Nerd Immersion interviews Kyle Brink

[Twiggly the Gnome]

At about 20 minutes in, Brink says theybare working on non3E older edition SRDs for CC.

I was pleasantly surprised to hear that might be possible. Like I said in another thread, the Core Rules rfts would be a great starting point for making a 2e SRD.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

At about 20 minutes in, Brink says theybare working on non3E older edition SRDs for CC.

I do not know that they are actually working on it, as in devoting resources to do it, but they are considering that.

 

[Parmandur]

I do not know that they are actually working on it, as in devoting resources to do it, but they are considering that.

He didn't seem surprised ot taken aback by the idea, and seemed to be suggesting it is happening. I'd guess IneD&D development is a higher priority, tho.

 

[mellored]

Almost asked about when the next playtest is....

 

[Ruin Explorer]

One dnd playtest docs may be denser because they want to stick to the deadline.

Kyle notes that this has been hard on the creative team. And they’ve missed a couple play test outputs.

Oh dear.

I mean, totally unsurprising and I feel for them, because it's not like they can re-arrange the 50th anniversary from being in 2024, but it'd be nice to not have a "rushed" edition of D&D for once. I don't think 2E or 3E were rushed, but 4E was (this is documented), and 5E absolutely seems like it was (tons of evidence, especially the DMG). I know they're changing less and they've still got a year and a bit, but damn.

 

[Xamnam]

Yeah, their initial timeline already seemed on the crunched side, given how the un-interrupted playtests were going at the start, and if they're still quite committed to hitting that window...

 

[Jer]

Oh dear.

I mean, totally unsurprising and I feel for them, because it's not like they can re-arrange the 50th anniversary from being in 2024, but it'd be nice to not have a "rushed" edition of D&D for once. I don't think 2E or 3E were rushed, but 4E was (this is documented), and 5E absolutely seems like it was (tons of evidence, especially the DMG). I know they're changing less and they've still got a year and a bit, but damn.

IMHO - if it encourages them to change even less it'll probably be a good thing in the end. If it ends up with devs who can't let go of their pet ideas rushing to put them into place instead of just dropping it and hoping to add it in a later supplement, that would be bad.

 

[dave2008]

Interesting quote from Kyle talking about the motive to change the OGL and then backtrack:

"...the perceived risk was much greater than the actual risk..."

 

[dave2008]

A couple of notes from the interview:

• Confirms plans to add earlier editions of SRDs to CC.
• Would be willing to add older editions (4e, 2e, & 1e) to CC, but no commitment.
• No change in leadership on the D&D side. However, design team will work more closely leadership.
• One D&D impacted by OGL issue: playtest schedule becomes more dense to meet 2024 deadline.
• Artificer likely to be added to CC SRD, but can't guarantee that (an SRD has been drafted with it).
• OneD&D will have an updated SRD, it is still 5e. The OneD&D SRD will be 5.2 or 5.3, etc.
• No new OGL 1.2 or whatever for One D&D - it will use CC and OGL 1.0a
• Want to figure out a way to support physical and digital bundles with local game stores. Just not sure how to do it.
• VTT: want to have creator tools in their VTT. So you don't have to buy everything, you can create your own. It will not be 1st party only.
• Adventure League: Can do more with organized play. It will change (they hope) to help people get into the game. Not sure how to do that yet.

 

[cranberry]

OK, so I think we all know that the design team had nothing to do with the OGL fiasco.

But there will be no changes to the executive suite...so you can expect this sort of thing to happen again. they'll just be more sneaky about it next time.