D&D 5E 5e, some thoughts.

[Tortoise]

Currently we have very little information to go on about how 5e will work. However, with what little we have heard, it sounds to me as if the designers are making an honest effort to take the best elements of the various editions and make them work together so that people liking various styles of game actually can share a table.

It may be impossible when all is said and done, but at least the designers have their hearts in the right place. They love the game as much as we do so let's cut them some slack for now and wait to see more of what they are doing.

Too many people are already declaring "deal breakers" when there is nothing set in stone and WotC has said we will have our say by being part of open playtests.

I'm curious and somewhat optomistic, with a proper dose of skepticism.

 

[Nebulous]

so far, i've heard more things i'm happy about than displeased with.

 

[RHGreen]

Deal breakers are silly.

I hate vancian, and they have said it is in, but I wouldn't call it a deal breaker (but TBH if they brought back THAC0 I'm gone) as long as I get to do magical stuff all the time (no crossbows, no slings, and no big sticks)

Most of the things that people say are dealbreakers are stupid. Those people will be in the minority - and if people say that they are probably overstating their feelings. It is the internet afterall.

Anyone who will not play a game because halflings are podgy and have hairy feet, when they can easily just say - 'In my game halflings are skinny and wear boots' can leave for all I care. Just shut the door on the way out.

 

[pauljathome]

Deal breakers are silly.

Some peoples deal breakers may be so easy to work around that they are silly.

But having deal breakers is certainly not silly.

I currently play Pathfinder. I'm happy with Pathfinder. 5th edition has to be better than Pathfinder for me to want to switch. There are definitely some things currently being talked about that would make me sufficiently unhappy that I'd prefer Pathfinder.

Now, deal breakers come in 2 categories.

The first are those things that will cause me to vote against 5th edition in my local group and will cause me to try and find Pathfinder games.

The second are those things that will cause me to refuse to play 5th edition, even if my local group decides to play it.

The idea of random character creation coupled with stats being extremely important is definitely a deal breaker for me. Its probably the first category but I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that I hated it enough that it would become the second category for me (especially if I rolled up a particularly incompetent character).

 

[RHGreen]

Some peoples deal breakers may be so easy to work around that they are silly.

But having deal breakers is certainly not silly.

I currently play Pathfinder. I'm happy with Pathfinder. 5th edition has to be better than Pathfinder for me to want to switch. There are definitely some things currently being talked about that would make me sufficiently unhappy that I'd prefer Pathfinder.

Now, deal breakers come in 2 categories.

The first are those things that will cause me to vote against 5th edition in my local group and will cause me to try and find Pathfinder games.

The second are those things that will cause me to refuse to play 5th edition, even if my local group decides to play it.

The idea of random character creation coupled with stats being extremely important is definitely a deal breaker for me. Its probably the first category but I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that I hated it enough that it would become the second category for me (especially if I rolled up a particularly incompetent character).

From what you say it sounds like you aren't a dealbreaker person. In the example you give, providing you don't have a bad DM, I can see you just rolling up another bunch of stats if they are too bad to enjoy.

 

[pauljathome]

From what you say it sounds like you aren't a dealbreaker person. In the example you give, providing you don't have a bad DM, I can see you just rolling up another bunch of stats if they are too bad to enjoy.

It depends .

Some GMs won't allow one to reroll. Some groups will allow it but will very strongly discourage it.

So, sometimes I'll probably go along but will like the game experience significantly less. If that is bad enough then eventually I'll either complain and either reroll or quit.

 

[Dice4Hire]

I am overall happy with waht 5E sounds like thus far and I can se myself using it, if it is how I think it is.

As for dealbreakers, I see lot of it as a thin justification ofr not playing a game. Sure, if it is too serious, I can see it, but for example rolling stats or using point buy is trivial. If that is somone's dealbreaker, I just cannot understand their way of thinking.

for other people 5E is not the game for them. So be it.

But overall, I am quite positive about the game thus far.

 

[mkill]

The thing about deal breakers is - it differs between my player hat and my DM hat.

As a player, I'm fine with pretty much any edition of any game system, because I know the DM makes the difference. He or she is the factor who decides whether I have fun or not. A DMs style easily overrides whatever the system tries to impose. This is especially true in D&D, which has always accomodated wildly differing play styles (although D&D gamers often aren't aware of it, and just assume their style as the default). Even if a deal breaker shows up, the DM is a human I can talk to, maybe we can work it out.

As a DM, I'm much more picky. I want a system that supports me and doesn't drop tons of baggage on me. Random example: If 5E tried to come back with stuff like fighting archdruids at lvl 13. WTF? What if druids in my game world have no organizational structure? What if they're in the middle of the ocean and the group has more important things to do? It's a deal breaker.

TL;DR: Players will bitch and moan, but they'll deal with most issues for the chance to play. DMs usually have their favorite system already. They won't switch unless the new edition gives them a tangible advantage.

 

[Greg K]

As a player, I'm fine with pretty much any edition of any game system, because I know the DM makes the difference. .

