1) Wizards of the coast is back stepping to fourth edition with the new monster/npc setup. Very Boring.
2) The woke extremism that Hasbro has been pushing did not sound good.
3) UA is not even being used anymore, the survey are not open enough to allow everyone to give a opinion. A) UA not being used on D&D beyond.
4) To many races being created. I like a choice, but now it getting bad.
5) Last two book have been rehash of a different theme.
6) They are not even trying to put out decent story lines. Fey one just seems hacked with revisited themes. It looks boring.
I am not liking what I see. I been playing dungeon and dragons along time. I have played every edition, since first. i can honestly say, I feel disappointed.
Except for point number 3, what does any of this have to do with Unearthed Arcana?
Like, if that's your opinion, then more power to you, but pretty much every thing you stated is just you putting your opinion out there about things completely unrelated to UA
Edit: Looks like the thread was moved to General Discussion. That being said, with the way OP has framed his/her views, I would caution people with how they choose to respond, or else risk starting another 10+ page thread arguing about all the recent changes that have been/will be made
Aside from 3A, what does any of that have to do with DDB? It’s kinda like giving Barns & Nobels a list of grievances against Penguin Books. B&N just sells the books, complaints regarding content would be better addressed to the publishing house directly.
1) Wizards of the coast is back stepping to fourth edition with the new monster/npc setup. Very Boring.
2) The woke extremism that Hasbro has been pushing did not sound good.
3) UA is not even being used anymore, the survey are not open enough to allow everyone to give a opinion. A) UA not being used on D&D beyond.
4) To many races being created. I like a choice, but now it getting bad.
5) Last two book have been rehash of a different theme.
6) They are not even trying to put out decent story lines. Fey one just seems hacked with revisited themes. It looks boring.
I am not liking what I see. I been playing dungeon and dragons along time. I have played every edition, since first. i can honestly say, I feel disappointed.
can’t comment on 1. Wasn’t here for fourth.
2 seems a strange issue. Extreme wokeness? I can’t say I’ve seen any extreme agenda pushing. I can only assume this relates to customising ability scores and starting options which seems… I mean a bit much to even call wokeness.
3 that’s a ddb choice. You can still custom create it. Don’t get me wrong it’s a shame it’s gone but I am not sure why this is a big omen of the future.
4 alright that’s a preference thing. But they need new content. If it wasn’t races it would be something else instead. Again I am not sure what the problem is here. If you don’t like the races don’t allow them or don’t play them.
5 honestly what themes haven’t been done before. And what specific themes are you objecting to. Because those books had multiple themes.
6 and what is the critique? What was rehashed? Ans what’s wrong with revisiting some themes? And which themes were revisited.
These points seem really… well lacking detail. your absolutely entitled to your views but could you provide a little bit more so we can see where your coming from. Because you haven’t pointed to any specific problem and just gestured at vague things
One of the great things about 5e is that you can pick and choose which rules you want to play by. If you don't like the new stuff, don't use it.
The phb and dmg still drive the core rules on how to play. You don't like new races, don't use them.
You don't like the new / future monster set up, then use one of the recent 3rd party publications. Or just change the stats of existing ones to how you think they should work.
Same goes for new adventures, classes etc, loads of 3rd party stuff out there based on 5e rule set.
It may not work in dndbeyond, but if you've played since before 5e you can manage with pen and paper, and still have a great game.
Oh, and I wish everyone was woke, it's a good thing, if you're not then please try harder.
woke /wəʊk/ verb past of wake adjectiveINFORMAL•US alert to injustice in society, especially racism. "we need to stay angry, and stay woke"
1) Wizards of the coast is back stepping to fourth edition with the new monster/npc setup. Very Boring.
This does cause issues with counterspell, but I don't think it won't be easy to fix.
2) The woke extremism that Hasbro has been pushing did not sound good.
I am 100% woke (obviously), and I can tell you WotC is not only not preventing your views from being heard, they're actually still not woke. Please don't call something something it isn't.
3) UA is not even being used anymore, the survey are not open enough to allow everyone to give a opinion. A) UA not being used on D&D beyond.
UAs are actually incredibly open, as I can say because I managed to get the fairy in WBtW changed. Please make sure to actually do the UA if you want to be heard.
4) To many races being created. I like a choice, but now it getting bad.
There's an overblow of races, but a large number are either setting specific or niche. I honestly don't mind - more options is always fun, regardless of whether or not you'll ever use them.
5) Last two book have been rehash of a different theme.
Pray, tell me how this is? Dragons are a rehash of what theme? Dragons? Honestly, I dislike Fizban's, but I see no rehash. And then Wilds Beyond the Witchlight? There's never been a D&D theme like it. I am unsure of Wilds but sure, it was no rehash.
6) They are not even trying to put out decent story lines. Fey one just seems hacked with revisited themes. It looks boring.
Along with the note from above, while I'll say Witchlight is not my jam, I will mention everything from Icewind Dale, Strixhaven, Call of the Netherdeep, etc. And I think really you don't care, do you? Just because you're in an unfortunate niche where you don't like a thing WotC does, doesn't mean you get the privileges to spew out racist beliefs or yuck everyone else's yum. I am guilty of this as well, but let's just say it's not nice to those who are okay with it.
