D&D 5E 15 Petty Reasons I Won't Buy 5e

[Tequila Sunrise]

1. I read a WotC article months ago saying that "Magic items will be about the story, not the math." Please, magic items are about the story and the math. Denying the importance of one just makes me think you can't design games.
2. Speaking of magic items, 5e still has +X items. *yawn*
3. And speaking of +X items, are they assumed or not? Because there's no happy middle ground; they're either assumed and expected, or an extra power boost that must be accounted for.
4. The release schedule is staggered. Quality control? Please! If that were the issue, all three core books would be released in December to ensure that much more quality control.
5. Mages are still the game's 'supreme magic-users,' and still can't heal. Are they even using balance as an excuse this time, or is it just one of those things that 'doesn't feel like D&D'?
6. Speaking of healing spells, they're now in the evocation school...bwuh? First it was necromancy, which made perfect sense, then it was conjuration, and now it's in the blow-stuff-up school. Jeez, D&D, make up your mind!
7. No more monster roles or castes? (minion, solo, ect.) What, are they just too helpful? Take up too much page space?
8. +2 or +1/+1 or a feat: Yup, that's gonna get broke quick!
9. Hard Stat Caps: A well-designed game doesn't need awkward hard caps.
10. Bounded Accuracy: Even if I liked the idea of BA, I guarantee it'll become Unbounded Accuracy quick enough.
11. A La Carte Multiclassing: You know, I think that 3e style multiclassing is a great idea, and I believe there're ways to make it work! Unfortunately, treating 1st level characters as (semi?)competent adventurers is not one of those ways.
12. Rolling abilities (and HP?) is default: Nope, not interested.
13. Spell charts and class ability advancements are irregular: Yes, it bothers me that there's no pattern.
14. No standard AEDU structure: I'd rather have fun combats than a fun rulebook to read.
15. And last, but certainly not least...NO MORE LEVEL BONUS TO AC?! What, it makes too much sense? Is it too elegant? No, I guess it just 'doesn't feel like D&D.'

Well, guess what, 5e? You just got too much D&D in my D&D, and I won't have that!

 

[Ahnehnois]

[*]Spell charts and class ability advancements are irregular: Yes, it bothers me that there's no pattern.

That's one thing that always drives me nuts. It's not that hard to do standard, rhythmic progressions; why they feel the need to either avoid patterns or keep the patterns opaque is beyond me.

It's been an issue with spell charts for a long time, among other things.

 

[Mistwell]

That's one thing that always drives me nuts. It's not that hard to do standard, rhythmic progressions; why they feel the need to either avoid patterns or keep the patterns opaque is beyond me.

It's been an issue with spell charts for a long time, among other things.

It's an agenda to annoy the ocd fans out there.

 

[Remathilis]

Well, enjoy 4e for a few more months. After that, the special ink will fade and the ddi will erase itself. Then the WotCstappo will come and threaten your hamster if you don't buy Tyranny of Dragons. Resistance is futile. You will become like uzz.

 

[Henry]

The color of the spine will clash on the shelf next to my 4e books, forcing me to buy a new bookshelf to avoid this; since I don't have enough room for a new bookshelf, this travesty cannot be allowed.

 

[Paraxis]

As you say those are mostly petty reasons to not try 5e. I even completely agree with some of them, but you know what I have been using the playtest rules to run a weekly game for the past year or so and have been having a very fun time of it.

I would suggest when the game comes out either play in a game and see if you still feel the same way or use the free Basic version to run a game, that way you won't have to buy anything and see if you still have fun.

Sometimes game theory is one thing and game practice is another, but whatever you do have fun, that is what all this is about you and your group having fun. I still play in a weekly 4e game and we are only a third of the way through Scales of War so I will be playing 4e for months to come and still having plenty of fun with that too.

 

[Crothian]

The color of the spine will clash on the shelf next to my 4e books, forcing me to buy a new bookshelf to avoid this; since I don't have enough room for a new bookshelf, this travesty cannot be allowed.

Clash? My OD&D books have declared formal war against the new edition. I fear I will have to keep them in separate rooms.

 

[Himajin]

