D&D 5E Have you moved on yet? Has Wizard's handled this properly?

[DaveMage]

Certainly no interest in 5E for my group. We just started Slumbering Tsar for Pathfinder a couple of months ago. We'll be there a while.

And since it's one of the best adventures I've ever read, I think we'll be very happy there for a few years. By the time we're done with Tsar, WotC will be ready for 6E.

As for WotC not being able to "win" on the internet, well, let's just say, one reaps what one sows....

 

[Grimmjow]

me and my group have been having a lot of fun with DDN (5e) and are looking forward to when the rules come out officially.

 

[GreyLord]

I think the problem they are facing is one of not living up to what they said they were working on. They made it seem like they were working on an edition that would appeal to players of ALL editions, or any edition.

Now if they had stuck to a VERY BASIC version that allowed add on modules to make it more like a specific edition (such as one for 1e, one for 3e, one for 4e) and released the CORE book along with the edition specific module at release (so two books, one core, one for the edition type you like) I think it may actually have gone better thus far. They would have concentrated on the core rules that were very basic with explanations that this was ONLY the core...and then have playtests for different edition modules.

As it is...I see extreme problems with what they are doing. They've lost their way. Who are they trying to appeal to?

Old timers...they've lost over 20 million of them...do they really think they will get them back? If so...why?

I'm an old time player and this new stuff feels more like a 3e/4e hybrid than anything old school. HECK, the OSR movement meets old time gaming FAR more than anything Next has thus far. Next doesn't even appear to be TRYING to do anything to really appeal to those gamers from the 70's to mid 90s...or if they are...they need someone who actually knows that audience. They obviously don't understand the oldtime gamer or what they would be after at this point from what I'm seeing.

NONE...and I mean NONE of those that I know from my days of the 70s and 80s have any interest in this right now. Of course most aren't playing RPGs at this point either (in fact one just gave me some of his old D&D books). If they were to be brought back it would have to be simple, something that they recognized as D&D (which means, 3.X and 4e it is NOT), and something they'd want to play with their kids or grandkids.

For 3.X gamers...I've seen some interest, but it's dying and dying quick. Next has some items that resemble 3e and 3.5 (D20 universal for skill checks, less adaptability but there are skill and adaptability options), but overall...if they aren't still playing 3.5, they are playing Pathfinder. In fact, the group I play with currently seems to be all about Pathfinder. The big question is...why should they play Next instead of Pathfinder. Right now, even with the current iteration, there is nothing to be gained from switching. They are very happy and content with where PF is at, and see nothing that DD Next offers over PF.

For 4e, I'm not certain. There IS some interest with the 4e gamers I've played with. However, many think that there are too many steps backwards from 4e to older editions (despite that older gamers probably don't think it's enough like their edition) to really cater to them.

So the problem is, instead of doing what they intially stated they would do, they've actively moved backwards and are achieving the exact opposite of what they stated. At least from what I'm seeing. Instead of appealing to players of any edition, they are actually making a game currently that is of interest to NO players of any edition of D&D.

I don't know what the future holds, and thankfully they have a lot of time, but currently if it were to be released shortly instead of further along and what we have is an indication of what is coming...I'd say D&D NEXT would be an unmitigated failure at release.

 

[Isaac Chalk]

Earnestly, whilst growing up I played a host of RPGs that weren't D&D at all - I had the occasional 2E game mixed in with GURPS, Marvel FASERIP, Rifts (shut up, I was 12,) and Aberrant and other White Wolf games. It was only when 3E hit that I played D&D more fully, and it was less by choice and more because it was the only game in town. The OGL was, by far, the game's biggest innovation - I witnessed those "networked externialities" first hand, as I found that I had to choose between gaming in 3E D&D or not gaming at all. (Or running my own games, in which case I would get a lot of blank looks as I explained that it was not a D&D game so their wizard build wasn't going to apply.) For all the noise that 4E gets for being like an MMO, it's OGL 3E - where people can play for free, because the presence of other people is the reason why anyone plays - that looks more like an MMO nowadays.

So I never had a nostalgic attachment to magic missiles that never miss or Larry Elmore on the covers of the books, and I never needed Wizards of the Coast to pander to my sense of nostalgia - I had no nostalgia. D&D wasn't my religion, it was a tool to use. Saying "But Gary Gygax said we should do it THIS way" earns a hearty "so effing what?" from me. I was never as offended as so many people were when 4E chopped up those sacred cows, since I enjoyed the tasty hamburgers that resulted and because, as an agnostic, no cows are sacred to me.