1) Wizards of the coast is back stepping to fourth edition with the new monster/npc setup. Very Boring.
2) The woke extremism that Hasbro has been pushing did not sound good.
3) UA is not even being used anymore, the survey are not open enough to allow everyone to give a opinion. A) UA not being used on D&D beyond.
4) To many races being created. I like a choice, but now it getting bad.
5) Last two book have been rehash of a different theme.
6) They are not even trying to put out decent story lines. Fey one just seems hacked with revisited themes. It looks boring.
1) We should be so lucky. No edition did monsters better than 4E. That's not what's happening though. 2) WotC is making a few steps towards rectifying decades of mistakes. That doesn't make them woke, and certainly not extremely so. 3) UA is the same as it ever was, other than DDB not putting it in the toolset anymore. 4) Being spoilt for choice is not a bad thing. People who like that variety of options are happy, people who don't can simply ignore what they don't want in their game. 5) No, they weren't. 6) Well that's like, your opinion, man. You're free to have one, and everyone else is free to have another one.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
2) The woke extremism that Hasbro has been pushing did not sound good.
I am not liking what I see. I been playing dungeon and dragons along time. I have played every edition, since first. i can honestly say, I feel disappointed.
I have not been playing for a long time. Wanted to since I was a kid thirty years ago, but didn't. Some of the emergent wokeness in the broader DnD culture (which is to some degree being reflected in official source material) is what helped me bridge the gap into finally playing. I can honestly say I do not feel disappointed.
Perhaps in twenty or thirty years, I'll feel alienated by changes to the game, but if it's ushering in new waves of players, I'll likely greet the change with a smile. I've already been a part of other communities where this has happened. There's a sadness to it, but things change. At least with D&D the existing material doesn't become unplayable, and you can always homebrew new content in the existing systems.
1) Wizards of the coast is back stepping to fourth edition with the new monster/npc setup. Very Boring.
Given I'm not a dungeon master I can't wholly appreciate this sentiment, but I would imagine DMs can salvage something from this change. I'm sure if they managed from the beginning of 4th Edition to the reintroduction of this style, they can manage again. What do you suggest they do? I'm all for discussing what would be better, and given you've aired your grievances here (however unlikely it is they'll be seen by anyone with any authority at Wizards), you appear to be too.
2) The woke extremism that Hasbro has been pushing did not sound good
I would like to think that the majority of the progressive moves are making for a more welcoming environment, as BogWitchKris above me can attest to. Even then I wouldn't go as far as to say that's "extremism." Some attempts involving language and inclusivity have been cheesy and sometimes ignorant, sure, but not extreme. I'd rather they attempt it than not, because you can't very well improve if you don't first make mistakes, or know you're making them.
But let's hear it from your point of view. What are some examples of this "woke extremism," and why does it "not sound good?" And once more, what do you want Hasbro to do about this, and how would you convince them it would be to their benefit?
EDIT: How I managed to forget 3) is beyond me. Apologies for having to retroactively jam this quote in:
3) UA is not even being used anymore, the survey are not open enough to allow everyone to give a opinion.
A) UA not being used on D&D beyond.
I wouldn't know if UA is or is not being used because I don't know every session of 5th edition that's ever been played, and what was played in it. It's data that simply isn't publically accessible, so we're not going to know. One thing's for certain, I don't use it because it doesn't interest me. Why do you think it isn't being used?
As for it not being used on D&D Beyond, I would imagine that it's too much work for the people running the site. If it's not a class, it can be homebrewed and inserted into D&D Beyond in some fashion.
Regarding surveys, I find they're extensive enough that I feel anyone can give any number of feedback options. I often have too much feedback to give, and end up giving less because I run out of steam toward the end. I'd say that's the mark of a good, if sometimes frustrating, survey.
4) To many races being created. I like a choice, but now it getting bad.
Any race in any edition of D&D is playable with some modifications; it just depends on if the DM allows homebrew at their table. And while playable races might be mechanically available in the books or on D&D Beyond, they might not be suitable for that particular campaign. I love that the Minotaur is a playable race, but I wholly appreciate that it's unlikely I'll be able to play one without having to put up with the roleplay consequences of having a beast-race in the party.
For the sake of discussion, let's say you're right: the clutter is too much. How much is enough? Are we picking and choosing the races, or culling by book? Which books?
5) Last two book have been rehash of a different theme.
I don't understand this criticism, you'll need to elaborate. There probably have been dragon-based books in a game called Dungeons & Dragons before, so Fizban's Treasury of Dragons will easily be a 'rehash' for 5th edition. As for The Wild Beyond the Witchlight: A Feywild Adventure, yes, there have been other books based in that setting.
Let's have a look at the next two books though. Strixhaven: A Curriculum of Chaos is set in a college with very stereotypical college themes. I don't think there's been any adventures close to that, save for going to Candlekeep, a fortress library. Critical Role: Call of the Netherdeep is based on Matt Mercer's own Exandria setting, though granted, with his own twists on the fey world and such (I'm not overly familiar with Critical Role - I'm only in episode 69 of Campaign 1. Nice.)
