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

[sunshadow21]

I know for me at least, the reason I haven't done anything with 5E is pretty simple. If I were a new player just getting into the hobby, it would be a strong competitor for what I started with; it's a good solid game that is easy to learn and build from. But for myself, and I suspect most people already in the hobby, it doesn't have anything particularly special or unique to really make it stand out. There are a few bits that are interesting to players of other systems, but most of them are easily ported into, or are already part of the systems being played currently.

In the end, I have to say that if the goal was to simply put a system out there that would keep the D&D name active and present with basically no followup support, they succeeded; 5E definitely stopped the bleeding and the damage caused during the 4E era. It also does a very good job of being a solid second or third choice for most groups for those times that the first choice can't be used or those groups that commonly rotate between systems. It also appeals to enough of the DM centric groups to have a solid base of support from there, giving the edition reasonably solid ground to potentially build from.

If the goal was anything more than that, they didn't succeed. It's not an edition that's going to win back the majority of the lost 3E or 4E crowd, as that crowd is generally looking for something a bit more crunchy and a bit less DM centered. Also, the parts that make DMing easier are centered on individual encounters, not campaign long concerns, where DMs have just as much work in 5E as they would in any other edition; thus, a lot of the aspects that seem to make DMing the system easier still get muted over time, especially for new DMs that have never run a campaign before, just like every other version of D&D out there. While it will get the attention of the pre-3rd crowd, it's not likely to automatically replace the sheer number of options already available to them. Far more likely with the latter crowd is that 5E material will get incorporated into the existing house rules, and most won't be all that concerned about playing 5E solely. And in the end, while I don't think anybody wanted the flood of new material seen in earlier editions, the lack of new material will end up being just as much of a problem in this edition. 2 APs and a few other random products here and there does not particularly scream industry leader, and to a certain extent, the hype is going eventually die down to match the supporting material.

In the end, for me, it's not the system is bad, but rather that it's also not particularly great or new. It does well what it was designed to do well, and, for better and for worse, that's pretty much it. Given all the other options out there, that's simply not going to be enough to really get the attention of those already in the hobby that want something else from their gaming time. Unless the video games and/or movies and/or whatever else they try to make to bolster the brand outside the rpg system really, really comes through, which isn't very likely given the lackluster reviews of the new video game that I have been reading and the really, really lackluster success of past movies, I don't see a lot of growth happening, and eventually D&D will be replaced by other systems that are more actively supported in the top position. It's role as a good general system will always keep it near the top, but other systems are already surpassing it as far as confirmed long term player support is concerned.

 

[Imperialus]

I don't actually know anyone who is playing 5th ed. It's actually the first edition of D&D that I have bought nothing for.

My longest running group plays a B/X, AD&D, BECMI mashup strung together with twine and sticky tape in the form of Labyrinth Lord. The campaign has been going on for 7 years now, it works for us, and we have no desire to change.

The kid I know who plays 3.5 plays 3.5 because he has a bajillion splatbooks for it and doesn't want to buy more.

My friend from work plays Pathfinder because it's a cleaned up version of 3.5.

 

[TheFindus]

In the end, I have to say that if the goal was to simply put a system out there that would keep the D&D name active and present with basically no followup support, they succeeded; 5E definitely stopped the bleeding and the damage caused during the 4E era. It also does a very good job of being a solid second or third choice for most groups for those times that the first choice can't be used or those groups that commonly rotate between systems. It also appeals to enough of the DM centric groups to have a solid base of support from there, giving the edition reasonably solid ground to potentially build from.

If the goal was anything more than that, they didn't succeed. It's not an edition that's going to win back the majority of the lost 3E or 4E crowd, as that crowd is generally looking for something a bit more crunchy and a bit less DM centered. Also, the parts that make DMing easier are centered on individual encounters, not campaign long concerns, where DMs have just as much work in 5E as they would in any other edition; thus, a lot of the aspects that seem to make DMing the system easier still get muted over time, especially for new DMs that have never run a campaign before, just like every other version of D&D out there. While it will get the attention of the pre-3rd crowd, it's not likely to automatically replace the sheer number of options already available to them. Far more likely with the latter crowd is that 5E material will get incorporated into the existing house rules, and most won't be all that concerned about playing 5E solely. And in the end, while I don't think anybody wanted the flood of new material seen in earlier editions, the lack of new material will end up being just as much of a problem in this edition. 2 APs and a few other random products here and there does not particularly scream industry leader, and to a certain extent, the hype is going eventually die down to match the supporting material.

