Watching this now after the MCDM RPG crowd funder was funded is interesting. Matt was very clearly already interested in picking up on what WoC dropped the ball on with the VTT (or interested in someone doing it)
5e does tell you how many encounters a day before a rest: 6. To Matt's point, a rest mechanic only makes sense if you are modeling an epic journey style game. Ie, lord of the rings (the book) they are resting constantly in scene because they are going on a multiple week long journey. Ie, the ad&d module "Tomb of the Lizard King" put the dungeon several hexes away where you ran into things along the way that hinted at the plot and twist at the end. You had to get through a swamp (which would take longer) and it was a game of managing resources because you could starve to death in a bog if you did not manage your resources right.
Interesting! Watching this a year later... and Dungeons of Drakkenhiem and other Ghostfire products are available on DnDBeyond. Some of these predictions are spot on! And some of the fears were unfounded.
What James brings up just before the 10 minute mark works well for Critical Role and lots of other people, probably his own games too, because the players use up their resources like spells and whatnot doing noncombat things as well, which often deepen the story too and make those big battles more dangerous. That's pretty old school but just in a more spectacular way, which is a lot of fun.
The talk about a modular system is exactly what I was hoping for 5.5/6e. 5e works at a base level but long term players want more nuance and depth right now
Define 'nuance'. This player and DM doesn't and my group definitely wouldn't if by nuance you mean what I think you mean. I started playing in 87. I stopped around 3E. I only came back into it once I saw 5e wasn't as crunchy as the previous editions. If I wanted more 'nuance' which really translates to more rules if I understand what you might mean, I would have gone back to playing 2nd edition or tried Pathfinder with its 600 page rule book. I want to be able to go through the adventure, tell a story and not spend half the game time figuring out all possible bonuses and penalties that apply to climbing a steep cliff wall under high winds and that is wet from rain while worrying about the best type of rope to use for it. It is also why I could never get into similar bogged down games, ex Shadowrun, Rifts, etc., despite enjoying the settings of both.
To address Matt's first point about positioning. As a DM you can just give any monster stat block the level 3 tricks rangers get from the Swarmkeeper subclass. It's fantastic. Every round you get to choose to add to one attack 1 damage die, take 5 feet of disengage movement, or cause 15 feet of forced movement. That's how you make the game more Tactical for a battle mat. Treat Tasha's like it's a DM homebrew tool box. As for the new edition. I genuinely believe the biggest change might be a default setting change. They're going to tweak some core rulebook sections and character options, but when it comes to the edition number they might just remove the edition numbers all together. The absolute biggest change coming in 2024 is probably moving the published adventures to Dominaria.
That's not a bad idea, it's just the problem comes when you fight more and more monsters. Are they all going to have those same movement options? That would get stale and expected after a while. The issue of 5e monsters not being tactically challenging on the grid is a problem large in its scope, so it likey requires a solution large in scope to address it.
I think Colville's idea if a "Steam" solution is a good one, although I don't think Steam is the right analogy. It would be more like Fantasy Grounds/Tabletop Simulator/Foundry VTT, which are built as frameworks ready to have modules plugged into them. D&d Beyond already has this to a minor degree, with the homebrew content that people can make and publish. I think they'd have to be really dumb to not see how letting people use a vtt for 3rd party content on their own system would only make their product more profitable.
In the book Slaying the Dragon they talk about how the more setting and specific books the more TSR fractured the audience. 5e pushes adventure paths over settings for this reason I think. Now at the end of the cycle they are gonna throw out the settings. The adventure strategy is so smart cause as a DM when I get an itch I will buy any setting or supplement just to see. When in 3.5 it was like okay I am gonna get the book on Dragon Mark's cause I incorporate alot of Eberron and I will skip the Serpent Kingdoms book in Lost Realms.
I think I agree. The earlier adventure modules felt like events along a continuous story path we could all follow, which seems to be becoming more frayed the further into other settings we're being taken.
Woa. Great episode! Lot's of really really insightful discussions about the brand and business of D&D. I'm an old groganard and there was some things discussed that I had never considered before. Totally agree about the VTT thing as well... that's coming for sure. And congratulations James!!! Great episode Eldritch LC!