My point about bringing up the next two books is because I think that undoes the 'rehash' that were the previous two, which is not that unique a criticism, really. You could've said that of Volo's Guide to Monsters,Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes, or Curse of Strahd? Why the last two books specifically? I'm not criticising any of those books, by the way, merely pointing out that they serve the more or less the same purpose as others that have previously existed: to make them work in fifth edition.
6) They are not even trying to put out decent story lines. Fey one just seems hacked with revisited themes. It looks boring.
Once more you seem to be hung up on the feywild adventure, but not Eberron which has two books, or Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft which is the second book of that setting, or the upcoming Critical Role book, or the amount of dragon adventures (again, in fairness, this is Dungeons & Dragons.) And if it looks boring, that's OK, not every book is going to appeal to every player.
I am not liking what I see. I been playing dungeon and dragons along time. I have played every edition, since first.
i can honestly say, I feel disappointed.
I don't want to shoot discussion down by asking this, because I'm genuinely curious, what are you telling us for? To vent or to talk solutions? Without further information we can't be of that much use, merely give our own opinions that are unlikely to change without further input, and go our seperate ways.
I would like to think that something fruitful may come out of this discussion. However good the feedback on this forum I promise it won't be read by Wizards of the Coast, but we can at least enjoy a chat about it amongst ourselves.
Zero is the most important number in D&D: Session Zero sets the boundaries and the tone; Rule Zero dictates the Dungeon Master (DM) is the final arbiter; and Zero D&D is better than Bad D&D.
"Let us speak plainly now, and in earnest, for words mean little without the weight of conviction."
1) they are killing the versatile of the monsters.which made 4e monster suck.
Thank you for elaborating somewhat, I really wasn't expecting any further developments. In regards to this you'd still need to provide some examples of what versatility monsters have, what lack of versatility monsters had in 4E, and how to improve them going forward, if this discussion's going to get the ball rolling.
The first results that come up are for Monopoly having a 'woke' edition and Potato Head. I don't see how either of those are "extremism." Some of the things throughout Monopoly's history have been silly (there's over 300 versions, they can't all be winners), and Hasbro clumsily fall over themselves to be progressive, but I think this is only a big deal when people make it one. That goes for those who are the target audience (such as those mentioned in Monopoly for Millenials) and those who want to mock it (such as yourself.)
4)I am fine with content. It just feels like races are now cookie cutter.
In what way? I could certainly see how the optional rules of Tasha's Cauldron of Everything may have watered things down by removing distinct features and allowing players to chop and change races, but I don't think that's cookie cutter design; quite the opposite in fact.
How are the races of today's game different to previous editions? If you could give us more details and provide examples, that'd be fantastic.
5) Growing up with D&D I have seen all of it. Now it just shallow. No meat as they say.
I think we've reached the crux of the problem, and there's no easy way to say it but I don't think D&D can offer you any more if you're relying on Wizards' content. There's tons of homebrew stuff out there if you haven't seen it already, and I say this as someone who is as vanilla as they get (I play Bethesda games on PC without mods and like it, for context). Alternatively it might be worth looking into older editions and enjoying them while you can still find groups to play with. You might even find some people who will use the old Unearthed Arcana!
6) hmm hard to explain, but I seen Alice in wonderland done to many times. It nothing new, just repackaged. Even the heroes and villains.
I can appreciate that. You might want to look at writing your own content for the Feywild and running a group through that; they might also not like the way Wizards do things, and would appreciate a new twist. It's one of those places that sees a lot of debate on forums as to what it should be depicted like, and some commenters only look at the surface level. It might be worth buying the book or reading some reviews, or even seeing play sessions of those who have played it before judging it too harshly.
As for heroes and villains, that's what'll happen to any property that's gone on this long, I'm afraid. A prime example of this is World of Warcraft wherein two expansion packs had been released and already most of the major heroes and villains reappeared, died, and resurrected in some fashion because Blizzard never expected it to last as long as it did.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Zero is the most important number in D&D: Session Zero sets the boundaries and the tone; Rule Zero dictates the Dungeon Master (DM) is the final arbiter; and Zero D&D is better than Bad D&D.
"Let us speak plainly now, and in earnest, for words mean little without the weight of conviction."
I don't want to turn this into a political discussion, but I don't see what the fuss is about with them changing community chest. Regardless, I really don't get what it's got to do with D&D. Unless you're upset with the political views Hasbro has presented and so you want to cancel them by refusing to by WotC products, it's pretty irrelevant.
The only issue I could see that is, are Tasha's rules for racial ASIs. I disagree with them on several levels...but I hardly think it's something to rant about. I don't play those rules (unless a player can persuade me that in their specific case it's justified) and move on. The only issue I think are Fairies, which I'll look into more deeply and judge whether I should keep then customisable, create my own template for which ASIs they get, or go partway (ie, give a choice of a couple). It's a storm in a teacup, from where I'm standing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I have no issues with anything that is woke, and anything that allows a player options is a good thing. If these changes were not put in then you would start seeing everything is the same as everything else.
Googled it, but like others, I don't really see what you mean. Of the limited stories that emerge, some are blown way out of proportion (e.g. the Mr. Potato Head story where many people got angry about a thing that wasn't even really happening).
4)I am fine with content. It just feels like races are now cookie cutter.
