D&D 5E Are you happy with D&D Next so far?

[slobo777]

No.
It seems to be turning out exactly as 4E did as a "only combat matters" edition where everything revolves around combat. The few breadcrumbs thrown to non combat look nice on paper when coming from 4E, but they are only fixing what they broke before and are not actually improving things when you look back through the editions. Also, those breadcrumbs look like cheap addons they slapped onto the combat engine to silence the RP crowd and not like something which was included from the beginning.

It seems that this edition will be even more "streamlined" and verisimilitude gets replaced with more gamiest nonsense because players can't be bothered to remember rules or DMs to run a world which doesn't freeze as soon as the PCs enter a dungeon.

I do not care if the game fits into a mythical definition of what "D&D" has to be, I want an interesting RPG. But what I see so far is only a board game.

I was pretty happy with the way 5e was shaping up based on the initial offering of the play test, but that was back when I assumed the material we were presented was the most conservative version of the game we would see and that the game's audience as a whole would be willing to compromise to an extent where we might actually be able to sit at the same game tables again.

What I've seen from WotC and the community since feedback has started to come in shows a lack of willingness to embrace elements of the game that might bring us back together. What I'm seeing is a preference towards ghettoizing elements of the community that prefer elements of 4e towards optional rules without providing them additional value. I'll be sticking around for at least one more iteration of the play test rules, but if I don't see some legitimate give and take I'll probably write off the next edition and look more towards games that allow the sort of narrative play I prefer like 4e, FATE, FantasyCraft, RuneQuest with the right dials, Burning Wheel, etc. I'm not on board for the second coming of 3e.

Wow.

One player dislikes 5E because it is too like 4E. Evidently 5E has too much of 4E "gamist" play . . .

The other player dislikes 5E because it is too like 3E. Evidently 5E goes too far in reversion to 3E.

What, exactly, am I seeing here? Edition wars moving to the trenches, with 5E as No Man's Land?

AFAICS in terms of edition mix the weighting, if anything, is being set very much in the middle for the playtest. Now, that does include stuff I'm not too keen on (e.g. Vancian spells), but I have to admit those things represent the over-all weight and feel of all versions of D&D. I've pretty much played them all (in over 30 years).

So, even though I'm unconvinced by the playtest material, I do think the design team have done a good job finding a workable mix in the core rules between versions.

 

[GX.Sigma]

One player dislikes 5E because it is too like 4E.

The other player dislikes 5E because it is too like 3E.

I like 5e because it is not at all like 4e and 3e.

People are weird.

 

[Mishihari Lord]

So far, so good. It's still awfully early to tell though.

My single biggest criterion is "With my knowledge of previous editions, can I just scan it and go?" If I have to totally relearn a D&D rules set to play, I'm not going to bother. I'll go play a game I like more. So far D&DN is doing fine in this regard.

 

[ArmoredSaint]

I like 5e because it is not at all like 4e and 3e.

I agree.

My hope is that it will correct the caster vs. Fighter imbalance too readily apparent in 3e, and that it will avoid being as...weird...as 4e.

In fact, I really like what we've seen of the core rules in the playtest so far. The only change I'd make would be to boost the effectiveness of heavy armour. Otherwise, I am satisfied; it feels like classic D&D to me.

 

[Dausuul]

Having played and run the current material, unless there's a lot more coming, I have no reason to play this.

Um. It's the first iteration of the playtest. It's like thirty pages. Of course there's a lot more coming.

 

[Fifth Element]

How am I denigrating people, I am merely noticing that 4th Ed is very much a derivative of DDM?

DDM is a derivative of D&D. First of 3E, then later of 4E.

As I said, there are plenty of threads about this stuff back in 2008. Go find those, find out about how these comments are denigrating, find out about how putting "IMO" on a statement does not make it less insulting, find out about how "it's not D&D" doesn't really mean anything, and then come back. We'll all be better off for it.

 

[Fifth Element]

Of course. I don't expect them to make a game just to please me, but I suspect there's a good chunk of customers who are likeminded.

And likely a good chunk of customers who would dislike a game that would please you. So they're damned either way.

 

[Boarstorm]

[MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION]

Interesting. I'd never looked at 4E in that light. I don't know that I fully agree, but I can see where you guys are coming from.

 

[Texicles]

Um. It's the first iteration of the playtest. It's like thirty pages. Of course there's a lot more coming.

This is what quite a few people seem to lose sight of. AFAIK, this is the first time a RPG has done playtesting to this scale and degree. I can understand that the novelty of the process can be a little confusing, but it is many months and several iterations from being close to a game.

If you put this in PC game terms (an industry that has been running beta tests for quite a while, a number of which I've participated in), we're looking at a game in the stage where you can boot up, walk around in, swing your sword a little and only glean the vaguest of notions of what the final product will look like. I'm talking about all the textures jacked-up or missing, numbers are placeholders, a few abilities are barely in place, the interface is all wonky, etc.

Looking at the first playtest iteration, we're not testing a game, we're testing a game "engine." Things like storyline, a fleshed out system of abilities and feats, and balance are all coming, but now is not the time to look for them. Now is the time to look at the most fundamental aspects of the game system and provide constructive criticism. Basically, if you don't like it for X or Y reason, and the game doesn't change to suit your liking, through both the playtesting process and the modularity of the game, it's really your responsibility.

There are plenty of things I'm not in love with, or find questionable, about 5e, but I like where it is now because 1) my expectations are not too high for this point in development, and 2) I see potential to make 5e do all sorts of interesting things when it's done and my feedback has been given to help it get there.

 

[Mengu]

4e is my favorite edition. Does it do everything right? No. Could it use improvement? Absolutely. Is 5e providing that improvement? No. So, no, I'm not happy with the direction of 5e *at the moment*. Could this change as more plans and material are revealed, maybe, but looking at their design goals, I am doubtful.