Are you happy with your current game/edition?

[Reynard]

Reading about "5e" -- or more to the point, reading people's hopes for and fears of "5e" -- has made me realize that, warts aside, I am perfectly happy with my current versions of D&D (which happen to be Pathfinder and Labyrinth Lord, depending on whether I am aiming for New or Old School). That isn't to say I am not curious (and apprehensive) about a new edition, but it's most academic fandom than any real need.

So I am just curious -- whatever game(s) or edition(s) you currently play, are you happy with it, or do you see a real need for a new version/update, etc...

 

[Hand of Evil]

As I play WFRP.v2 I am happy. Pathfinder is good and I am happy with it as my D&D base but starting to feel the need of wanting one game system that fits in MY created campaign setting.

 

[Daztur]

My ideal version of D&D would be more or less 2.5ed Done Right (C&C is OK but I don't like a lot of the implementation) with a few futzes and squiggles on the side. 5ed looks promising, but if it doesn't pan out I'm perfectly happy with ACKS (not perfect, but it comes the closest to what I want).

 

[S'mon]

I'm running 3 different systems - 1e AD&D (online), Pathfinder Beginner Box, and 4e D&D. Individually they have their limitations:

1e works great online, but in tabletop play it can feel like PC combat options are limited, and the GM needs to make frequent rulings so a high degree of player trust is required. Many rules need to be ignored.

Pathfinder is great at low level, but like 3e D&D I doubt it's fun to play beyond about 10th. Beginner Box removes Attacks of Opportunity, which is great IMO.

4e is inherently limited in its design, it does set-piece battles very well, but does not encourage thinking or acting outside the box. If you accept its limitations (& halve monster hp!) it can work great for an 'epic' feel. One of my 4e campaigns is sandboxy though, and that has definitely caused some mechanical friction. Its very dependent on players and DM having the same vision of the game, much moreso than the earlier versions of D&D I think.

I'm not looking to learn a new system, although I may consider learning the full Pathfinder game at some point, especially if they publish a 2e presented more along the Beginner Box style, which takes tips from 4e.

 

[Crothian]

We are playing Pathfinder Kingmaker AP and at 16th level this is some of the best mid to high level play I've had in a while. Pathfinder has been popular with out group so that after almost 20 months of this campaign we are sticking with Pathfinder for the next campaign.

 

[Balesir]

No system is perfect - I would love the only edition of D&D that I play to be extended as I see vast potential (still) there.

The discussions of D&D Next, however, are making me more and more aware of how generally happy I am with it!

 

[Yora]

D&D 3rd Edition is too complex, PF doesn't improve anything, and AD&D has weird math.
I have some hope for 5th Edition or the AGE system as an alternative.

 

[Stoat]

I am perfectly content with my current game, and I am not particularly excited about 5E.

 

[delericho]

I play 3e. Frankly, I was ready for an update back when 4e was announced, and that hasn't changed. The system is okay, and still fun to play, but it just feels like too much work, to be honest. It doesn't help that I can see a whole bunch of ways to improve it, but none that wouldn't be too much work for me to implement.

So I went for "kinda happy".

 

[Elf Witch]

I am happy most of the time with 3E. There are times I wish I had something less complex and more low magic. I don't think 3E does low magic all that well.

I am not sure DnD any edition is the answer for me when I am in mood for something different. I think I would prefer a game without levels something more along the lines of Shadowrun but done for a fantasy setting.