5) Growing up with D&D I have seen all of it. Now it just shallow. No meat as they say.
To me it feels the opposite. Some of the attributes assigned to races felt like they were flattening them out, generalizing them as peoples who should have had greater diversity. In terms of player characters, 50% of the value of playing a given race were its racial ASIs rather than the race itself. I also felt a little spoon fed before on certain things before. In terms of npcs, the races felt a bit flatter than I'd have liked. What I'd like to see is consistently better lore rather than more rigid stat blocks.
1) they are killing the versatile of the monsters.which made 4e monster suck.
2 ) google hasbro woke, you will see what I mean.
4)I am fine with content. It just feels like races are now cookie cutter.
5) Growing up with D&D I have seen all of it. Now it just shallow. No meat as they say.
I can't say you're wrong, because that is rude. But you are wrong. If we view the collective D&D player base as one person (impossible and dumb simplicity, for certain, but what the hell, at this point reasoning isn't the most potent thing in any thread on disagreements), we will find that our hypothetical all-as-one D&D Player will love the new monsters (not understanding the issues with counterspell, because they're more open-minded), they feel like Hasbro is not woke enough (I certainly feel this way, and I am "woker" than your mind can comprehend because I'm strange), love more lineages with more diversity (this means maybe less people will play that bane of banes, the Human Fighter), and while you say that you have grown up with D&D, I grew up with Tolkien.
Tolkien was my world. I have read the Hobbit dozens of times, no joke, and watched each film over four times over. Even the Hobbit films. Hours, hours and hours of my life has gone into Tolkien. But the things is, in the past few years I've come to "meh" Tolkien. It's not that Tolkien has gotten any worse - no new books are coming out for that to be the case. It's merely the fact that I have personally moved on somewhat. I still love Tolkien, but I disagree with the new TV series (not necessary in my opinion) and Tolkien's portrayal of fantasy race. This doesn't mean Tolkien is now suddenly bad. So why does that mean D&D is suddenly bad for you? You don't have to use current 5E lore. Use 3E. Hundreds of high-calibre creators still use 3E and 3.5E for their stuff, and hey, it sounds like 3E has what you need.
Before you accuse me of gatekeeping - no. I am not saying you can't play 5E. What I am saying is, if you disagree with "lack of crunch", "lack of [insert polite form of saying racist values here]", and "lack of lore", go with either a modified 5E, go 3.5E, go Pathfinder, or even go home and make your own RPG. This is not gatekeeping. These are potential solutions to your problem, and if you don't like them, tough luck. It's still not gatekeeping.
1 I sincerly doubt this is true, the main changes to statblocks are very minor, and have nothing to do with 4th edition
2.What woke extremism, not wanting to perpetuate a half century of racism?
3. UA is no different then it was at the start of 5e.
4. If its all unique enough and quality, who cares.
5.I fail to see to how feywild and dragons are rehashed themes
6.You say about a book you've probally never bought or read, or even seen a reveiw off
For point 2, why don't you do some reading on the hiring practices of TSR and then get back to me on this one. I was there, the game was open to anyone and everyone. Whatever they could do to sell or get talent they did. If you want to go revisionist history, then please pontificate about it, I'm all ears.
1) Wizards of the coast is back stepping to fourth edition with the new monster/npc setup. Very Boring.
2) The woke extremism that Hasbro has been pushing did not sound good.
3) UA is not even being used anymore, the survey are not open enough to allow everyone to give a opinion. A) UA not being used on D&D beyond.
4) To many races being created. I like a choice, but now it getting bad.
5) Last two book have been rehash of a different theme.
6) They are not even trying to put out decent story lines. Fey one just seems hacked with revisited themes. It looks boring.
I am not liking what I see. I been playing dungeon and dragons along time. I have played every edition, since first. i can honestly say, I feel disappointed.
Yeah what WotC has been putting out is lackadaisical at best since Mearl's has been removed. Descent into Avernus was horrible, Von Rickies was a horror book without the horror and Beyond the Witchlight took Igwilv arguably one of the strongest casters (she held Grazzt for a century and lived to tell about it) in the game and turned her into a Fey CN caster with hardly any spells but they did give her Wish because we know how balanced that is.
I highly suggest using older content updated to 5E and/or using 3rd party content. Kobold Press and Goodman Games put out very good content for 5E that you can use for your own campaigns. I've dropped over $850 over the last year on the two and they are good purchases. The tome of beasts from Kobold Press and Original Adventures Reincarnated from Goodman Games are must haves for 5E.
If you want some OSR type modules, try Dark Wizard games, they have similar tradecraft to AD&D, a similar feel and again are much better written than what WotC tries to put out since Mearls has been removed.
If you want to move away from 5E, Goodman Games Dungeon Crawl Classics feels like an AD&D w/ a smidgeon of 3.0 and a lot more variability or you could try necrotic gnomes Old School Advanced Essentials if you want a better version of AD&D.
The thing is, as WotC continues down the path of irrelevance, there are a lot and I do mean a lot of very good content of similar vein to D&D without the taint from WotC trying to create content by committee.
If you believe WotC politics is over the top in their content then duckduckgo this search string: "[List] TTRPG Guide to Woke Companies". You can get an idea of the type of content you will be getting.
