Re: [The Gamer] Dungeons & Dragons' 2024 Rules Won't Get Going Until 2026

On Tue, 17 Sep 2024 09:18:51 +0200, Kyonshi <gmkeros@gmail.com> wrote:

On 9/16/2024 6:12 PM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

On Mon, 16 Sep 2024 09:41:02 +0200, Kyonshi <gmkeros@gmail.com> wrote:
 

Source:
https://www.thegamer.com/dungeons-dragons-2024-rules-dnd-2026-book-phb/
>
Dungeons & Dragons' 2024 Rules Won't Get Going Until 2026
>

My major complaint about the new rules coming out is that they feel
unnecessary. Well, unnecessary to the player, anyway. A new edition
should be a significant revision to the game, otherwise it feels very
much like an attempt to just sell the same books to players twice.

>
Well, yeah, that's what they make their money with. Everybody and their
gran already have the 5e books. Gonna move units somehow.
>
(incidentally I never bought the 3 core books because they just would
have been for the shelf and I didn't want to spend 150$ on that)
>

 
More, a major revision should have _purpose_ to it other than just to
exist. That purpose should be to revamp the rules to be correct
mistakes or problems, or to significantly change the tone and texture
of the game. I've not seen enough significant complaints about 5th Ed
rules that would require the former, and everything I've seen about
6th Ed (or whatever WOTC wants to call it) indicates it isn't doing
the latter.

>
I noticed that they are very careful about calling it 6th ed. I guess
for them it's closer to the 3.5 release: not a complete reworking, just
different enough so people have to buy new books. That's how you get
people to buy new books without scrapping your whole environment. Or at
least that's what they hope.
I wouldn't be surprised if this ends up being their 5.5 release, and the
actual new 6th edition comes in 2030.
>

 
Maybe instead of churning out new rules every five years, WOTC could
concentrate on creating adventure modules and settings.
 

>
>
yes, they should, but it always has been the case that modules and
settings just didn't sell as well as rule books. People need to have the
rulebooks, multiple ones even if you want to use it as a table reference
book. But settings and modules are only ever bought by DMs.
There's financial incentive to release mostly rule books for them.

I mean, I won't argue with the fact that modules/settings don't sell
as well as rulebooks. But every player I've known has had almost as
big a collection of adventures etc. as I have.

Admittedly, this 'survey' is a bit out of date. It may have been
partly because -at the time- D&D had a lot of fiction (books, comics,
video games etc.) associated with it, and players interested in those
sought out more information about that fiction. So they went out and
bought the associated campaign settings and modules.

But a lot of players are also budding DMs, and the easiest way to
start DMing is to use a module. Plus, a lot of players like knowing
what's coming, and try to 'cheat' by reading the adventure ahead of
time.

Modules and settings also grow the hobby. Not only can they attract
tabletop gamers who don't play D&D, but it makes people who do more
invested in the system. If I have a couple dozen adventure modules,
I'm much less likely to jump ship to another system (and more likely
to buy the next rules upgrade).

Focusing simply on the "does book A sell more than book B" metrics is
short-sighted thinking that does nobody any good... except the
short-term stockholders because it might briefly make the stock jump.
But those sort don't really care about the company or hobby anyway.