D&D 5E Is 5E "big enough" for a Basic/Advanced split?

[Lyxen]

5E is pretty basic as it is relative to prior editions. I can't imagine people playing a simplified version of 5E for more than a few sessions before they move on to the full ruleset.

I completely agree. Yes, there are a few additional rules in 5e compared to basic, but who would play a game without things as simple as skills, or with as few options in this day and age ? I would be interested to know about the population playing OSR games, not that they are bad games, but I suspect it's mostly people with actual nostalgia.

 

[beancounter]

I completely agree. Yes, there are a few additional rules in 5e compared to basic, but who would play a game without things as simple as skills, or with as few options in this day and age ? I would be interested to know about the population playing OSR games, not that they are bad games, but I suspect it's mostly people with actual nostalgia.

About 7 years ago, I played in a 1E group. Two of us were "old", but the rest of the group were in their 30's. But you're right, it's a tiny percentage of the total population of gamers.

 

[Lyxen]

About 7 years ago, I played in a 1E group. Two of us were "old", but the rest of the group were in their 30's. But you're right, it's a tiny percentage of the total population of gamers.

Again, I'm not saying that these are intrinsically bad games, it's just that I think that it takes at least some people with nostalgia to draw people in with a game like this, and considering the explosion of people playing 5e worldwide, I think we can agree that it's a tiny percentage.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Again, I'm not saying that these are intrinsically bad games, it's just that I think that it takes at least some people with nostalgia to draw people in with a game like this, and considering the explosion of people playing 5e worldwide, I think we can agree that it's a tiny percentage.

Nostalgia is a big part, of course, as a long-time player I look back at older editions with fondness, and often wonder what I can do to 5E to help bring back part of that "feel".

But I think another aspect is the desire for a "simpler" game. As much as having tons of options is great for a lot of players, for some it can lead to player paralysis when they have to choose what to do. While it might seem boring (especially by today's standard), the idea of "I attack" each round without having to decide other things to do.

Granted, IMO, 5E certainly can be played pretty simply, but I think you could make it even more "basic" for people who wanted it.

 

[Reynard]

Considering the amount of digital ink spilled over skills, DCs, and when to roll (ex: see the Stealth thread that just crawled out of the grave) it seems like a game without skills might be very desirable. Between your race, background and class, everyone is going to have a decent idea of what you are "proficient" in.

 

[Oofta]

Considering the amount of digital ink spilled over skills, DCs, and when to roll (ex: see the Stealth thread that just crawled out of the grave) it seems like a game without skills might be very desirable. Between your race, background and class, everyone is going to have a decent idea of what you are "proficient" in.

But then people would just claim that "the rules" stated that they could do whatever they wanted.

 

[Reynard]

But then people would just claim that "the rules" stated that they could do whatever they wanted.

Doubtless.

 

[Lyxen]

Considering the amount of digital ink spilled over skills, DCs, and when to roll (ex: see the Stealth thread that just crawled out of the grave) it seems like a game without skills might be very desirable. Between your race, background and class, everyone is going to have a decent idea of what you are "proficient" in.

But then does proficiency always mean success ? Moreover, considering the amount of people who prefer clear and cut rules these days, and who don't even want a DM to inferfere with their expectations, a game in which there is no rule support at all and where the DM decides everything would have difficulty flying with I think a significant part of the players.

As usual, YCMV and all that, but I certainly don't think that this would made the game desirable by a large percentage of the players.

 

[jmartkdr2]

But then does proficiency always mean success ? Moreover, considering the amount of people who prefer clear and cut rules these days, and who don't even want a DM to inferfere with their expectations, a game in which there is no rule support at all and where the DM decides everything would have difficulty flying with I think a significant part of the players.

I agree that a majority wouldn't like that, but for those who prefer to let the dm make a call in the moment based on the fiction - there's OSR.

You'll also notice that OSR isn't taking over the ttrpg space - it's a niche within the hobby. One of the bigger niches, but a niche nonetheless.

But when people talk about 'basic 5e' they're usually not talking about going OSR. (You can play 5e OSR-style without changing any rules.) They're talking about cutting down on cruft to make diving in simpler. There's subclasses for that (ie champion) and they're popular enough, but finding a whole table who wants that isn't really common and isn't really necessary for the players looking for an easy in. They can just play a champion at a table of whatever.

The lack of a truly easy spellcaster is the bigger hindrance.

 

[Reynard]

But then does proficiency always mean success ? Moreover, considering the amount of people who prefer clear and cut rules these days, and who don't even want a DM to inferfere with their expectations, a game in which there is no rule support at all and where the DM decides everything would have difficulty flying with I think a significant part of the players.

As usual, YCMV and all that, but I certainly don't think that this would made the game desirable by a large percentage of the players.

There's quite a gulf between "The sailor background allows you to make rolls relating to sailing using your proficiency bonus" and "no rules support."