D&D 5E Is 5E Special

[Minigiant]

Any edition would have succeeded with the timing, zeitgeist, and support that 5e had.

5e however was the most configured to succeed in that environment.

 

[Oofta]

Any edition would have succeeded with the timing, zeitgeist, and support that 5e had.

5e however was the most configured to succeed in that environment.

All editions succeeded at first, it was the sustained growth that didn't always follow.

It seems to have been a happy accident of minimal product releases planned because they didn't have high expectations for sales, a decent core along with cultural zeitgeist.

Whatever it was, I'm just happy I can find players and/or games easily.

 

[Nightfly]

God forgive me if this post ignites an edition war, but...

Yes, I think 5e is special. It has just enough crunch to be interesting and then gets out of your way. That was emphatically not true of either 3e or 4e, and largely wasn't even true of Basic, even though that was explicitly the point of Basic. If D&D still made you do lots of math every time you attacked, there's no way it would be this popular now.

5e probably doesn't get enough credit for being such a splendid iteration of the rules. I've been playing since 1e, even before Basic came out, and 5e is in my eyes the best version ever. There's no way D&D would be even half as popular if we still had THAC0, or the full-page monster stat blocks of 3e, or the three-hour combats of 4e.

 

[Minigiant]

All editions succeeded at first, it was the sustained growth that didn't always follow.

It seems to have been a happy accident of minimal product releases planned because they didn't have high expectations for sales, a decent core along with cultural zeitgeist.

Whatever it was, I'm just happy I can find players and/or games easily.

What I am saying is all edition would have been a success and sustained growth in the environment 5e fell into.

I mean we had a worldwide disaster but international modern society had the infrastructure to allow D&D to be played well within it, a society decently enough trained in that technology to play, watch and experience D&D in the new medium, and the culture stigma against the knowledge of this technology that would facilitate D&D more or less removed.

Quite frankly, I don't really think 5e is the best version to succeed in that environment. It's was just the best edition of D&D to do it.

WARNING: HOT TAKE INCOMING

I think 4th Edition Essentials, if written as a fully stand alone edition completely disconnected from main 4e, would have sold more than 5e if it came out when 5e did due to its heavier focus on making specific fantasy archetypes work on its own.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

God forgive me if this post ignites an edition war, but...

Yes, I think 5e is special. It has just enough crunch to be interesting and then gets out of your way. That was emphatically not true of either 3e or 4e, and largely wasn't even true of Basic, even though that was explicitly the point of Basic. If D&D still made you do lots of math every time you attacked, there's no way it would be this popular now.

5e probably doesn't get enough credit for being such a splendid iteration of the rules. I've been playing since 1e, even before Basic came out, and 5e is in my eyes the best version ever. There's no way D&D would be even half as popular if we still had THAC0, or the full-page monster stat blocks of 3e, or the three-hour combats of 4e.

I will run 5e. Of course I love playing the most but no matter.

I would not run 3e. I liked playing it fine but it was for me too much work. This is just right for me.

I don’t have the comfort I did with 1e—-just guess and make an encounter—-but it’s not bad.

Ease of use was a factor for me really coming back full force.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

I think 4th Edition Essentials, if written as a fully stand alone edition completely disconnected from main 4e, would have sold more than 5e if it came out when 5e did due to it's heavier focus on making specific fantasy archetypes work on its own.

As years come and go, I find the idea of a feat-less 4th Essentials with advantage/disadvantage and prof. bonus instead of the scaling 1/2 level quite, quite enticing.

Essential was also way easier to homebrew archetypes than 4e, since you did not have to write 5 billions new powers each time you created a new class. Want a Fighter (slayer) expert at archery? Just add a Power Strike option for ranged basic attacks. Done.

 

[Shardstone]

Other than OD&D, no other edition of D&D has been as fun for me to homebrew. So, its special. But, it fights me at every chance. Wouldn't be fun if there wasn't a challenge, I guess?

 

[Oofta]

What I am saying is all edition would have been a success and sustained growth in the environment 5e fell into.

I disagree. I'm not getting into edition wars, I think @Nightfly's post explains it well.

I mean we had a worldwide disaster but international modern society had the infrastructure to allow D&D to be played well within it, a society decently enough trained in that technology to play, watch and experience D&D in the new medium, and the culture stigma against the knowledge of this technology that would facilitate D&D more or less removed.

Quite frankly, I don't really think 5e is the best version to succeed in that environment. It's was just the best edition of D&D to do it.

WARNING: HOT TAKE INCOMING

I think 4th Edition Essentials, if written as a fully stand alone edition completely disconnected from main 4e, would have sold more than 5e if it came out when 5e did due to its heavier focus on making specific fantasy archetypes work on its own.

I think Essentials was closer to what the devs wanted but weren't given the time to implement. Which is too bad. No clue how well it would have worked or what other mechanics would have been tweaked.

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

I think the issue is, no edition of D&D has ever been really accessible. 5e is more accessible than most, unless you're really keen on concise jargon, in which case maybe 4e was more accessible. But certainly every edition before 4e was emphatically not accessible. Remember how some people complained about the removal of THAC0 because it meant folks could learn how to play more easily? There was long a badge of honor mentality regarding D&D play, that people had to earn the right to be D&D players. That attitude has largely been expunged from the hobby, much to its benefit.

Yeah, I think that you're basically right in terms of the previous editions of the game not being accessible-- the cleaned up versions of some of the early ones kind of are, but they have their own baggage, including my beloved 4e which featured long tactical combats, not inaccessible per se, but would probably driven some of the players 5e captured, who have a resentful relationship with combat, nuts. I'd almost say 5e did a good job of sanding down some of earlier editions most immediate baggage, sort of back loading the problems.

As for the attitude, I simultaneously agree that its good that its gone and think in some ways its been replaced by other toxic elements, in terms of how completely unwilling some players are to learn enough to help make the experience fun for everyone at the table, its a common issue we see in places like r/dmacademy.

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

What I am saying is all edition would have been a success and sustained growth in the environment 5e fell into.

I mean we had a worldwide disaster but international modern society had the infrastructure to allow D&D to be played well within it, a society decently enough trained in that technology to play, watch and experience D&D in the new medium, and the culture stigma against the knowledge of this technology that would facilitate D&D more or less removed.

Quite frankly, I don't really think 5e is the best version to succeed in that environment. It's was just the best edition of D&D to do it.

WARNING: HOT TAKE INCOMING

I think 4th Edition Essentials, if written as a fully stand alone edition completely disconnected from main 4e, would have sold more than 5e if it came out when 5e did due to its heavier focus on making specific fantasy archetypes work on its own.

Honestly I agree with your hot take, if 4e had come out in the opposite order, starting with the essentials stuff, and then diversifying into the PHB style, it would have helped it a lot-- probably not scared off the 3.5 fans in the first place. Give it the quality of digital tools we see today (if it was taking the place of 5e), I think people would really prefer it for both its hands off approach to out of combat roleplaying, and its more engaging game play. Honestly, given a few more years, I think digital tool use is going to be so ubiquitous its going to start radically changing the narrative on accessibility vs. engaging game play in RPGs, because people will be more comfortable letting their tools take the burden of actually book keeping, and just enjoy the depth on offer, my players already do this and it works super well. I think its already been accelerated by the COVID shift to virtual tabletops.

My personal opinion is that pf2e actually fulfills that niche even better though, since its a lot more approachable than either 5e or 4e or pf1e in terms of how much character optimization it takes to succeed and how wide the party gap can get, it just doesn't benefit from the Coca-Cola like status of Dungeons and Dragons as a brand.