I came here because a TH-camr did a vid about how Matt C predicted the current ogl 1.1 debacle that we find ourselves in His vid was ok This one was better Love listening to Matt Love Dael too, but I never gave this a chance until now. I'll keep it in my wheelhouse for when I'm painting minis
As a VTT map cartography myself, Cze & Peku has always been so inspirational for me! Their maps are full of wonder and high fantasy and I love it. Congrats on the Ennie for Tal'Dorei as well! The book is one of the most beautiful D&D setting books I own.. second only to Grim Hollow!
I've not seen your work, but I'm curious about something. I'm old school, been playing since 1st Edition and I really love black and white maps. Is it not possible to create the newer standard of maps (lack of a better word but including "depth" to them) in black and white - does it not work, not look good, or something you just don't enjoy doing?
@@dnew2photo554 So I make maps using Inkarnate (DM Andy Maps if you are curious) and I started making maps for Curse of Strahd. I enjoy the more realistic maps for VTT use as my players really respond to the visuals of a more realistic map. However, as a DM I can see where there can be situations where a player might ask "What is in this book that is lying here?" when in reality I just placed a book on the map to make it more lived in but not really something I had flushed out for game purposes. However, the map tool I use (Inkarnate) just announced at Gencon they are coming out with a "Classic" version of their maps which resemble the old graph paper / black and white maps. I think you'll find that as map tools evolve, so too does their reach to allow cartographers to make maps in tons of different styles.
@@andydamato5357 Impressive work for sure. In case it was unclear I meant no offense, was simply curious and seeking your opinion on why you think more people don't create "realistic maps" with depth but in black and white? For example take your Church Crater map, would a lineart style with some grey shading not work with this map? Would it not feel as natural or realistic to you as a map creator? I do agree it's great we have new tools to cater to different styles and desires. Personally, and maybe I'm just a grognard or something but, I'm all for the realism and adding setting details, it's just the colors I find distracting for some reason and why I prefer black and white.
@@dnew2photo554 Oh no offense taken at all! I love hearing what other DMs look for in maps and I always appreciate insight. With the map tool that I use, there is a black & white filter I could use to apply to my work which will keep the realism but strip the color. I think you can do this in a lot of image editing software as well such as Gimp. This way if you find a map you like online that you just love, you can strip the color from it and have it fit your needs! :)
James is only partly right, 4th did have a license for 3rd party developers, it was horrible and not fully open. But it did exist. They called it the Gaming System License, and I'm not able to find a copy of it anywhere but you can find tons of articles about it and how terrible it was. Because it wasn't truly open, it did allow them to revoke it, unlike the 3rd and 5th versions so I'm not sure if it still exists or not.
I actually do think about HotDQ and RoT a lot. Lol. But that was my first adventure so it holds a special place for me. It will still be my default if I'm not homebrewing something.
Since 80% of the population of the US is urban, the number of people who live within distance to a game store is probably higher than we imagine. Unfortunately most of those potential players are too young to drive and live trapped in unwalkable suburbia.
I feel like a lot of tables I see are running DND 5e without a grid and some of them have even taken the next step and began abstracting time as short and long rests rather than hours and minutes. But the problem that arises is adjudication of AOE effects. I have my own version homebrewed, but I would love to see wotc release "dnd-lite" which fully expects no grid and for time to be abstracted. Specifically so we can get official rulings on spell durations, casting times, and aoe's. I'm imagining something like FATE zones and scenes, for abstracted time and positions.
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 88 | คู่เอก "ป้อมเพชร vs อัสลามจอน"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1ZqTVVbMgbo/mqdefault.jpg)
Matt’s opening comments on the value of the OGL to WotC has aged so well. He’s spot on, and Wizards are so off-key.
Watching this now after the MCDM RPG crowd funder was funded is interesting. Matt was very clearly already interested in picking up on what WoC dropped the ball on with the VTT (or interested in someone doing it)
5e does tell you how many encounters a day before a rest: 6. To Matt's point, a rest mechanic only makes sense if you are modeling an epic journey style game. Ie, lord of the rings (the book) they are resting constantly in scene because they are going on a multiple week long journey.
Ie, the ad&d module "Tomb of the Lizard King" put the dungeon several hexes away where you ran into things along the way that hinted at the plot and twist at the end. You had to get through a swamp (which would take longer) and it was a game of managing resources because you could starve to death in a bog if you did not manage your resources right.
24:22 well-well, Matt, aight.. you can put down your thinfoil hat
I love seeing Matt Colville :) Very insightful and inspiring
Couldn't agree more! We were very lucky to have him.
