Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Historian Ben Riggs on TSR's Salaries in the 1990s
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Jaeger" data-source="post: 8504587" data-attributes="member: 27996"><p>15 to 30 is a ridiculous number of people unless you're crediting every piece of art in the book done by a different artist.</p><p></p><p>The design by committee does seem to be a WotC speciality...</p><p></p><p>And as for <em>'aiming for the widest possible audience'</em> - IMHO it was the stakes and tension that have gradually been removed during the homogenization D&D has undergone during WotC's tenure that made the game in its earlier incarnations.</p><p></p><p>Certainly not now. Probably not within the next 5 years or so. But sooner or later the continued 'blandification' of D&D will catch up with it.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think you hit the nail on the head here with: "committee-compromised"</p><p></p><p>IMHO part of the problem is that for D&D; "Lead Designer" does not mean what we think it means where WotC is concerned.</p><p></p><p><em>(granted these are off memory - it'd take me a bit to track down the actual sources)</em></p><p></p><p>On this forum it was related that Rob Henisloo for 4e had to really go back and forth with his team to make sure that casters and fighters were on equal footing. Mearls dealt with a similar issue with 5e; evidently having to continually push back against his own design team to get it as simplified as it is.</p><p></p><p>I just found those offhand comments completely flabbergasting. Yes a lead listens to his team, and takes into consideration their input. But then he makes the call, <em>and that's it.</em> Everyone moves forward to make it work.</p><p></p><p>There is no continued debating going back and forth, or pushback from the team that you are supposedly the lead of. It is an absolutely alien way to do things compared to what I have seen in many different other businesses.</p><p></p><p>This might be the reason why both editions were essentially 'finalized' last minute compared to the supposed length of "playtesting" they underwent.</p><p></p><p>( I also find it amazing that they don't rock up to the playtesting phase without a solid alpha build of the game already in hand...)</p><p></p><p>IMHO a lot of non-WotC games don't have these half-baked issues because there is one person, for the good or ill of the system that is designing to a singular vision from beginning to end.</p><p></p><p>But again, <em>in my opinion</em>, given the resources available to WotC compared to any other RPG publisher - there is really no excuse for this kind of thing.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>In my opinion it was almost a throw away line in Montes 'review' that signaled to me that it was in response to shortcomings...</p><p></p><p>Under: The Beginning of the Story</p><p>Two key phrases:</p><p>"Even <em>before 3.0 went to the printer,</em> the business team overseeing D&D was talking about 3.5. ...</p><p>And:</p><p>"...a clarification of <em>issues that seemed to confuse large numbers of players</em>"</p><p></p><p>3.0 was play tested, but given the nature of the ivory tower game design that Monte admitted to - and the sheer number of feats available upon release - there is no way to fully playtest all that in a truly comprehensive way given all the other changes that they made to D&D for 3e.</p><p></p><p>IMHO they were well aware of certain issues coming out of the playtest. I believe Monte and Tweet thought it could all just be handled through gradual errata.</p><p></p><p>Whereas the business team saw an opportunity for $$$...</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jaeger, post: 8504587, member: 27996"] 15 to 30 is a ridiculous number of people unless you're crediting every piece of art in the book done by a different artist. The design by committee does seem to be a WotC speciality... And as for [I]'aiming for the widest possible audience'[/I] - IMHO it was the stakes and tension that have gradually been removed during the homogenization D&D has undergone during WotC's tenure that made the game in its earlier incarnations. Certainly not now. Probably not within the next 5 years or so. But sooner or later the continued 'blandification' of D&D will catch up with it. I think you hit the nail on the head here with: "committee-compromised" IMHO part of the problem is that for D&D; "Lead Designer" does not mean what we think it means where WotC is concerned. [I](granted these are off memory - it'd take me a bit to track down the actual sources)[/I] On this forum it was related that Rob Henisloo for 4e had to really go back and forth with his team to make sure that casters and fighters were on equal footing. Mearls dealt with a similar issue with 5e; evidently having to continually push back against his own design team to get it as simplified as it is. I just found those offhand comments completely flabbergasting. Yes a lead listens to his team, and takes into consideration their input. But then he makes the call, [I]and that's it.[/I] Everyone moves forward to make it work. There is no continued debating going back and forth, or pushback from the team that you are supposedly the lead of. It is an absolutely alien way to do things compared to what I have seen in many different other businesses. This might be the reason why both editions were essentially 'finalized' last minute compared to the supposed length of "playtesting" they underwent. ( I also find it amazing that they don't rock up to the playtesting phase without a solid alpha build of the game already in hand...) IMHO a lot of non-WotC games don't have these half-baked issues because there is one person, for the good or ill of the system that is designing to a singular vision from beginning to end. But again, [I]in my opinion[/I], given the resources available to WotC compared to any other RPG publisher - there is really no excuse for this kind of thing. In my opinion it was almost a throw away line in Montes 'review' that signaled to me that it was in response to shortcomings... Under: The Beginning of the Story Two key phrases: "Even [I]before 3.0 went to the printer,[/I] the business team overseeing D&D was talking about 3.5. ... And: "...a clarification of [I]issues that seemed to confuse large numbers of players[/I]" 3.0 was play tested, but given the nature of the ivory tower game design that Monte admitted to - and the sheer number of feats available upon release - there is no way to fully playtest all that in a truly comprehensive way given all the other changes that they made to D&D for 3e. IMHO they were well aware of certain issues coming out of the playtest. I believe Monte and Tweet thought it could all just be handled through gradual errata. Whereas the business team saw an opportunity for $$$... [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Historian Ben Riggs on TSR's Salaries in the 1990s
Top