So seeing D&D Next all but give up on new mechanics and instead choosing to bring back a mishmash of the old is somewhat disheartening, but I've come to see it as a blessing in disguise because finally, people around me are remembering that there are game systems other than D&D or its derivatives. My GM's next campaign isn't set in stone yet, he just knows he isn't going to be using D&D again - ANY edition. People going outside of D&D is the best news I could imagine for this hobby.

People talk about "old school revivals," but they always mean "old school D&D," as if it were the only old RPG worth talking about. For me? Lots of different games and lots of different settings, IS old-school roleplaying. I'll be quite glad to get back to it.

 

[Bluenose]

People talk about "old school revivals," but they always mean "old school D&D," as if it were the only old RPG worth talking about. For me? Lots of different games and lots of different settings, IS old-school roleplaying. I'll be quite glad to get back to it.

I'm not sure that there are any "old school" RPGs where the system has changed as significantly as D&D has. An "Old School" Runequest revival would seem rather odd, since most of the old material is usable as it is with very few changes - about as much, in my estimation, as is involved in altering BECM adventures to AD&D. Similarly for Traveller, another "Old School" game where the rules have remained pretty consistent. As such, there's no "Old School Revival" where the Old School is pretty much the same as the "New School".

 

[herrozerro]

Imo, d&d is sort of a unique case. To the extent of my knowledge no other game spans multiple editions with such sweeping changes. Granted my knowledge is a little limited, gurps or traveler might prove me wrong.

I feel if each edition was not toted as the next edition of the game and rather separate games we wouldnt have the edition wars and each game could exist as its own entity. Edition could be used for major erratas to a game, for instance 3 to 3.5.

 

[Evenglare]

I wish wizards would stick to a damn game, and after they have a basic system develop stories and worlds with that system. It's annoying to have to rebuy all these rules and settings if I want to get some ongoing support. I understand that's what they are attempting to do with D&D next, but honestly they said the exact same crap with 4th edition (which I love) but however Next turns out I wish they would just stay with the system. This whole edition switching is...it's... it's annoying .

 

[Umbran]

Nobody is treating Next like it's a full game, it's the exact opposite. The game is no where near being finished so people are moving elsewhere for their gaming needs and while they are off playing other games, they are becoming more and more attached to where they moved so when Next does finally come out, it's going to be that much harder to bring them back, if they even come back at all.

I think you may be incorrect there. Past market research indicated that a typical "campaign", if it gets off the ground, runs for a year or 18 months. This helped inform 3e's "13.3 encounters to level", so that folks would more often see more of what the game had to offer in a single typical campaign. Sure, there's folks out there who have campaigns that have lasted 20 years, but those are exceptional, not average.

With that - WotC can go ahead and let folks play other things for a while. A year or 18 months from now, those folks will typically be in a position for a switch.

 

[Jester David]

I'll have to see more Next before I switch. I've played a little and done some playtesting but my ongoing campaign remains Pathfinder, and the following one will also likely be Pathfinder.

Whether or not my group adopts Next really depends on the state of the game upon launch as well as the follow-through by WotC. I'll probably hold off adopting 5e until the first couple books are out.
Let's face it, WotC as a company is a bit ADHD. If something isn't a solid instant hit they often rapidly change approaches, and with so many staff change regularly happening it's hard for planned content and released to come out as initially designed. With two Christmases with lay-offs between now and the release of 5e, there's plenty of time for some staff shuffling and creative turnover rapidly affecting the feel and tone of the game.
I really don't want to buy into 5e and get the core books expecting certain modules that are released half-finished or never released at all. Or have content to never move past the "playtest" stage because they release it, tweak it, and then get busy with the next big thing leaving it half-finished.

It also really, really depends on the state of the game following the playtest. So much has changed and so much will continue to change. But if they don't stop tweaking and tweaking and tweaking and move onto other projects they won't have the time before launch to test all the other needed content. Because they decided to completely change how fighters work they had to stop working on certain planned modules and possibly have not resumed work as they keep tweaking fights and now rogues. 1/4 of the way through the planned playtest period and they're already a couple months behind.

 

[Obryn]

I wish wizards would stick to a damn game, and after they have a basic system develop stories and worlds with that system. It's annoying to have to rebuy all these rules and settings if I want to get some ongoing support. I understand that's what they are attempting to do with D&D next, but honestly they said the exact same crap with 4th edition (which I love) but however Next turns out I wish they would just stay with the system. This whole edition switching is...it's... it's annoying .

Unless the entire D&D line gets cancelled, there will always be a "next" edition.

Their sales are too immense during their product launches to ignore.

-O