How many people do you know who haven't switched to 5e, and why haven't they?

[Mepher]

Actually in 5E a singe Wraith vs a group of 6 level 4 characters is considered an easy encounter. 2 Wraiths though ramps the difficulty up to Deadly.

You can use this tool here. It looks nice but I really can't attest to its accuracy since I didn't find it until tonight.

http://kobold.club/fight/#/encounter-builder

 

[Mepher]

Yeah never mind that tool. I just tried throwing Kobolds in there. I know first hand from my group that was going through HotDQ, a good number of Kobolds could take out the group. According to that tool a Kobold encounter for the same sized group would be considered hard between 30 and 40 of them. It takes 40 Kobolds to push that encounter into the deadly range. I am calling shenanigans. It still goes back to my original thoughts.....who really wants to be fighting Kobolds forever anyways.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

That is not exactly how CR works on 5e. This is 3e logic, but not 5e. 5e is based on XP budgets, with some extra multipliers added if you have more than one monster in the encounter, but the multiplier is for difficulty only, not for reward.

...or something like that. I didn't read the 5e DMG. The point is that just because a monster is CR 4 do not mean it is a balanced encounter by itself against a level 4 group.

What it does mean is that the monster isn't too hard for you. It also means (from mine and other experiences, not necessarily what the books say) that a lower level party can often take it out. The only exception is at levels 1-2, where a CR 2 ogre (the example given) has a good chance of one-shot instakilling party members. Once you're level 2 or 3 that isn't an issue, and you can generally handle higher CR opponents fairly easily.

It is supposed to be a "must be this tall to fight" indicator, but in practice it doesn't really do that. If you are fighting a solo opponent, the CR is functionally equivalent to what it meant in 3e. It just doesn't work quite as well. Now that isn't a big problem for me, because I prefer to eyeball it once I have a grasp of how things work. The CR example was just to indicate the huge power downgrade of certain opponents.

 

[Emerikol]

I ended up not switching. My work situation took me away from my local area so I haven't had the energy to decide what version of D&D I really want to play. I've considered C&C and Pathfinder depending on my desire for complexity. I've also thought about making a game based upon the fudge/fate dice.

I was a 4e hater (the game not the people who played it) and I feel too much of the things I objected to in 4e made it into 5e. Dissociative mechanics being a major one. I'm very much about the players acting only as their characters. I realize it's just a taste so I'm not downing anyone else. That is just what I personally want. So 5e didn't really lend itself really well to my style and I really had no expectation that the designers really even understood my concerns. Some of their decisions (some!) would be so easy to rewrite as non-dissociative that not doing so must indicate they don't care or don't understand.

 

[Greenfield]

My group just started our second 5e adventure.

It more or less re-enforced what I thought of the system. As in, when this current run is done, I doubt I'll pick it up.

I will say that the the Forged Anvil character sheet, found her eon Enworld, is an exceptional piece of work, and I strongly applaud and appreciate all the work that went into it. Well done.

 

[Manorhouse_PR]

New here.

I know me and my friend, both long-time DM who started in 2ed, didn't do the switch.
We loved the concept of 5ed, but it was poorly implemented in our opinion.
We tried it, but didn't like the fact that all classes seemed alike on level 1, and the "let's balance everything" mantra that was still there.
But some ideas and concepts inside it were/are pretty cool

 

[Shades of Vengeance]

My group refuse to switch any further than 3.5e (and we ban Warlocks...) because of the horrible, horrible experiences with 4e. I tried to tell them that 5e is better than 4e, but to no avail...

 

[Boneguard]

Around me, I'd say we have a fair mix and it depends on when we started: Most of us who are older and starter with Original D&D, BECMI, AD&D 1st or 2nd ed. pretty much stuck to those editions. I would say we are part of the 2nd category. We've tried 3.5 Ed, Pathfinder and 5th edition, but did not really find what we are looking for.

We have one or two in our gaming group who starter in earlier edition but who converted to either 3.5E, Pathfinder or 5E as their system of choose. But do enjoy earlier edition.

And we have a few players who started with more 3.5E or Pathfinder who has either stuck to their system or switched to 5E finding it more streamlined.

 

[Big J Money]

I"m not buying 5th, but I don't fall into any of the 3 categories mentioned.

But I'm also not a fan of TSR's (and by virtue, WoTC's) D&D. I'm more a fan of Arneson/Gygax's original game and the games of my own that I can make from it. I highly doubt WotC would ever publish another edition aimed at me; it probably wouldn't be profitable anyway. If they would come up with interesting new Campaign sourcebooks I would buy them. But they're mired in TSR's past, when it comes to fictional creativity.

Looking back, I suppose the only reason I bought 3rd and 4th edition was to end up learning this lesson. I think 4th edition is an interesting mini's squad combat game with some RP potential, but not a game I like enough to make time for.

 

[Lwaxy]

We were mostly disappointed with the way magic had been nerfed, most other things are fine about 5e. Still, we could simply house rule this - it's not like we don't have a gazillion house rules for 3.5/PF already. Also,too many things we didn't like in 4e are clearly visible in 5e.

But the main thing is, we have sooo many books 3.5/PF compatible, and it makes no sense to spend more money on new stuff. We did get the core books and some adventures though, the latter you can use with any version and the former is a collector's thing