SovietPutin's Russia, browser keeps tabs on you.
Mord wrote:Chromatic Wolves are massively under-CRed. Its "Dood to stone" spell-like is a TPK waiting to happen if you run into it before anyone in the party has Dance of Sack or Shield of Farts.
User avatar
Smeelbo
Apprentice
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:44 am

Oh, oh, oh! It's Magic! You know! Never believe it's not so!

Post by Smeelbo »

FrankTrollman wrote:Magic is so successful because they sell to Timmy and they sell to Johnny and they sell to Spike. And they sell to these different people who have different buying patterns and ways of interacting with the game with the same packs of cards.
So very true. For example, there are multiple formats for play and deck construction. The most popular ones in the store are Standard, Draft, Commander/EDH, and Modern.

Most of the tournaments we run are Draft, where players "draft" cards, one at a time, from three packs of the most recent sets, build a 40 card deck and play. This allows players to be all on an even footing, as no one has access to significantly better pool of cards, and luck is minimized. This allows WotC to make cards that, while not great for constructed formats, are key to making enjoyable drafts. We have about a dozen players who attend most of our three drafts a week.

Elder Dragon Highlander/Commander is a 100-card singleton, multiplayer format, and is the most commonly played casual format in the store. No tournaments, but they buy a lot of single cards. This format drives a lot of older card prices.

Standard decks are the usual 60-card, 4-of-a-kind max, constructed decks, but only using cards from the current Core set, along with the two most recent Blocks. Since sets rotate in and out a few times a year, the metagame (what decks you might play against) is constantly changing, people update their decks, or build new decks, all the time. This format drives prices for the newest cards. Often our Standard players have acquired many of their new cards by Drafting the newest sets.

Modern is another 60-card, 4-of-a-kind max, constructed format, but allows cards published from 8th Edition on. Because sets do not rotate out, it is considered an Eternal format. The metagame, and hence your deck, changes slowly, so while a typical Modern deck might cost hundreds of dollars, once purchased, it is pretty much done. Modern drives prices for recent cards not in Standard.

Magic is the best managed game brand I have ever seen in my four decades of gaming. When they publish a new set, almost every card is good for some common format, and they are been play-tested over a year in advance. It is astounding that the same company that have ground a venerable brand like Dungeons and Dragons into detritus at the same time manage to support an entire gaming economy with Magic.

Smeelbo
Last edited by Smeelbo on Thu May 14, 2015 2:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
rasmuswagner
Knight-Baron
Posts: 705
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 9:37 am
Location: Danmark

Post by rasmuswagner »

Lago PARANOIA wrote: D&D needs a campaign setting, like, yesterday. If someone picks up the pieces from 5E D&D, that should be the first thing that they work upon. Before they even hire mechanics guys, they should use their money to attract the most talented fantasy authors that they can get and spend several months brainstorming and focus-group testing the hypothetical campaign setting. That's the biggest obstacle to its success.
What, a box of Ed Greenwoods used tissues and recycled Elmore art is not good enough for you?
Every time you play in a "low magic world" with D&D rules (or derivates), a unicorn steps on a kitten and an orphan drops his ice cream cone.
User avatar
rasmuswagner
Knight-Baron
Posts: 705
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 9:37 am
Location: Danmark

Post by rasmuswagner »

NineInchNall wrote:
maglag wrote:D&D never really got an organized gaming scene. Most people can't even fully agree how the D&D rules work for any edition. If I meet another MTG player, neither of us need to discuss shady wording interpretations or dozens of pages of houserules just to set up a game.
That's partially because the people writing the rules for RPGs have always, overwhelmingly been hacks.

