Serious question - are you going to invest in D&DNext?

[Starfox]

Having pretty much been off the entire d20 mechanical "base" for two years now, I find for the most part that the thought of having to deal with a "classic D&D" game approach frankly annoys me. I'm sick of gobs of hit points. I'm sick of AC. I'm sick of "Vancian" casting. Would D&D Next still let me tell some of the stories I want to tell? Well sure, of course it does; it's a fantasy RPG after all.
[...]
Who knows, maybe a year from now I'll suddenly have urge to "return to my RPG roots" and try it out.

I was there in the 2E period... Thought my DnD days were over in favor of Pendragon and similar games. 3E seduced me back, even if it took a few years to happen. Not saying it will happen to you, just saying it happened to me.

5e -- through the public playtest documents -- has already helped me introduce more new players to rpgs than 3.5 or 4e did. Certainly, there's lots of factors at play, but the reports I've read of people playing the game have mostly meshed with my own: it's a fast, intuitive experience that creates opportunities for imaginative and dynamic play.

This is my main hope for 5E - that it will be a good newbie game, hopefully with some ads and other marketing support. Ideally it should also have enough depth to at least be playable by veterans, but honestly that's secondary for me.

 

[amerigoV]

That said, I do not consider Next to be a complete game or even near to a complete game. We've seen the alpha test. I suspect some sharper and more focussed people will be called in now - Chris Perkins, for example, or they could hire back Rich Baker - to get it completed before Hasbro completely loses patience with a team that has taken over two years to punch out something that a lot of people on internet messageboards doing their own fantasy heartbreakers on their own could have punched out in months.

I've seen comments to this effect a couple of times in this thread. I'm no Next or WoTC apologist (long live Savage Worlds and all), but this is not a fair statement. Sure, anyone can crank out a fantasy heartbreaker much quicker than we have seen the development of Next (I did so myself back in the dark days of 2e). But they only have to account for themselves and a small number of like minded folks. If they hate Modrons and other Planar stuff, they can completely ignore it. If they hate psionics they can completely excluded them. If they hate all spells that begin with the letter "F", then they can just leave them out (XP to the person that knows my reference). D&D is vast in its material and play range, but these people only have to deal with "their D&D" and not "your D&D" or "My D&D".

Simply put, its your fault that they are talking so long since they have to account for how you play D&D (wrong, of course) instead of just making my game

 

[Starfox]

If they hate all spells that begin with the letter "F", then they can just leave them out.

Pure guesswork here, but I guess tihs would be because of the "force" spells, forcecage et all.

Or maybe this was just an amerigoV plot to derail this thread? ^^

 

[amerigoV]

Pure guesswork here, but I guess tihs would be because of the "force" spells, forcecage et all.

Or maybe this was just an amerigoV plot to derail this thread? ^^

Don't forget Faerie Fire, and Fireball, Forbiddance and Fly. (why is a Dr. Seuss rhyme going through my head now?)

 

[billd91]

Pure guesswork here, but I guess tihs would be because of the "force" spells, forcecage et all.

Or maybe this was just an amerigoV plot to derail this thread? ^^

Derail? Not as I see it. Just amerigoV pointing out how much easier it is to be an armchair game designer than to be the one doing the work with all of the expectations loaded upon them.

 

[Starfox]

Derail? Not as I see it. Just amerigoV pointing out how much easier it is to be an armchair game designer than to be the one doing the work with all of the expectations loaded upon them.

I meant, derailing it into becoming a discussion about what that reference to spells on "F" really meant. ^^

Besides, it was a joke.

 

[Salamandyr]

As a counterpoint to the nattering nabobs of negativity, I love what I've seen of 5e.

I'm super happy Monte Cook left...I still haven't forgiven him for some of the stupidities of 3e; mostly the ones he seems the most self congratulatory on.

And people, a math polish is the last step in game design! (one 3e pretty much skipped, and one that 4e whiffed early on due to differing expectations between designers and players) The fact that they're to that point means the game is pretty much done...which should be obvious from the play packet which by this point is pretty much a complete game. I'm hoping there are some more subclass options for a few classes; and of course we need more magic items and spells, but the core? That's done, and it rocks very hard.

 

[DaveMage]

One thing that hasn't been mentioned was the article with Greg Leeds a few weeks ago. He mentioned that it was WotC's goal to support all players of D&D - not just a particular edition.

If that comes to fruition, it could be interesting.

 

[amerigoV]

Pure guesswork here, but I guess tihs would be because of the "force" spells, forcecage et all.

Or maybe this was just an amerigoV plot to derail this thread? ^^

As an aside, that is not my reference in this case (one hint, its non-gaming).

 

[Starfox]

As an aside, that is not my reference in this case (one hint, its non-gaming).

Aw, F*** off!