B4: The Lost City is a classic module for D&D. At one point it (in)famously stops giving full description of the rooms but instead lists monsters in each area and tells the DM to figure out why they’re here themselves. Once the reprint will show up in new anthology, I’m sure people who complain online whenever WotC uses “ruling not rules” or “DM decides” or “these parts were left for the DM to fill in” in their design (and then continues buying WotC books to keep bitching and doesn’t touch 3rd party or other games for some reason) is going to be normal about it. /s

    • StraySojourner@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      7 months ago

      Oh I’m not. I don’t even play 5e anymore unless someone else is running it. I moved my setting and campaigns to Savage Worlds.

      I did so because I don’t like that WotC sells me books that are half baked and claims it’s up to GM to write the content they paid for.

      Also the entire debacle the other year with the OGL.

      • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Spelljammer and the OGL were what drove me to GURPS.

        I don’t need a book’s permission to use my imagination. I buy a book to have play tested and balanced content.

        • StraySojourner@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          7 months ago

          Yea this is 100% the issue here. If I wanted to make content, I would, if I purchase a book with content for a specific setting or scenario, then there had better be that content in it.

      • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        7 months ago

        Honestly, if the campaign settings said “This is where you should make your own shit up” I’d be fine with it, but most of the time they’re just poorly thought out and that’s an excuse for when people ask questions.

      • TheGreatDarkness@ttrpg.networkOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        I don’t buy WotC after OGL, but I do not think it’s necessairly bad to leave some things up for DM’s decision. maybe not sailing rules, but still

        • Kichae@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          7 months ago

          There is leaving space for the DM to inject some creativity, and then there’s deciding that you don’t need to actually produce a complete product because you know your customers will do it for you anyway.

          I mean, it’s not like any of the published rules are mandatory. Just because they’re in a book doesn’t mean you need to use them. But them being in the book means you don’t need to come up with your own half-baked, undocumented, and inconsistent “rulings” if you don’t want to.

          And, frankly, it’s not a symmetric situation. Published materials are suggestions that, ideally, are crafted by experts and well play-tested that may be ignored if chosen. Unpublished materials cannot be opted into.

          • Lianodel@ttrpg.network
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            7 months ago

            To go one step further, it’s not just that their customers will fill in the gaps, they’ll also take the blame.

            The DM struggles with a products that provides them with little to no support? “Skill issue. You just need a good DM.”

            The DM works doggedly to fill in and paper over the gaps? Sure, they’ll appreciate the DM, but WotC gets some credit because “This module is so much fun!”

          • StraySojourner@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            7 months ago

            Also if its from the developers of the system you also, hopefully, can assume that they are keeping with their own visions and intentions which should be healthy for the system. Even if its just “Story” content, it’d be really weird to see a room full of random sci-fi crap in what has up until that point been mostly a gritty fantasy dungeon. Also, people can rail against this all they want, but people tend towards authority. The developers and publishers saying X feat or edge or whatever is useable in X setting, it doesn’t leave a lot of room for inter-group bickering about it, but even then its opt-in.

    • Zagorath@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Personally, I’m not. The last WotC product I bought was Fizban, I think. At that point they had already started disappointing with the quality of their content, and it only got worse and worse with even removing huge amounts of content from already-purchased books in digital form. I wasn’t playing much during the pandemic, but when I finally picked it up again last year, I decided to switch to Pathfinder 2e. Both a much better product and a much better company producing said product.

    • shani66@ani.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Why do you think everyone buys their shitty products? I’d bet most actual hobbyists haven’t played dnd in a decade or more, partly because of this crap.