At this time, I'm only using the 5E ruleset, everything else is from prior editions of D&D or 3rd party content. My players love it. I did recently buy the Witchlight because of a youtuber I used to trust for reviews raved about it, after reading it though, yeah well he's no longer on my trust list.
For point 2, why don't you do some reading on the hiring practices of TSR and then get back to me on this one. I was there, the game was open to anyone and everyone. Whatever they could do to sell or get talent they did. If you want to go revisionist history, then please pontificate about it, I'm all ears.
Why are people like this? If you have resources available, I am happy to read them instead of expecting you to regurgitate them, but what am I supposed to be looking for on their hiring practices? If you have a coherent point or argument, just make it. I will do the additional reading if you can point me in the right direction. So far, in googling Wizards of the Coast hiring practices, I am getting personal testimonial that there is racism within the company. I'm getting WotC company pages. I'm getting random stories and glassdoor reviews. Is that what you wanted me to see? If so, what is the connection to woke extremism and content? Or are you merely saying the company isn't racist in response to Zonlos2_0?
You are not a rogue in real life. Your viewpoints don't get sneak attack bonuses if you make them hidden.
For point 2, why don't you do some reading on the hiring practices of TSR and then get back to me on this one. I was there, the game was open to anyone and everyone. Whatever they could do to sell or get talent they did. If you want to go revisionist history, then please pontificate about it, I'm all ears.
Why are people like this? If you have resources available, I am happy to read them instead of expecting you to regurgitate them, but what am I supposed to be looking for on their hiring practices? If you have a coherent point or argument, just make it. I will do the additional reading if you can point me in the right direction. So far, in googling Wizards of the Coast hiring practices, I am getting personal testimonial that there is racism within the company. I'm getting WotC company pages. I'm getting random stories and glassdoor reviews. Is that what you wanted me to see? If so, what is the connection to woke extremism and content? Or are you merely saying the company isn't racist in response to Zonlos2_0?
You are not a rogue in real life. Your viewpoints don't get sneak attack bonuses if you male them opaque.
Ok, so you are lazy. Who is Darlene in relation to TSR and what did she contribute?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I am not liking what I see in the future.
1) Wizards of the coast is back stepping to fourth edition with the new monster/npc setup. Very Boring.
2) The woke extremism that Hasbro has been pushing did not sound good.
3) UA is not even being used anymore, the survey are not open enough to allow everyone to give a opinion.
A) UA not being used on D&D beyond.
4) To many races being created. I like a choice, but now it getting bad.
5) Last two book have been rehash of a different theme.
6) They are not even trying to put out decent story lines. Fey one just seems hacked with revisited themes. It looks boring.
I am not liking what I see. I been playing dungeon and dragons along time. I have played every edition, since first.
i can honestly say, I feel disappointed.
Except for point number 3, what does any of this have to do with Unearthed Arcana?
Like, if that's your opinion, then more power to you, but pretty much every thing you stated is just you putting your opinion out there about things completely unrelated to UA
Edit: Looks like the thread was moved to General Discussion. That being said, with the way OP has framed his/her views, I would caution people with how they choose to respond, or else risk starting another 10+ page thread arguing about all the recent changes that have been/will be made
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Aside from 3A, what does any of that have to do with DDB? It’s kinda like giving Barns & Nobels a list of grievances against Penguin Books. B&N just sells the books, complaints regarding content would be better addressed to the publishing house directly.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
can’t comment on 1. Wasn’t here for fourth.
2 seems a strange issue. Extreme wokeness? I can’t say I’ve seen any extreme agenda pushing. I can only assume this relates to customising ability scores and starting options which seems… I mean a bit much to even call wokeness.
3 that’s a ddb choice. You can still custom create it. Don’t get me wrong it’s a shame it’s gone but I am not sure why this is a big omen of the future.
4 alright that’s a preference thing. But they need new content. If it wasn’t races it would be something else instead. Again I am not sure what the problem is here. If you don’t like the races don’t allow them or don’t play them.
5 honestly what themes haven’t been done before. And what specific themes are you objecting to. Because those books had multiple themes.
6 and what is the critique? What was rehashed? Ans what’s wrong with revisiting some themes? And which themes were revisited.
These points seem really… well lacking detail. your absolutely entitled to your views but could you provide a little bit more so we can see where your coming from. Because you haven’t pointed to any specific problem and just gestured at vague things
1 I sincerly doubt this is true, the main changes to statblocks are very minor, and have nothing to do with 4th edition
2.What woke extremism, not wanting to perpetuate a half century of racism?
3. UA is no different then it was at the start of 5e.
4. If its all unique enough and quality, who cares.
5.I fail to see to how feywild and dragons are rehashed themes
6.You say about a book you've probally never bought or read, or even seen a reveiw off
My homebrew content: Monsters, subclasses, Magic items, Feats, spells, races, backgrounds
One of the great things about 5e is that you can pick and choose which rules you want to play by. If you don't like the new stuff, don't use it.
The phb and dmg still drive the core rules on how to play. You don't like new races, don't use them.
You don't like the new / future monster set up, then use one of the recent 3rd party publications. Or just change the stats of existing ones to how you think they should work.