1. I read a WotC article months ago saying that "Magic items will be about the story, not the math." Please, magic items are about the story and the math. Denying the importance of one just makes me think you can't design games.
2. Speaking of magic items, 5e still has +X items. *yawn*
3. And speaking of +X items, are they assumed or not? Because there's no happy middle ground; they're either assumed and expected, or an extra power boost that must be accounted for.
4. The release schedule is staggered. Quality control? Please! If that were the issue, all three core books would be released in December to ensure that much more quality control.
5. Mages are still the game's 'supreme magic-users,' and still can't heal. Are they even using balance as an excuse this time, or is it just one of those things that 'doesn't feel like D&D'?
6. Speaking of healing spells, they're now in the evocation school...bwuh? First it was necromancy, which made perfect sense, then it was conjuration, and now it's in the blow-stuff-up school. Jeez, D&D, make up your mind!
7. No more monster role or castes? (minion, solo, ect.) What, are they just too helpful? Take up too much page space?
8. +2 or +1/+1 or a feat: Yup, that's gonna get broke quick!
9. Hard Stat Caps: A well-designed game doesn't need awkward hard caps.
10. Bounded Accuracy: Even if I liked the idea of BA, I guarantee it'll become Unbounded Accuracy quick enough.
11. A La Carte Multiclassing: You know, I think that 3e style multiclassing is a great idea, and I believe there're ways to make it work! Unfortunately, treating 1st level characters as (semi?)competent adventurers is not one of those ways.
12. Rolling abilities (and HP?) is default: Nope, not interested.
13. Spell charts and class ability advancements are irregular: Yes, it bothers me that there's no pattern.
14. No standard AEDU structure: I'd rather have fun combats than a fun rulebook to read.
15. And last, but certainly not least...NO MORE LEVEL BONUS TO AC?! What, it makes too much sense? Is it too elegant? No, I guess it just 'doesn't feel like D&D.'

Well, guess what, 5e? You just got too much D&D in my D&D, and I won't have that!

A lot of your points are reasons I'm more excited than usual about this edition, but I guess they're subjective to a certain extent.

1. I've always preferred to describe items in more detail, rather than making every +1 long sword a carbon copy clone. That doesn't take away from the power boost that they grant, but making each item special by giving it a history can only add to the play experience in my opinion.
2. As has been said, the focus is not on the mechanical bonuses, and magic items will be fewer and farther between. I see this as a step in the right direction.
3. Not assumed is the impression I get. With less of a "curve" that players have to either keep up with or face frustration, there are far more options for building fun encounters. It's always been the case that you have to adjust things on the fly if players start to breeze through combat, but as long as you aren't handing out magic items left, right and center it shouldn't be a big issue.
4. The staggering makes sense to me. The small team working on 5E can each focus on one product at a time, meaning they're all on the same page. Waiting to release them all at once wouldn't necessarily give them more time to iron out issues with how they're handling it one book at a time.
5. I've houseruled healing mages in the past when I ran a two player campaign, but I don't see the need for them to step on the cleric's toes for more standard parties.
6. This really doesn't bother me at all...
7. Too much terminology can detract from the game in my experience. I did like the concept of monsters that go down with one hit no matter what, but I don't see the need to codify it in the rules.
8. I actually thought this too at first. I still don't have a good sense of how it will affect the game. I guess time will tell...
9. This was a necessary part of flattening out the math.
10. This remains to be seen, but they're at least making an effort to keep things in check this time.
11. Not sure what your point is here.
12. The easiest thing to houserule in the world, and I'm sure multiple options will be presented.
13. I would assume that this is for balancing reasons. It may not be as elegant as 4E in this regard, but I doubt it's purely to be more old-school.
14. Personally I think combat can be fun and varied without the need for hundreds of named powers to choose from.
15. This is another part of flattening out the math. The flatter bonuses mean that lesser creatures can still show up as viable foes later in a campaign.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

[*]Speaking of magic items, 5e still has +X items. *yawn*
[*]And speaking of +X items, are they assumed or not? Because there's no happy middle ground; they're either assumed and expected, or an extra power boost that must be accounted for.

Agree.

[*]No more monster role or castes? (minion, solo, ect.) What, are they just too helpful? Take up too much page space?

Somebody said they didn't like minions, so WotC decided they must listen. Actually solos are back, they're just called "legendary".

[*]Bounded Accuracy: Even if I liked the idea of BA, I guarantee it'll become Unbounded Accuracy quick enough.

Already demonstrated, in fact.

[*]Rolling abilities (and HP?) is default: Nope, not interested.

*Shudder* Fixable by using point buy, but I wonder how many games will crash and burn over this.

[*]And last, but certainly not least...NO MORE LEVEL BONUS TO AC?! What, it makes too much sense? Is it too elegant? No, I guess it just 'doesn't feel like D&D.'

You see, WotC wanted high-level PCs to be vulnerable to low-level NPCs. Alas, they forgot that many character archetypes (eg swashbucklers) actually learn how to parry and dodge. Any fighter would as part of learning and training. A level-based bonus to AC should keep up with proficiency bonuses. Attack bonuses for PCs aren't really bounded anyway, so why should AC be?

To make high-level PCs vulnerable, some sort of big "outnumbering bonus" would have worked wonders. Even Exalted did this better. (In Exalted, barring the ubiquitous "perfect defense" or a few charms, your defenses went down a bit per attack. My only PC threw five daggers a round. And came this close to being killed when facing a huge guy dual-wielding hammers. Actually I think lots of games do this; alas, most such games don't use levels.) A bonus that doesn't (just) involve advantage, please. I don't want to deal with 20 kobolds making 40 attack rolls!

I wish I knew how serious you were being.

 

[Stormonu]

I think every reason mentioned is one i'd be for. Still, with for editions behind me, I'm not really interested in a 5th.

My minor gripe? Don't like the art, spells are wordy.