Interesting! Watching this a year later... and Dungeons of Drakkenhiem and other Ghostfire products are available on DnDBeyond.
Some of these predictions are spot on! And some of the fears were unfounded.
Matt is a great GM, running Dale's character for her while she is missing a session.
😂
I love how prophetic this video was.
What James brings up just before the 10 minute mark works well for Critical Role and lots of other people, probably his own games too, because the players use up their resources like spells and whatnot doing noncombat things as well, which often deepen the story too and make those big battles more dangerous. That's pretty old school but just in a more spectacular way, which is a lot of fun.
Humbled that you not only opened with my question, but that you spent a quarter of the episode discussing it. Thanks for all the insightful answers.
Our pleasure, Dave! Was a great opening question, thanks for continuing to tune in.
The talk about a modular system is exactly what I was hoping for 5.5/6e.
5e works at a base level but long term players want more nuance and depth right now
Define 'nuance'. This player and DM doesn't and my group definitely wouldn't if by nuance you mean what I think you mean. I started playing in 87. I stopped around 3E. I only came back into it once I saw 5e wasn't as crunchy as the previous editions. If I wanted more 'nuance' which really translates to more rules if I understand what you might mean, I would have gone back to playing 2nd edition or tried Pathfinder with its 600 page rule book. I want to be able to go through the adventure, tell a story and not spend half the game time figuring out all possible bonuses and penalties that apply to climbing a steep cliff wall under high winds and that is wet from rain while worrying about the best type of rope to use for it. It is also why I could never get into similar bogged down games, ex Shadowrun, Rifts, etc., despite enjoying the settings of both.
I've still ben begging for a scavenging system from WOTC and I'm pretty sure I'm never going to get it,
Well this is certainly topical again. You bloody psychics.
To address Matt's first point about positioning. As a DM you can just give any monster stat block the level 3 tricks rangers get from the Swarmkeeper subclass. It's fantastic. Every round you get to choose to add to one attack 1 damage die, take 5 feet of disengage movement, or cause 15 feet of forced movement. That's how you make the game more Tactical for a battle mat. Treat Tasha's like it's a DM homebrew tool box.
As for the new edition. I genuinely believe the biggest change might be a default setting change. They're going to tweak some core rulebook sections and character options, but when it comes to the edition number they might just remove the edition numbers all together.
The absolute biggest change coming in 2024 is probably moving the published adventures to Dominaria.
That's not a bad idea, it's just the problem comes when you fight more and more monsters. Are they all going to have those same movement options? That would get stale and expected after a while. The issue of 5e monsters not being tactically challenging on the grid is a problem large in its scope, so it likey requires a solution large in scope to address it.
I think Colville's idea if a "Steam" solution is a good one, although I don't think Steam is the right analogy. It would be more like Fantasy Grounds/Tabletop Simulator/Foundry VTT, which are built as frameworks ready to have modules plugged into them. D&d Beyond already has this to a minor degree, with the homebrew content that people can make and publish.
I think they'd have to be really dumb to not see how letting people use a vtt for 3rd party content on their own system would only make their product more profitable.
In the book Slaying the Dragon they talk about how the more setting and specific books the more TSR fractured the audience. 5e pushes adventure paths over settings for this reason I think. Now at the end of the cycle they are gonna throw out the settings. The adventure strategy is so smart cause as a DM when I get an itch I will buy any setting or supplement just to see. When in 3.5 it was like okay I am gonna get the book on Dragon Mark's cause I incorporate alot of Eberron and I will skip the Serpent Kingdoms book in Lost Realms.
I think I agree. The earlier adventure modules felt like events along a continuous story path we could all follow, which seems to be becoming more frayed the further into other settings we're being taken.
The starter box *is* the 1981 basic set for 5e.
Woa. Great episode! Lot's of really really insightful discussions about the brand and business of D&D. I'm an old groganard and there was some things discussed that I had never considered before. Totally agree about the VTT thing as well... that's coming for sure. And congratulations James!!!
Great episode Eldritch LC!
Great podcast!
I always love hearing from Matt Colville!
Ooooo this looks to be a great episode with a great guest
I came here because a TH-camr did a vid about how Matt C predicted the current ogl 1.1 debacle that we find ourselves in
His vid was ok
This one was better
Love listening to Matt
Love Dael too, but I never gave this a chance until now. I'll keep it in my wheelhouse for when I'm painting minis
Watching after Wizards Presents to see how you did!