Same goes for new adventures, classes etc, loads of 3rd party stuff out there based on 5e rule set.
It may not work in dndbeyond, but if you've played since before 5e you can manage with pen and paper, and still have a great game.
Oh, and I wish everyone was woke, it's a good thing, if you're not then please try harder.
woke
/wəʊk/
verb
past of wake
adjectiveINFORMAL•US
alert to injustice in society, especially racism.
"we need to stay angry, and stay woke"
This does cause issues with counterspell, but I don't think it won't be easy to fix.
I am 100% woke (obviously), and I can tell you WotC is not only not preventing your views from being heard, they're actually still not woke. Please don't call something something it isn't.
UAs are actually incredibly open, as I can say because I managed to get the fairy in WBtW changed. Please make sure to actually do the UA if you want to be heard.
There's an overblow of races, but a large number are either setting specific or niche. I honestly don't mind - more options is always fun, regardless of whether or not you'll ever use them.
Pray, tell me how this is? Dragons are a rehash of what theme? Dragons? Honestly, I dislike Fizban's, but I see no rehash. And then Wilds Beyond the Witchlight? There's never been a D&D theme like it. I am unsure of Wilds but sure, it was no rehash.
Along with the note from above, while I'll say Witchlight is not my jam, I will mention everything from Icewind Dale, Strixhaven, Call of the Netherdeep, etc. And I think really you don't care, do you? Just because you're in an unfortunate niche where you don't like a thing WotC does, doesn't mean you get the privileges to spew out racist beliefs or yuck everyone else's yum. I am guilty of this as well, but let's just say it's not nice to those who are okay with it.
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
1) We should be so lucky. No edition did monsters better than 4E. That's not what's happening though.
2) WotC is making a few steps towards rectifying decades of mistakes. That doesn't make them woke, and certainly not extremely so.
3) UA is the same as it ever was, other than DDB not putting it in the toolset anymore.
4) Being spoilt for choice is not a bad thing. People who like that variety of options are happy, people who don't can simply ignore what they don't want in their game.
5) No, they weren't.
6) Well that's like, your opinion, man. You're free to have one, and everyone else is free to have another one.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I have not been playing for a long time. Wanted to since I was a kid thirty years ago, but didn't. Some of the emergent wokeness in the broader DnD culture (which is to some degree being reflected in official source material) is what helped me bridge the gap into finally playing. I can honestly say I do not feel disappointed.
Perhaps in twenty or thirty years, I'll feel alienated by changes to the game, but if it's ushering in new waves of players, I'll likely greet the change with a smile. I've already been a part of other communities where this has happened. There's a sadness to it, but things change. At least with D&D the existing material doesn't become unplayable, and you can always homebrew new content in the existing systems.
Given I'm not a dungeon master I can't wholly appreciate this sentiment, but I would imagine DMs can salvage something from this change. I'm sure if they managed from the beginning of 4th Edition to the reintroduction of this style, they can manage again. What do you suggest they do? I'm all for discussing what would be better, and given you've aired your grievances here (however unlikely it is they'll be seen by anyone with any authority at Wizards), you appear to be too.
I would like to think that the majority of the progressive moves are making for a more welcoming environment, as BogWitchKris above me can attest to. Even then I wouldn't go as far as to say that's "extremism." Some attempts involving language and inclusivity have been cheesy and sometimes ignorant, sure, but not extreme. I'd rather they attempt it than not, because you can't very well improve if you don't first make mistakes, or know you're making them.
But let's hear it from your point of view. What are some examples of this "woke extremism," and why does it "not sound good?" And once more, what do you want Hasbro to do about this, and how would you convince them it would be to their benefit?
EDIT: How I managed to forget 3) is beyond me. Apologies for having to retroactively jam this quote in:
I wouldn't know if UA is or is not being used because I don't know every session of 5th edition that's ever been played, and what was played in it. It's data that simply isn't publically accessible, so we're not going to know. One thing's for certain, I don't use it because it doesn't interest me. Why do you think it isn't being used?
As for it not being used on D&D Beyond, I would imagine that it's too much work for the people running the site. If it's not a class, it can be homebrewed and inserted into D&D Beyond in some fashion.
Regarding surveys, I find they're extensive enough that I feel anyone can give any number of feedback options. I often have too much feedback to give, and end up giving less because I run out of steam toward the end. I'd say that's the mark of a good, if sometimes frustrating, survey.
Any race in any edition of D&D is playable with some modifications; it just depends on if the DM allows homebrew at their table. And while playable races might be mechanically available in the books or on D&D Beyond, they might not be suitable for that particular campaign. I love that the Minotaur is a playable race, but I wholly appreciate that it's unlikely I'll be able to play one without having to put up with the roleplay consequences of having a beast-race in the party.
For the sake of discussion, let's say you're right: the clutter is too much. How much is enough? Are we picking and choosing the races, or culling by book? Which books?
I don't understand this criticism, you'll need to elaborate. There probably have been dragon-based books in a game called Dungeons & Dragons before, so Fizban's Treasury of Dragons will easily be a 'rehash' for 5th edition. As for The Wild Beyond the Witchlight: A Feywild Adventure, yes, there have been other books based in that setting.
