D&D 5E Did The Finished 5th Edition Change Anyone's Mind?

[Argyle King]

Thus far, I've gone through 2 significant changes.

First, I was very negative during the playtest, and that changed to pleasant surprise upon seeing the finished PHB. A lot of the things which made me feel actively hostile toward the game during playtest appeared to have been addressed, and I had hopes that the DMG would deliver what I wanted.

Second, I was very positive at the point of the PHB, but have become somewhat negative/apathetic after the DMG. The game feels more shallow than I expected. I had hoped that the modular approach would have a default which painted things in broad strokes, and then allowed for more granularity in areas where I wanted it via options. While I can certainly homebrew some of what I want into the game, I'm not yet convinced that doing so would lead to the experience I want.

 

[Celebrim]

Were you negative about the playtest, only to be pleasantly surprised with the finished product?

Well, I was negative regarding the playtest and development of the product generally, but am pleasantly surprised with the finished product. I suppose that counts as changing my mind. I feel that 5e is a great product and I wish it well.

Unfortunately, I still haven't changed my mind regarding the likelihood that it actually will do well. Despite being a far better product at least as a rules set and even in terms of the art direction of the books than I had dared hope for, things are otherwise proceeding about like I anticipated and I have not become less melancholy regarding the future of the brand.

I still feel much like Charlton Heston beating my hands on the sand in anguish, and have felt that way for about 7 years now.

 

[TerraDave]

The process of the playtest meant that I was always quite optimistic. Clearly more so then many others here. Not the details--there were all kinds of questionable things that they tested--but the process whereby they would really take on board feedback and fix those things.

Speaking of details, there are some things I was skeptical about up front based on their various announcements: 1) Backgrounds and inspiration as sources of role play and campaign hooks; 2) Having quite (setting) specific flavor text for monsters in the MM. and 3) The DMG as a set of sort of vague guidelines and options. Now these are some of my favorite things in the game!

So these--and more game play--have left me more positive then ever.

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

Yes, that would be me.

I still think it's the third edition of AD&D but I no longer think of it as a homebrewed fantasy heartbreaker which was my perception at certain points during the playtest process.

I'm running it and enjoying it without being a huge fan (4E is my game, and I am itching to run 13th Age)... but I definitely don't hate it. I certainly prefer it to OD&D, 1E, 2E, and 3.xE/PF none of which I would run again.

 

[bogmad]

I still think it's the third edition of AD&D but I no longer think of it as a homebrewed fantasy heartbreaker which was my perception at certain points during the playtest process.

How is it the third edition for you? Were 1 and 2e one game, 3e another, and ... then this? Was 4e another type of game than D&D, but still your favorite game? No judgement, I just find this a fascinating perspective and am curious as to the breakdown.

 

[Brian Michaluk]

Playtest had its up's and downs. plenty of good and plenty of weird so I was not sure what the final product would be like.

The final 5th ed basic rules pack totally convinced me they finally recreated the excitement of 2nd ed and its not failed my two groups since I bought the books and started running exclusively 5th ed since.

Fast fun and real element of danger for the characters.

 

[rosing-bull]

I looked at the playtest -- probably the first iteration of it -- at a time when I had absolutely zero interest in D&D. I was one of those folks that had given up on the brand entirely. I was surprised to like as much as I did, and it definitely put me in a more optimistic position, but I never played it or really looked at it or any other playtest materials again. I bought the Starter Set when I first saw it in a store, almost entirely on impulse, and seeing the final version of the rules, got instantly hooked. They made pretty much the exact game I had wanted to play, and when the Player's Handbook came out it was even better.

So I suppose while I wasn't cynical about the playtest, and thought they were definitely inching in the right direction, I would not have anticipated loving 5e as much as I do. It definitely renewed my faith in Dungeons and Dragons 100% after several years of thinking the game was doomed to be forever crap. Not that the game had become "crap," mind you. I was just irritated with the direction they had been moving in and their seeming inability to commit to anything for more than a couple years. You know how we nerds are, never satisfied and prone to hyperbole and hysterics.

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

How is it the third edition for you? Were 1 and 2e one game, 3e another, and ... then this? Was 4e another type of game than D&D, but still your favorite game? No judgement, I just find this a fascinating perspective and am curious as to the breakdown.

For me (IMO/YMMV) it feels like the Third Edition of AD&D. In other words, it feels like it fits just after, or follows on directly from, 1E and 2E. That said, I've run enough of both 3.xE and 4E to see both of those editions' influences on 5E but calling it AD&D3E is just my shorthand way of describing my basic response to the new edition. Does that make a bit more sense?

And that's a good question about 4E. It is very different to the other editions which, for me at least, is a good thing. But I will leave it at that so that I don't stray any further away from the topic of the thread.

 

[bogmad]

For me (IMO/YMMV) it feels like the Third Edition of AD&D. In other words, it feels like it fits just after, or follows on directly from, 1E and 2E. That said, I've run enough of both 3.xE and 4E to see both of those editions' influences on 5E but calling it AD&D3E is just my shorthand way of describing my basic response to the new edition. Does that make a bit more sense?

Ah, that makes sense. I skipped over 3e and came back to D&D with 4th.
One of my groups grew tired of 4e, so we tried out PF/3x, but after the first playtest packet I was pretty much on board from the beginning. Specifically because it reminded me more of the 2e that I started with, so I can agree that it can feel almost like a continuation from that.

 

[Tony Vargas]

But with the Basic Rules and now all three Core Books now out and released, and with many having the opportunity to play and/or run the game, I'm wondering did anyone's mind change?

I had little reason to be optimistic going into the playtest. The middle packets raised some false hopes, but they were dashed before the playtest ended. I went into 5e with relatively low expectations.

Even so, 5e managed to be disappointing in just how slavishly it catered to the prejudices of the classic-D&D side of the h4ter faction, and how completely it abandoned it's early professed goals of being an all-inclusive kumbaya edition of D&D for everyone who ever loved D&D. Apart from 3e-style multiclassing, no significant improvement made to the game in the 21st century was retained in any meaningful way - there were plenty of token, vestigial nods to bits of 3e and 4e, but in bowdlerized form that didn't deliver. I suppose they figured 3.5 fans were permanently lost to Pathfinder, and 4e fans had nowhere else to go - I suppose they were right, too.

In spite of having to recognize all that, though, the final product hit me very much like the first playtest packet did. While I have to acknowledge that it's a bad game in any objective or practical sense, it is bad in just those right familiar ways that evoke the feel of the game as it was when I first got into the hobby. While that nostalgia can't sustain my interest as a player for more than an hour or two, in a more practical sense, those familiar failings do mean that I have the tools and experience to make the best of a technically bad game from the other side of the screen (and 5e /does/ work better if you get behind a DM screen, so your players aren't always aware of how much of the game you're overruling and fixing on the fly to preserve their play experience).

So, while I'm disappointed with the technical details of the game, I am still happy to see D&D in print again, and am determined to do my small part in giving new players the best possible experience with it.

For me (IMO/YMMV) it feels like the Third Edition of AD&D. In other words, it feels like it fits just after, or follows on directly from, 1E and 2E.

That sums it up nicely - and positively.