D&D 5E [Poll] Do You Like The Direction D&DN Is Heading In?

TarionzCousin · Jan 24, 2013

I feel like 5E is a throwback, albeit with some strange quirks (advantage, skill dice, etc.). So I mostly like it. I really hope that they can make it "modular" like was once promised, adding elements from other editions. That would be very groovy.

MortalPlague said:
I've said it before, but my group and I have found D&D Next to be a great game at the table, even at this early stage. We're eight sessions into an excellent campaign, and we're definitely having fun.

Have you posted any session recaps online here or elsewhere? I would like to see more examples of 5E in action.

Dice4Hire · Jan 24, 2013

I do not agree things are set in stone yet.

Bluenose · Jan 24, 2013

Given that the latest playtest put out more spells; so the Wizard got more breadth as well as depth of power.
And it put out more manoeuvres by narrowing the scope of existing ones; so the Fighter got less breadth.
And the discussion about multiclassing being framed solely in 3e terms.
And the mention of prestige classes.

They're going to have to climb a very high slope to make me expect anything but a bad game.

Kinak · Jan 24, 2013

I agree with Stormonu. Every playtest after the first has moved 5e away from what I'm looking for.

Maybe the end product with polished "basic" rules might be my cup of tea, but I'm not going to abandon Pathfinder for another game that's equally complex.

Cheers!
Kinak

Tequila Sunrise · Jan 24, 2013

I stopped paying attention at about the time when one of the devs wrote an article claiming that "magic items aren't a part of the 5e math."

Riiiight...

Sunseeker · Jan 24, 2013

Bluenose said:
Given that the latest playtest put out more spells; so the Wizard got more breadth as well as depth of power.
And it put out more manoeuvres by narrowing the scope of existing ones; so the Fighter got less breadth.
And the discussion about multiclassing being framed solely in 3e terms.
And the mention of prestige classes.

They're going to have to climb a very high slope to make me expect anything but a bad game.

These tend to be my caveats as well.

Ebon Shar · Jan 24, 2013

My players were very skeptical prior to our first session, but are now loving the game and cannot wait until each new session. For me, DnDNext is a major hit and I'm enjoying it in it's current, unfinished form. I'm very anxious to have the finished product. It harkens back to 1E, which very much suits my playstyle. I hated 4E and so did my players. 5E is fast, loose, and fun. The story takes precedent over the mechanics.

Ratskinner · Jan 24, 2013

For me, its very hard to tell.

Mostly that's because I'm probably most interested in a very light version of the game, and most of the playtesting is putting optional stuff through its paces. Therefore its a little difficult to see what they are planning for the "Basic" version. Right now I'm more keyed up about FATE 3 core kickstarter, as that project seems to be going in prescisely the direction I would hope for it.

Ahnehnois · Jan 24, 2013

GX.Sigma said:
That's weird. I'm a big fan of it, because it seems nothing like 4e: quick, lightweight, able to support multiple playstyles.

I don't necessarily disagree with your observations (and indeed, the flexibility and availability of simple characters are where I see a difference).

I think it echoes the problems of 4e in overly simplistic monster design. I also think that the classes showcase the same problems as in existing material. The casters are needlessly complicated, and the noncasters still don't have the requisite level of coherence or believability. Whoever wrote them just seems clueless to me. And reading some of the columns put out by WotC confirms that suspicion. I had high hopes, but basically everything I've read on 5e has pushed me in the direction of disillusionment. I truly believe the hobby is at a place where the best designers don't work for the leading company (or in the industry at all), and that's a problem.

And, at the moment, I see nothing about the core elements (how classes, skills, magic, health, etc. work) that is strong enough to get me to look any harder at the peripherals.

Don't get me wrong; if someone was planning to start up a new game and was choosing between 4e and the current playtest, and asked me what to use, I'm telling them to do 5e. You could do worse. However, if any version of 3e was still on the table, I'd tell them to use that. And for me personally, having invested money and time in the game, it's even more clear. If I used 5e, I'd end up rewriting most of it anyway. Since I've already done that for 3e, why bother?