Not too bad to memory? We got the VTT and I think the 5.5 announcements… though I might be thinking of this week’s episode?
@@GhostfirePodcasts definitely not too bad! A lot of good ideas and thoughts. Some parts still unknown. Some minor things wrong
As a VTT map cartography myself, Cze & Peku has always been so inspirational for me! Their maps are full of wonder and high fantasy and I love it. Congrats on the Ennie for Tal'Dorei as well! The book is one of the most beautiful D&D setting books I own.. second only to Grim Hollow!
I've not seen your work, but I'm curious about something. I'm old school, been playing since 1st Edition and I really love black and white maps. Is it not possible to create the newer standard of maps (lack of a better word but including "depth" to them) in black and white - does it not work, not look good, or something you just don't enjoy doing?
@@dnew2photo554 So I make maps using Inkarnate (DM Andy Maps if you are curious) and I started making maps for Curse of Strahd. I enjoy the more realistic maps for VTT use as my players really respond to the visuals of a more realistic map. However, as a DM I can see where there can be situations where a player might ask "What is in this book that is lying here?" when in reality I just placed a book on the map to make it more lived in but not really something I had flushed out for game purposes.
However, the map tool I use (Inkarnate) just announced at Gencon they are coming out with a "Classic" version of their maps which resemble the old graph paper / black and white maps. I think you'll find that as map tools evolve, so too does their reach to allow cartographers to make maps in tons of different styles.
Love your work Andy! Much love from the GFG Discord!
@@andydamato5357 Impressive work for sure. In case it was unclear I meant no offense, was simply curious and seeking your opinion on why you think more people don't create "realistic maps" with depth but in black and white? For example take your Church Crater map, would a lineart style with some grey shading not work with this map? Would it not feel as natural or realistic to you as a map creator?
I do agree it's great we have new tools to cater to different styles and desires. Personally, and maybe I'm just a grognard or something but, I'm all for the realism and adding setting details, it's just the colors I find distracting for some reason and why I prefer black and white.
@@dnew2photo554 Oh no offense taken at all! I love hearing what other DMs look for in maps and I always appreciate insight. With the map tool that I use, there is a black & white filter I could use to apply to my work which will keep the realism but strip the color. I think you can do this in a lot of image editing software as well such as Gimp. This way if you find a map you like online that you just love, you can strip the color from it and have it fit your needs! :)
Holy shit this podcast is incredible
...
James is only partly right, 4th did have a license for 3rd party developers, it was horrible and not fully open. But it did exist. They called it the Gaming System License, and I'm not able to find a copy of it anywhere but you can find tons of articles about it and how terrible it was. Because it wasn't truly open, it did allow them to revoke it, unlike the 3rd and 5th versions so I'm not sure if it still exists or not.
Cool! New podcast I can listen to while I draw!
Glad Matt was able to fill in. Also love his Peace Out sign off at the end😊
I actually do think about HotDQ and RoT a lot. Lol. But that was my first adventure so it holds a special place for me. It will still be my default if I'm not homebrewing something.
Since 80% of the population of the US is urban, the number of people who live within distance to a game store is probably higher than we imagine. Unfortunately most of those potential players are too young to drive and live trapped in unwalkable suburbia.
I feel like a lot of tables I see are running DND 5e without a grid and some of them have even taken the next step and began abstracting time as short and long rests rather than hours and minutes. But the problem that arises is adjudication of AOE effects. I have my own version homebrewed, but I would love to see wotc release "dnd-lite" which fully expects no grid and for time to be abstracted. Specifically so we can get official rulings on spell durations, casting times, and aoe's. I'm imagining something like FATE zones and scenes, for abstracted time and positions.
Here after Legal Eagle's vid. Super interesting since I've only played a sesh or five over the last 5 years.
Fantastic episode, thanks for putting all these D&D genuses into the same voice chat.
Thanks for watching. Really glad you enjoyed it!
BX had an exploration rest mechanic; lord of the rings started the rest in Fantasy; 4e mechanized it in the modern game
That was quite informative, interesting and entertaining!
Glad you enjoyed, Tachilen! We’re here with new eps every week, come back any time. 🙂
Algo
i don't understand the shade that creators throw on Paizo and pathfinder.... Aren't you doing the same thing...? Even Matt does it...