Let's have a look at the next two books though. Strixhaven: A Curriculum of Chaos is set in a college with very stereotypical college themes. I don't think there's been any adventures close to that, save for going to Candlekeep, a fortress library. Critical Role: Call of the Netherdeep is based on Matt Mercer's own Exandria setting, though granted, with his own twists on the fey world and such (I'm not overly familiar with Critical Role - I'm only in episode 69 of Campaign 1. Nice.)
My point about bringing up the next two books is because I think that undoes the 'rehash' that were the previous two, which is not that unique a criticism, really. You could've said that of Volo's Guide to Monsters, Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes, or Curse of Strahd? Why the last two books specifically? I'm not criticising any of those books, by the way, merely pointing out that they serve the more or less the same purpose as others that have previously existed: to make them work in fifth edition.
Once more you seem to be hung up on the feywild adventure, but not Eberron which has two books, or Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft which is the second book of that setting, or the upcoming Critical Role book, or the amount of dragon adventures (again, in fairness, this is Dungeons & Dragons.) And if it looks boring, that's OK, not every book is going to appeal to every player.
I don't want to shoot discussion down by asking this, because I'm genuinely curious, what are you telling us for? To vent or to talk solutions? Without further information we can't be of that much use, merely give our own opinions that are unlikely to change without further input, and go our seperate ways.
I would like to think that something fruitful may come out of this discussion. However good the feedback on this forum I promise it won't be read by Wizards of the Coast, but we can at least enjoy a chat about it amongst ourselves.
Zero is the most important number in D&D: Session Zero sets the boundaries and the tone; Rule Zero dictates the Dungeon Master (DM) is the final arbiter; and Zero D&D is better than Bad D&D.
"Let us speak plainly now, and in earnest, for words mean little without the weight of conviction."
- The Assemblage of Houses, World of Warcraft
1) they are killing the versatile of the monsters.which made 4e monster suck.
2 ) google hasbro woke, you will see what I mean.
3) I agree
4)I am fine with content. It just feels like races are now cookie cutter.
5) Growing up with D&D I have seen all of it. Now it just shallow. No meat as they say.
6) hmm hard to explain, but I seen Alice in wonderland done to many times. It nothing new, just repackaged. Even the heroes and villains.
Thank you for elaborating somewhat, I really wasn't expecting any further developments. In regards to this you'd still need to provide some examples of what versatility monsters have, what lack of versatility monsters had in 4E, and how to improve them going forward, if this discussion's going to get the ball rolling.
The first results that come up are for Monopoly having a 'woke' edition and Potato Head. I don't see how either of those are "extremism." Some of the things throughout Monopoly's history have been silly (there's over 300 versions, they can't all be winners), and Hasbro clumsily fall over themselves to be progressive, but I think this is only a big deal when people make it one. That goes for those who are the target audience (such as those mentioned in Monopoly for Millenials) and those who want to mock it (such as yourself.)
In what way? I could certainly see how the optional rules of Tasha's Cauldron of Everything may have watered things down by removing distinct features and allowing players to chop and change races, but I don't think that's cookie cutter design; quite the opposite in fact.
How are the races of today's game different to previous editions? If you could give us more details and provide examples, that'd be fantastic.
I think we've reached the crux of the problem, and there's no easy way to say it but I don't think D&D can offer you any more if you're relying on Wizards' content. There's tons of homebrew stuff out there if you haven't seen it already, and I say this as someone who is as vanilla as they get (I play Bethesda games on PC without mods and like it, for context). Alternatively it might be worth looking into older editions and enjoying them while you can still find groups to play with. You might even find some people who will use the old Unearthed Arcana!
I can appreciate that. You might want to look at writing your own content for the Feywild and running a group through that; they might also not like the way Wizards do things, and would appreciate a new twist. It's one of those places that sees a lot of debate on forums as to what it should be depicted like, and some commenters only look at the surface level. It might be worth buying the book or reading some reviews, or even seeing play sessions of those who have played it before judging it too harshly.
As for heroes and villains, that's what'll happen to any property that's gone on this long, I'm afraid. A prime example of this is World of Warcraft wherein two expansion packs had been released and already most of the major heroes and villains reappeared, died, and resurrected in some fashion because Blizzard never expected it to last as long as it did.
Zero is the most important number in D&D: Session Zero sets the boundaries and the tone; Rule Zero dictates the Dungeon Master (DM) is the final arbiter; and Zero D&D is better than Bad D&D.
"Let us speak plainly now, and in earnest, for words mean little without the weight of conviction."
- The Assemblage of Houses, World of Warcraft
I don't want to turn this into a political discussion, but I don't see what the fuss is about with them changing community chest. Regardless, I really don't get what it's got to do with D&D. Unless you're upset with the political views Hasbro has presented and so you want to cancel them by refusing to by WotC products, it's pretty irrelevant.
The only issue I could see that is, are Tasha's rules for racial ASIs. I disagree with them on several levels...but I hardly think it's something to rant about. I don't play those rules (unless a player can persuade me that in their specific case it's justified) and move on. The only issue I think are Fairies, which I'll look into more deeply and judge whether I should keep then customisable, create my own template for which ASIs they get, or go partway (ie, give a choice of a couple). It's a storm in a teacup, from where I'm standing.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I have no issues with anything that is woke, and anything that allows a player options is a good thing. If these changes were not put in then you would start seeing everything is the same as everything else.
