D&D 5E How Can D&D Next Win You Over?

[Umbran]

All they need to do, for me, is produce a game that is fun to play.

I set no requirements of how it functions specifically as compared to 3e, or 4e. I don't have requirements based on licensing, or the number of books, or whether minis are involved, or whether one form of magic is present or not.

I want to pick up the game, and judge it on its own merits. I don't want o set arbitrary "It must to X," because that kind of requirement can blind me to the fact that the game may also do W, Y, and Z, and actually be fun even if the thing I thought I needed wasn't there.

There are more ways to make a good game than are imagined in my philosophy - my preconceptions are not the only way to my having fun.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

It needs to be something that it will explicitly not be.

 

[Mercule]

*cough*HERO*cough*

If only I could "wing" Hero like I could AD&D; I'd never need another system.

 

[Mercule]

All they need to do, for me, is produce a game that is fun to play.

That pretty much covers it, for me. The catch is what I consider fun.

The times I've had the most fun gaming in my life have been in systems where the GM is allowed a significant amount of flexibility in dealing with situations, but there is sufficient framework for the players to be able to make reasonable decisions. For the most part, that means that AD&D provided me the most fun. That isn't to say it didn't have flaws. I very intentionally stopped playing AD&D, in the mid 1990s, because it had flaws that were not fun.

Still, a return to the "just enough rules" feel that AD&D had (to me) would be welcome, so long as they provide fixes for at least some of the weaknesses. The two biggest keys are having a skill system and having some way to differentiate two characters of the same class in small (classes are important) but meaningful ways. It sounds like the skill system will be substantively different from either 3e or 4e, but still present. Feats are, of course, the character tweak mechanism of choice. Those inclusions have me hopeful, even if we don't have all the details.

Note that I'm not saying that I just want AD&D with skills and feats. I am saying that there are elements of flexibility and GM empowerment that I'd love to see included in 5e, though.

 

[Umbran]

That pretty much covers it, for me. The catch is what I consider fun.

Of course. But, part of my point is that I am willing to just play it and decide if it is fun, rather than pre-judge it based on a set of attributes.

Whether they've won me over will be decided by empirical means, not theoretical ones. Like my Mom taught me, long ago, concerning dinners - you need to try a bit of it first before you decide you don't like it.

 

[Mercule]

Of course. But, part of my point is that I am willing to just play it and decide if it is fun, rather than pre-judge it based on a set of attributes.

Whether they've won me over will be decided by empirical means, not theoretical ones. Like my Mom taught me, long ago, concerning dinners - you need to try a bit of it first before you decide you don't like it.

Darn Internet. I was actually agreeing with you, then continuing on to answer the implied question of "and what do you think would be fun?"

The play test has definitely shown me enough that I'm planning on trying the final release.

 

[dd.stevenson]

All they need to do, for me, is produce a game that is fun to play.

I set no requirements of how it functions specifically as compared to 3e, or 4e. I don't have requirements based on licensing, or the number of books, or whether minis are involved, or whether one form of magic is present or not.

Sure, and if the OP is asking what it would take to make fifth edition a fun game that I will play now and then, then I can agree with you. However, I took the 0P to mean something more like "what would it take to make DND your game again?", which is exactly what Mike Mearls said he would like fifth edition to accomplish. That's a much higher bar to reach.

Thus, more stringent standards on my part.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

All they need to do, for me, is produce a game that is fun to play.

That may get me to BUY it- it did for 4Ed- but that isn't quite enough for it to become "D&D" to me...which is how I interpret "win you over."

As things stand right now, 4Ed is a game I enjoy playing, but it lacks a certain something that helps me feel like I'm actually playing "D&D" and not some other good FRPG.

 

[Harlock]

All they need to do, for me, is produce a game that is fun to play.

I set no requirements of how it functions specifically as compared to 3e, or 4e. I don't have requirements based on licensing, or the number of books, or whether minis are involved, or whether one form of magic is present or not.

I want to pick up the game, and judge it on its own merits. I don't want o set arbitrary "It must to X," because that kind of requirement can blind me to the fact that the game may also do W, Y, and Z, and actually be fun even if the thing I thought I needed wasn't there.

There are more ways to make a good game than are imagined in my philosophy - my preconceptions are not the only way to my having fun.

Yes. I mean to stick with D&D Next. I expect everyone here to give it a try, whether or not they purchase the books first. I'll buy it and try it just to see how it plays and if it offers more than my current edition of choice, great! And don't think if it isn't on my or anyone else list we may not stick with it. Obviously a game can offer me something I didn't even know I wanted and make the things I wanted look not so important. Just consider this a wish list thread, I suppose.

 

[Stormonu]

Win me over? If I could pick up any module with a letter/number designation on it and run it with conversions on the fly for any of the material within.

That means, I can use the game with B2, X1, S2, U1-U3, etc.

Honestly though, I couldn't even do that in 3E. But the more I can get use out of my BECMI, 1E, 2E, and 3E materials with 5E, the happier I would be. The less conversion required, the closer to "perfect" it would be.

And just to note, I'm not against it working with 4E stuff, it's just not on my priority list.