Can you imagine what the reaction from the larger D&D community would be if it had to recognize something as thorough and unambiguous as Magic's comprehensive rules? Decades of being told, "the rules are just, like, guidelines, man," have fostered a culture of personal interpretation not unlike that seen in modern religion. Fuck, just over ten years ago the idea of discussing D&D rules by actually looking at what the rules say was so different from the prevailing norm that it got its own damn acronym. Those who do look at what the rules say are still denigrated as rules lawyers.
Most of those people read the rules like grammar-obsessed 'spergs, not like any kind of lawyer.
Every time you play in a "low magic world" with D&D rules (or derivates), a unicorn steps on a kitten and an orphan drops his ice cream cone.
Gnorman
Apprentice
Posts: 99
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 2:38 am

Post by Gnorman »

rasmuswagner wrote:
NineInchNall wrote:
maglag wrote:D&D never really got an organized gaming scene. Most people can't even fully agree how the D&D rules work for any edition. If I meet another MTG player, neither of us need to discuss shady wording interpretations or dozens of pages of houserules just to set up a game.
That's partially because the people writing the rules for RPGs have always, overwhelmingly been hacks.

Can you imagine what the reaction from the larger D&D community would be if it had to recognize something as thorough and unambiguous as Magic's comprehensive rules? Decades of being told, "the rules are just, like, guidelines, man," have fostered a culture of personal interpretation not unlike that seen in modern religion. Fuck, just over ten years ago the idea of discussing D&D rules by actually looking at what the rules say was so different from the prevailing norm that it got its own damn acronym. Those who do look at what the rules say are still denigrated as rules lawyers.
Most of those people read the rules like grammar-obsessed 'spergs, not like any kind of lawyer.
I like how you think there's a difference.
User avatar
RadiantPhoenix
Prince
Posts: 2668
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 10:33 pm
Location: Trudging up the Hill

Post by RadiantPhoenix »

maglag wrote:Actually, MTG doesn't sell to Spike, because Spike will not buy randomized packs but instead buy second-hand singles from Timmy and Jhonny and/or win tournaments for profit.
Spike will buy packs because Spike needs to practice booster draft and sealed for the Grand Prix and the Pro Tour.

Well, I suppose you could look at the card list and make a random booster pack generator, then play using someone's collection, or maybe even proxies, but that doesn't appear to be what the pros actually do.
User avatar
tussock
Prince
Posts: 2942
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 4:28 am
Location: Online
Contact:

Post by tussock »

maglag wrote:Most people can't even fully agree how the D&D rules work for any edition.
That is mostly true, and important, and also pretty fucking easy to fix with a professional editor from outside the immediate hobby. People do agree, for instance, on how Mentzer-D&D works, because Frank Mentzer was pretty good with making rules that way. Helped that Holmes and Moldvay had already done so much toward that.

Gary Gygax was not even a writer, and as such is really hard to read. Dave Arneson was much worse. Neither of them played by the rules they wrote. Zeb Cook didn't even like the concept of rules you had to use. Mike Mearls wouldn't know how to turn his promising concepts into usable rules if you paid him, as demonstrated by people paying him for that and it not happening.

Heinsoo turned out a minis-like RPG game he enjoyed, something like Bo9S and/or SWS, but then everyone else got together and voted for 4th edition instead, which was an exercise in everyone doing as little work as possible while filling thousands of pages rather than anything to do with making an interesting game.

3.0 core got it pretty good. A big playtest with steady updates and specific destructive testing and feedback protocols, people mostly agree what it says. The bigger game problems seem to have arisen mostly from late changes and particularly a change in player goals and desires in response to the changed-up reward and treasure structure, which was only tacked on post-playtest.

The designers since 2005, and to some extent since 1998, still have this idea that there's some mechanical sweet-spot you can play some ideal "D&D" in, from a particular level, and are unable to even conceptualise any other level play after they do that. So 3e works alright for everyone around 8th level, and 4e's DC 40 slippery floor because you've got +30 was an attempt to keep everyone there, and it's become 5e's DC "just make something up after they roll" slippery floor because "people don't like rules".