Googled it, but like others, I don't really see what you mean. Of the limited stories that emerge, some are blown way out of proportion (e.g. the Mr. Potato Head story where many people got angry about a thing that wasn't even really happening).
To me it feels the opposite. Some of the attributes assigned to races felt like they were flattening them out, generalizing them as peoples who should have had greater diversity. In terms of player characters, 50% of the value of playing a given race were its racial ASIs rather than the race itself. I also felt a little spoon fed before on certain things before. In terms of npcs, the races felt a bit flatter than I'd have liked. What I'd like to see is consistently better lore rather than more rigid stat blocks.
I can't say you're wrong, because that is rude. But you are wrong. If we view the collective D&D player base as one person (impossible and dumb simplicity, for certain, but what the hell, at this point reasoning isn't the most potent thing in any thread on disagreements), we will find that our hypothetical all-as-one D&D Player will love the new monsters (not understanding the issues with counterspell, because they're more open-minded), they feel like Hasbro is not woke enough (I certainly feel this way, and I am "woker" than your mind can comprehend because I'm strange), love more lineages with more diversity (this means maybe less people will play that bane of banes, the Human Fighter), and while you say that you have grown up with D&D, I grew up with Tolkien.
Tolkien was my world. I have read the Hobbit dozens of times, no joke, and watched each film over four times over. Even the Hobbit films. Hours, hours and hours of my life has gone into Tolkien. But the things is, in the past few years I've come to "meh" Tolkien. It's not that Tolkien has gotten any worse - no new books are coming out for that to be the case. It's merely the fact that I have personally moved on somewhat. I still love Tolkien, but I disagree with the new TV series (not necessary in my opinion) and Tolkien's portrayal of fantasy race. This doesn't mean Tolkien is now suddenly bad. So why does that mean D&D is suddenly bad for you? You don't have to use current 5E lore. Use 3E. Hundreds of high-calibre creators still use 3E and 3.5E for their stuff, and hey, it sounds like 3E has what you need.
Before you accuse me of gatekeeping - no. I am not saying you can't play 5E. What I am saying is, if you disagree with "lack of crunch", "lack of [insert polite form of saying racist values here]", and "lack of lore", go with either a modified 5E, go 3.5E, go Pathfinder, or even go home and make your own RPG. This is not gatekeeping. These are potential solutions to your problem, and if you don't like them, tough luck. It's still not gatekeeping.
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
For point 2, why don't you do some reading on the hiring practices of TSR and then get back to me on this one. I was there, the game was open to anyone and everyone. Whatever they could do to sell or get talent they did. If you want to go revisionist history, then please pontificate about it, I'm all ears.
Yeah what WotC has been putting out is lackadaisical at best since Mearl's has been removed. Descent into Avernus was horrible, Von Rickies was a horror book without the horror and Beyond the Witchlight took Igwilv arguably one of the strongest casters (she held Grazzt for a century and lived to tell about it) in the game and turned her into a Fey CN caster with hardly any spells but they did give her Wish because we know how balanced that is.
I highly suggest using older content updated to 5E and/or using 3rd party content. Kobold Press and Goodman Games put out very good content for 5E that you can use for your own campaigns. I've dropped over $850 over the last year on the two and they are good purchases. The tome of beasts from Kobold Press and Original Adventures Reincarnated from Goodman Games are must haves for 5E.
If you want some OSR type modules, try Dark Wizard games, they have similar tradecraft to AD&D, a similar feel and again are much better written than what WotC tries to put out since Mearls has been removed.
If you want to move away from 5E, Goodman Games Dungeon Crawl Classics feels like an AD&D w/ a smidgeon of 3.0 and a lot more variability or you could try necrotic gnomes Old School Advanced Essentials if you want a better version of AD&D.
The thing is, as WotC continues down the path of irrelevance, there are a lot and I do mean a lot of very good content of similar vein to D&D without the taint from WotC trying to create content by committee.
If you believe WotC politics is over the top in their content then duckduckgo this search string: "[List] TTRPG Guide to Woke Companies". You can get an idea of the type of content you will be getting.
At this time, I'm only using the 5E ruleset, everything else is from prior editions of D&D or 3rd party content. My players love it. I did recently buy the Witchlight because of a youtuber I used to trust for reviews raved about it, after reading it though, yeah well he's no longer on my trust list.
Why are people like this? If you have resources available, I am happy to read them instead of expecting you to regurgitate them, but what am I supposed to be looking for on their hiring practices? If you have a coherent point or argument, just make it. I will do the additional reading if you can point me in the right direction. So far, in googling Wizards of the Coast hiring practices, I am getting personal testimonial that there is racism within the company. I'm getting WotC company pages. I'm getting random stories and glassdoor reviews. Is that what you wanted me to see? If so, what is the connection to woke extremism and content? Or are you merely saying the company isn't racist in response to Zonlos2_0?
You are not a rogue in real life. Your viewpoints don't get sneak attack bonuses if you make them hidden.
Ok, so you are lazy. Who is Darlene in relation to TSR and what did she contribute?