How do you feel about the future of D&D after the official announcements?

BriarMonkey · Jan 11, 2012

Neutral.

Overall, I don't think WotC can pull it off, especially given the very different games that pre-4E and 4E are. And if they don't, it doesn't matter to me because I have Pathfinder. But, I am willing to give it a look-see as even if the system doesn't work, it may have good ideas to be used. And if the system does work, then that's a good thing.

synthapse · Jan 11, 2012

Positive.

I really enjoy 4E (especially running it), but I'm looking forward to a change. Like most people here, I'm skeptical about WotC's ability to do what they say, but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.

I also plan on spreading the term "5mind".

sckeener · Jan 11, 2012

I'm neutral. I would have gone with negative, but mentioning 5e has me coming back to enworld after 9 month absence. That's a positive since I love this site, but I really really hate 4e.

I don't think WotC can pull 5e off and get it right. You can't please everyone from all editions. I think Hasbro would be better off selling D&D as a brand off (to Paizo if they actually cared,) but retaining rights to make toys with the D&D logo.

Jan van Leyden · Jan 11, 2012

Negative.

I think their lofty goals are unreachable. I believe that a not so small number of players will enter a "but they promised!" mode when things don't turn out like they hoped they'd be.

A few people will see themselves as "winners" and many more as "losers". As for the final result, I see D&D as a game being developed over the years. I was happy when 3e appeared on the scene and I was happy when the less-cumbersome (for me, at least) 4e came out. I might be looking forward to a 5e a few years from now, but I don't want it to turn back to older instances. And I definitely don't want it to be a weird toolbox with which I can try to craft my own game. There are a lot of game systems for just this purpose.

So regarding the content I'm skeptical, regarding the imminent decade of flame wars I'm very negative.

Steerpike7 · Jan 11, 2012

I'm not holding out too much hope, given the involvement of Mearls. Does anyone else remember how condescending and insulting toward 3e players the 4e team was when it released? They came just short of saying "your game sucks, and we're here to save you."

Anything that has Mearls' name on it has to undo a lot of damage before I'll spend a dime it.

Setting aside my personal feeling toward elements of the design team, I think the stated goals are going to be hard to meet. My group plays Pathfinder, or 3.X, or even older versions of D&D (or completely unrelated games) because most of what we found playing 4e did not fit our personal preferences. For others, 4e fit their preferences nicely. Nothing wrong with either viewpoint, but by trying to create a game that somehow units the fan base of both 4e and 3.X, they are more likely to alienate both.

In 2008 I would have had a more visceral reaction, because my emotional connection to RPG gaming was tied to D&D. It no longer is, thanks to what WotC did with 4e. So now I'm more of a curious onlooker. If WotC pulls this off and releases an incredible edition, I'll buy it. Anything short of that, I'll be content to play something else for the foreseeable future.

Mallus · Jan 11, 2012

Very Positive.

If nothing else, I'm curious to see what a talented group of designers comes up with given a set of seemingly hard-to-reconcile design goals.

At best, I'll get a set of rules which play faster than 3e/4e/Pathfinder, but offers a touch more flexibility/mechanical complexity (out of the box) than AD&D (which I'm running now).

No, strike that... at best we'll get a set of rules which demonstrates the bulk of the D&D community isn't really divided into warring partisan camps, that the Edition War thing is just an artifact of a communication style prevalent on Internet message boards (I can hope, right?).

At heart I'm a genre fan, in the sense I'm always up for a new take on a frequently-told story.

pauljathome · Jan 11, 2012

I'm cautiously optimistic.

Right now WOTC is making all the right noises. It certainly sounds like they've seriously changed their attitude since the 4th edition launch and that is a very good thing.

I'm sceptical that they'll be able to achieve their goals. But I'm willing to approach what they come up with with an open mind.

My biggest fear is that they'll be TOO open and try TOO hard to please EVERYBODY. That will end up pleasing nobody. They have to take SOME position and, regardless of what that is, SOME people will get irked.

The fact that Hasbro is willing to invest medium to long term (2 years at least) in D&D is sure better than the alternative of it pulling the plug

pauljathome · Jan 11, 2012

double post

Starglyte · Jan 11, 2012

Neutral.

I am quite happy with 4th edition, but will wait and see what they do with 5th before writing it off.

FallenAkriel · Jan 11, 2012

i start playing dnd when i was a kid and 2E was flexible (full of custom/options), feeling light, full of fluff but with clunky rules . 3E was great but so much rules heavy, difficult to dm. 4E was great to dm, but feel like a boardgame (too much combat-oriented, pc mechanic always the same).

I'm positive because 5E CAN take up the strength of all editions and add some.
5E - Bring quicker combat, maybe even skill/social ''combat''. Like my diplomacy roll beating the Will Defense.
4E - Easy to DM (monster simple enough) and Heroic feeling at low-level
3E - Lot of Players options that feel different, rules that make sense
2E - Customizable and lot of fluff for campaign settings (pdf/online). If i want to play Dark Sun or any weird campaign setting, it can stack with ease rule-wise with the Basic DnD stuff.

Bottom line, i want a Basic DnD that feel light with possible Advanced D&D books for Players (Races and class options) and DM (aerial/water/desert/cold campaign or any investigation/social heavy campaign mecanic).