But we do like rules. New options for a character. New classes to try. Helping the things that are bad, but not the things that are good. Patching the rules that don't work, rather than the ones that do. Not like all the shit in 3e that lowered metamagic costs, or the 4e errata cycle of nerfing your "outrageous" +1 you got once per fight that maybe came up once every couple levels.
PC, SJW, anti-fascist, not being a dick, or working on it, he/him.
Windjammer
Master
Posts: 185
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 4:48 pm

Post by Windjammer »

FrankTrollman wrote:
Insomniac wrote:Wow. Two adventure style books released when Paizo does APs monthly and has a years long backlog of them. They aren't even writing the freaking adventures themselves! How in the world do they think that is competitive?
"D&D Sales" are driven not by game books, but by board games that have D&D branding on them. Which is why there aren't even any game books to buy.

-Username17
Small correction: the latest instalment in the boardgame series, Temple of Elemental Evil, is no longer produced and sold by WotC (as Ravenloft, Ashardalon, and Drizzt were). It is produced and sold by WizKids, like the Attack Wing game you showed an image of. And that is no surprise, of course, since the reduced staff has no capacity for designing and executing a board game, and be it an instalment in an extant series.

So "D&D sales" are: novels, RPG products, and licenses for various things including boardgames and miniatures.
fearsomepirate
1st Level
Posts: 43
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 4:29 am

Post by fearsomepirate »

tussock wrote:
maglag wrote:Most people can't even fully agree how the D&D rules work for any edition.
That is mostly true, and important, and also pretty fucking easy to fix with a professional editor from outside the immediate hobby. People do agree, for instance, on how Mentzer-D&D works, because Frank Mentzer was pretty good with making rules that way. Helped that Holmes and Moldvay had already done so much toward that.

Gary Gygax was not even a writer, and as such is really hard to read. Dave Arneson was much worse. Neither of them played by the rules they wrote. Zeb Cook didn't even like the concept of rules you had to use. Mike Mearls wouldn't know how to turn his promising concepts into usable rules if you paid him, as demonstrated by people paying him for that and it not happening.

Heinsoo turned out a minis-like RPG game he enjoyed, something like Bo9S and/or SWS, but then everyone else got together and voted for 4th edition instead, which was an exercise in everyone doing as little work as possible while filling thousands of pages rather than anything to do with making an interesting game.

3.0 core got it pretty good. A big playtest with steady updates and specific destructive testing and feedback protocols, people mostly agree what it says. The bigger game problems seem to have arisen mostly from late changes and particularly a change in player goals and desires in response to the changed-up reward and treasure structure, which was only tacked on post-playtest.

The designers since 2005, and to some extent since 1998, still have this idea that there's some mechanical sweet-spot you can play some ideal "D&D" in, from a particular level, and are unable to even conceptualise any other level play after they do that. So 3e works alright for everyone around 8th level, and 4e's DC 40 slippery floor because you've got +30 was an attempt to keep everyone there, and it's become 5e's DC "just make something up after they roll" slippery floor because "people don't like rules".

But we do like rules. New options for a character. New classes to try. Helping the things that are bad, but not the things that are good. Patching the rules that don't work, rather than the ones that do. Not like all the shit in 3e that lowered metamagic costs, or the 4e errata cycle of nerfing your "outrageous" +1 you got once per fight that maybe came up once every couple levels.
I think the core problem is that a game is similar to software. The more lines you write, the more bugs you're going to have. To complicate matters, you're writing your program in English, which isn't airtight the way C is. And then you *explicitly* allow for creativity. Every feat, class power, monster, table, etc is like adding new lines of code.

Every TTRPG is bug-riddled RAW in the sense that you can construct situations, character builds, etc where the math works out to something that indicates whoever wrote the rule clearly did not consider this situation. With several hundred pages of rules, those situations will come up. It's why new editions and edition updates change things as much as they do. I think anyone who has spent significant time behind the DM screen understands that part of your job is working around the bugs so the players stay invested. It gets to be second nature at some point so you hardly realize you're doing it.
Post Reply