I agree with you that the new edition stopped "the bleeding" that was caused by the fact that many people just did not like 4E. And I say this as somebody who really really likes 4E.
On the other hand: what makes you so sure they can or have won back lots of 3e, 4E or Pathfinder players? I do not know the numbers but looking at the available sales statistics it seems that 5e is a great success regardless of the fact that "only" 2 APs are being published every year and by third party publishers. I do not play 5e and probably never will, but just 2 APs a year seems much better than the flood of books in the 3e-era that was a mess (Book of Erotic something just to call out one of the worst offenders). And I guess they were able to win back some of the players who kept playing AD&D and earlier editions since 5e is clearly aimed at that target group. I remember the first playtest package and how I thought that it was so old-fashioned until I realized that they wanted to get the attention of the AD&D players. This edition was not really meant for me.
Now, I play 4E and 13th Age. And while I think 5e does nothing to bring more players to play 4E, since most will simply play the latest edition, I am convinced that some of those who play 5e will start playing 13th Age eventually because of all the unique mechanics and fluffability. And that is good for the game I like. So I think 5e should succeed. And I think it is and will in the long run. It does not look like wishful thinking.

 

[sunshadow21]

I agree with you that the new edition stopped "the bleeding" that was caused by the fact that many people just did not like 4E. And I say this as somebody who really really likes 4E.
On the other hand: what makes you so sure they can or have won back lots of 3e, 4E or Pathfinder players? I do not know the numbers but looking at the available sales statistics it seems that 5e is a great success regardless of the fact that "only" 2 APs are being published every year and by third party publishers. I do not play 5e and probably never will, but just 2 APs a year seems much better than the flood of books in the 3e-era that was a mess (Book of Erotic something just to call out one of the worst offenders). And I guess they were able to win back some of the players who kept playing AD&D and earlier editions since 5e is clearly aimed at that target group. I remember the first playtest package and how I thought that it was so old-fashioned until I realized that they wanted to get the attention of the AD&D players. This edition was not really meant for me.
Now, I play 4E and 13th Age. And while I think 5e does nothing to bring more players to play 4E, since most will simply play the latest edition, I am convinced that some of those who play 5e will start playing 13th Age eventually because of all the unique mechanics and fluffability. And that is good for the game I like. So I think 5e should succeed. And I think it is and will in the long run. It does not look like wishful thinking.

I never said it hadn't succeeded; I just said that expecting much more success than what it currently has is unrealistic without major changes in the product schedule or major help from an outside source. It has already been far more successful than most expected; even people at WotC don't seem to have expected the level of success it has achieved. That said, growth going forward is going to be difficult, and sustaining what they currently have is likely to be a notable effort. They've pretty much gotten the people they are going to get from earlier editions, Pathfinder, and other game systems. Every single AP is going to have to be really, really, really good and have a fairly wide appeal to make up for the lack of other products. While many prefer the only 2 APs a year to the flood, it does create pressure on each individual product that a schedule that fell in between their current one and the one used by previous editions would do a lot to alleviate. Something akin to the OGL would take a lot of that pressure off, but there's no evidence that we are likely to see that anytime soon. A wildly successful movie or video game might help, but early reviews for SGL are not making that seem like an immediate source of relief. In short, I see no reason to expect 5E to drop off any time soon, but I also don't see a lot of room for growth given the small size of the dev team, and other systems will eventually catch up to it. Pathfinder already has in many regards, and there are others that have the potential if those making them keep up their current levels of success. In this case, 5E falling from the top is less about 5E failing and more about everyone else catching up and using the momentum to move past. Because for all that it is a solid system and foundation to keep printing books for some time, 5E, with it's current team and product schedule, does not have internal momentum; any future growth is going to rely almost entirely on the success of the other ventures using the same brand. As long as this is what the company was looking for, it was a success; if they were looking for something more, it's going to be a major disappointment in the long run.

