-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
D&D 5E Are you happy with D&D Next so far?
- Thread starter ForeverSlayer
- Start date
Viktyr Gehrig
First Post
Too soon to tell, but I think it's going in the right direction. I see most of the parts I like about 4e without the parts I don't like. I see the potential for it to have what I liked about Player's Option AD&D and 3.Xe without the overwhelming system bloat and caster dominance.
And I see the 'pick up and play' capacity of Classic D&D, which is huge for someone who prefers FATE and being able to introduce non-gamers to the hobby.
There are things I already don't like about it. I don't like the ability score limits. I don't like 3.X-style multiclassing unless they find a better way of emulating AD&D multiclassing than issuing an incomplete set of 'patch' PrCs. I think the way they're handling racial ability score bonuses is completely backwards.
But with the direction they're headed and a little bit of polishing up, Next could be the game that brings me back to D&D.
And I see the 'pick up and play' capacity of Classic D&D, which is huge for someone who prefers FATE and being able to introduce non-gamers to the hobby.
There are things I already don't like about it. I don't like the ability score limits. I don't like 3.X-style multiclassing unless they find a better way of emulating AD&D multiclassing than issuing an incomplete set of 'patch' PrCs. I think the way they're handling racial ability score bonuses is completely backwards.
But with the direction they're headed and a little bit of polishing up, Next could be the game that brings me back to D&D.
Ratskinner
Adventurer
Keeping in mind the embryonic stage of development that we've seen...yes, I'm very pleased.
The playtest very much "felt like D&D" to me, and had a lot of good indications for their future directions that I liked.
Of course, there's still plenty of time to muck it up.
The playtest very much "felt like D&D" to me, and had a lot of good indications for their future directions that I liked.
Of course, there's still plenty of time to muck it up.
UngeheuerLich
Legend
Just simple: Yes
Some things are not as good as they should be, but the designers are aware of them. They also seem to know how to interpret feedback.
Some things are not as good as they should be, but the designers are aware of them. They also seem to know how to interpret feedback.
Stormonu
NeoGrognard
The playtest is off to a good start, but it isn't quite where I want it to be yet (I'm primarily worried about how damage will scale, and what they'll do with armor).
Right now, it's just not compelling enough to draw me away from the game I'm playing. But I'm still watching it - cautiously. I've been burned by marketing hype before and if the game doesn't deliver ON PAPER, all the intentions and words from the designer won't change what it is.
Right now, it's just not compelling enough to draw me away from the game I'm playing. But I'm still watching it - cautiously. I've been burned by marketing hype before and if the game doesn't deliver ON PAPER, all the intentions and words from the designer won't change what it is.
All we've seen so far are the core mechanics.
Nobody plays D&D for the core mechanics.
People play D&D for the wealth of material -- adventures, monsters, magic items, adventures, spells, classes, adventures, settings, feats, and adventures.
We haven't really seen any of that stuff yet. I think they have a solid foundation upon which great material could be made. But will it? That's what matters. All those details matter. The sum total of those details matter. Not the core.
-- 77IM
(PS. Actually there is another reason people play D&D -- for the vast player network. I.e., people play D&D because everyone else plays D&D. That's extrinsic to the rules, though, so it can't possibly be judged in a play test.)
Nobody plays D&D for the core mechanics.
People play D&D for the wealth of material -- adventures, monsters, magic items, adventures, spells, classes, adventures, settings, feats, and adventures.
We haven't really seen any of that stuff yet. I think they have a solid foundation upon which great material could be made. But will it? That's what matters. All those details matter. The sum total of those details matter. Not the core.
-- 77IM
(PS. Actually there is another reason people play D&D -- for the vast player network. I.e., people play D&D because everyone else plays D&D. That's extrinsic to the rules, though, so it can't possibly be judged in a play test.)
Connorsrpg
Adventurer
Well, we played 5 sessions straight of the new rules. Based on that playtest - yes, I am very happy with the direction and rules presented.
Even better, I feel the tone and modularity so far seems to make the game easily adaptable to what I want. New features don't seem to ingrained into the core, so it is easy to modify and exclude. I know a lot of people don't like that, but it is important for me to ba able to 'write for' and 'modify' the game. I found 4E very difficult on that front (and 1E too - there just didn't seem too many areas you could mess with).
Even better, I feel the tone and modularity so far seems to make the game easily adaptable to what I want. New features don't seem to ingrained into the core, so it is easy to modify and exclude. I know a lot of people don't like that, but it is important for me to ba able to 'write for' and 'modify' the game. I found 4E very difficult on that front (and 1E too - there just didn't seem too many areas you could mess with
).
MortalPlague
Adventurer
I ran five playtest sessions, with veterans and complete noobs alike, and I'm extremely pleased with how easy the game is to play. It feels like D&D, and it's accessible for gamers of all walks of life. On top of that, the direction the designers are talking about makes me very happy. 
So far it's uninspiring for me. I'm probably least happy about return of Vancian magic, and the very "old school" spell descriptions that require DM and player negotiation to resolve.
However, I am waiting for two big things:
1) Character creation
2) Rules for tactical board game combat
If character creation is flexible enough, and the tactical board game fun whilst still being faster/simpler than 4E, then my group are likely to move to it.
However, I am waiting for two big things:
1) Character creation
2) Rules for tactical board game combat
If character creation is flexible enough, and the tactical board game fun whilst still being faster/simpler than 4E, then my group are likely to move to it.
