The question is discussed in this podcast episode.
Cynthia Williams is out at WotC, which begs the question: If you were hired as the new CEO, what would you do to right the ship of game and sail us all to safer waters?
The question is discussed in this podcast episode.
Cynthia Williams is out at WotC, which begs the question: If you were hired as the new CEO, what would you do to right the ship of game and sail us all to safer waters?
Is D&D in danger? D&D is in this weird place where it’s in the middle of a lot of things. It’s honestly pretty complex compared to actually rules light systems, but it’s still much less complex than Pathfinder. If folks want more crunch they go to Pathfinder.
D&D has two pillars. Combat and everything else. I know that WotC defines it differently but generally I think it’s easier to view like this. Everything I’m combat is extremely rigid. Everything outside is pretty flexible. Sure, exploration has more rigid rules than social interactions but I genuinely don’t believe many people use rigid exploration rules. I think a lot of players dislike combat for a big variety of reasons. There are extremely few class-specific special things some classes can do outside of combat. Do fighters get anything special? Not really. And a lot of spells can totally negate specific things other players might be able to contribute.
It would be really nice to have flexible combat but I don’t think there’s a good way to do it without fundamentally changing the game. Instead, I believe every class needs to have meaningful ways to contribute to each pillar of play that cannot be one-upped by spells.
Another thing, I believe every class should have the same amount of limited resources more like 4th edition but I don’t think there’s a way to fix that in 5th edition or the new version without fundamentally rewriting everything.