 

[was]

Too wrapped up in existing PF campaigns.

 

[Nibelung]

Number 3 for me, with a caveat: It is not that I don't want to buy new books. It is that I don't want to buy new physical books. I ran out of space on my shelves, and I'm seriously tired of selling stuff I stopped playing (I don't like to keep stuff there gathering dust. Books were made to be read).

So, now I only buy books in digital format. And since you can't buy any of the 5e stuff in digital version, I keep playing 4e. I really, really, REALLY, like 4e as a system (but I don't like how it handle skills), but I DM for long enough to know that finding new players is easier with the current edition of D&D than any previous edition, no matter how "complete" they are (pick ANY finished D&D edition: You can play for decades with all material released).

And since I just started my first campaign I intend to go all the way to level 30, even if WotC release 5e pdfs soon, I might keep playing 4e until this campaign is finished.

 

[Imaculata]

Me and my group still play 3.5, because we have so many 3rd edition books. Plus, the open gaming license just opens up so many possibilities. If we want to play Call of Cthulhu, D20 Modern, D20 Past, or do some Pathfinder, we don't have to learn any new rules. I can buy Pathfinder books just to expand my 3.5 material. The open gaming license was a great idea, and its a pity that Wizards stepped away from that.

That being said, I have read the 5th edition rules, and I like them. But I don't like them enough to switch.

 

[Jack Daniel]

I can only speak to my own experiences. I remain happy with BECMI and the Rules Cyclopedia. I've so fully internalized these rules that using them is like speaking English or riding a bicycle.

Learning to play 5e would be like learning Dutch. Easier than 3e was (about like learning Latin or French), much easier than 4e would be (might as well be Mandarin Chinese), but still foreign.

 

[Imaculata]

Learning to play 5e would be like learning Dutch. Easier than 3e was (about like learning Latin or French), much easier than 4e would be (might as well be Mandarin Chinese), but still foreign.

The Dutch word for roleplaying game, is rollen spel.

 

[Tony Vargas]

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

Quite a few, unfortunately. Two out of the 4-6 tables we've had at our FLGS on Wed nights for a long time, for instance, they both turned into ongoing campaigns between editions, and just haven't run their course, two more tables on the weekend. A comparable number of PF players, what I hear from them is that 5e is fine, nothing about it makes them want to burn Mike Mearls in effigy or anything, but nothing much makes them want to play it instead of Pathfinder, either.

I do suspect that most 4e players will come around as their ongoing campaigns finish, and they notice there hasn't been a book out in 3 years and finally find something new/shiny in 5e and go 'oh, this looks cool...' :shrug:

PF fans, though, as long as Piazo keeps making stuff, maybe rolls out a PF 2.0, why would they?

From what I see online, as well as my own experience, 5e seems to appeal most to:
1) Those who liked AD&D/pre-3e D&D
2) Those who are fans of D&D in general

That matches my experience. Most of the new players I've had who have stuck with 5e had previously played 2e, or even were playing for the first time, but had been exposed to the game back in the 80s. AD&D, when you think about it (1e & 2e were /very/ similar), had a run from 1977 to 1999, it's the most definitive version of D&D, and the one 5e most tries to evoke the feel (if, blessedly, not all the mechanics) of, and the one version most past players have the most experience with.

I, OTOH, have been with the game since 1980 and played & enjoyed every edition, though so am in group (2) - at least, as a DM.

The ones who seem most resistant to even giving 5e a chance seem to fall into a few categories:
1) Those who hate WotC and won't look at anything with their logo on it
2) Those who have found their edition already, and aren't really interested in anything new
3) Those who don't want to buy new books

I haven't heard the last complaint much (I've heard price complaints from people who /have/ switched, and a lot of them buy the books from Amazon as a result), but aside from that, yes, those seem fairly straightforward reasons. I'd expand on (2) a little to say that 5e either doesn't give them enough of what 'their edition' does, or does something 'wrong' from that PoV. A 3.5 fan might find 5e limited with too few choices & no respect for RAW, a 4e fan might find it lacking specific options & 'broken' with imbalanced classes, encounters, & magic items.