For myself, this is not the case. It is true that a poor DM may ruin a game that I like, mechanically. However, even a great DM is not going to make much of a difference if I dislike the mechanics of a system (unless they rewrite the game).

 

[Umbran]

What sometimes seems a bit unreasonable (or, "silly" if you will) is declaring what is or isn't a deal-breaker before seeing it in context. What seemed horrible to you in a previous game might actually work out okay when reworked, and set in the middle of a set of rules that works differently.

 

[Mark CMG]

As an (O)D&D player since the mid-70s, if I had thought in terms of deal breakers I never would have tried 1E, 2E, 3.XE, 4E or the many other RPGs that have given me tons of fun over the past four decades. I'm glad I am not one who sees an individual mechanic and considers it a deal breaking decision but if that is how someone wishes to approach thier tabletop hobby gaming, particularly before the game has even been finalized, there's really nothing the rest of us can do to talk them out of such a stance. We're probably better off not trying.

 

[Tortoise]

As for dealbreakers, I see lot of it as a thin justification ofr not playing a game. Sure, if it is too serious, I can see it, but for example rolling stats or using point buy is trivial. If that is somone's dealbreaker, I just cannot understand their way of thinking.

From what they have indicated so far both rolling for stats and point buy are options and there is no reason for either to be left out. At least this way the DM and group can decide which to use.

 

[Tortoise]

On another topic within the framework of the thread . . .

A DM of one of the groups I play in remarked recently that he feels the game is already written and the open playtest is just a marketing tool and nothing we as playtesters suggest will affect the core mechanics as they stand.

While I can understand where he is coming from (they have been playtesting and designing for over 9 months already), I am a little more optimistic and feel that if enough playtesters have a disagreement with something that is currently in the skeleton, that it could be altered.

The designers did say it was going to be quite a while before release so despite not giving us a solid time-frame it would seem long enough to fix a big issue if one is discovered.

 

[Consonant Dude]

Deal breakers are silly.

I hate vancian, and they have said it is in, but I wouldn't call it a deal breaker (but TBH if they brought back THAC0 I'm gone) as long as I get to do magical stuff all the time (no crossbows, no slings, and no big sticks)

Most of the things that people say are dealbreakers are stupid. Those people will be in the minority - and if people say that they are probably overstating their feelings. It is the internet afterall.

*******BREAKING NEWS********

So I am a billionaire and I just bought the DnD brand.

My first move as head of WotC was to fire everyone involved in RPGs. They haven't been able to nail DnD yet, so out they go! I have decided to hire a new enthusiastic staff with a fresh take on roleplaying. In charge of R&D is Bob, my neihghbor who cooks a mean rabbit stew. Bob is a former underground boxer (record of 2-23-2) and I intend to use his extensive expertise in flea market fights to craft the ultimate edition of the game. We have looked carefully at the combat system of previous editions and decided they are extremely flawed. Initiative is always a confusing mess, hitting is arbitrary. I can't wrap my head around hit points and AC. I also feel weapons aren't differentiated enough and the wounding system is unrealistic. Bob has identified the thickness of the manuals as another obstacle to learning the game.

Our solution is the new Innovative Ball Breaker System™. IBBS™ relies on real fights between the players, not their characters. It represents the end of endless calculation to know when it is your turn. Market research and playtesting (while highly inebriated) have shown people really love the fact they aren't sitting around waiting for their turn. To represent big monsters and special attacks such as trampling or breath weapon, DMs are provided with guidelines and suggestions including trying to run over their players with a car or using flamethrowers.

We are currently consulting with former members of MADD and Jack Chick and are happy to announce most trace of occultism will not be part of the next edition. Spells, demons and that sort of stuff are out. A new magician class is featured with a starting kit to "50 Easy Magic Tricks" written by David Copperfield. Learn how to make a rabbit appear out of a hat. These fluffy creatures are handy ammunition to throw during combat and are delicious if you follow Bob's recipes, which come in the Monster Cooking Manual core book. One other genius innovation is the divine intervention system powering the cleric class. No more spells for the cleric! Grab you d20, close your eyes and pray to a higher power before making to-hit or saves. Then throw your die! Good-aligned clerics can support other members of the party by praying for them before they roll. These features make the cleric the most versatile it has ever been and finally solve the age-old problem of cleric being either an active participant in combat or providing support for others. You can now do both!

We know we're breaking new ground with this game but we are confident none of this will be considered a deal breaker. Deal breakers are silly anyway. Look for the game in your favorite hobby store. MSRP 350 USD, books bound with leather coming from your choice of the top 5 endangered species on the planet and assembled in the filthiest sweatshop we could find to save costs.

*********************************

OK, so this example is extreme but between that and the perfect game for each of us, everyone has a breaking point somewhere in the middle. And with so many amazing roleplaying games out there and more being produced all the time, skipping something that isn't to your liking is not so unreasonable

Just registered here and am carefully optimistic about the next edition. I hope it will be amazing for as many people as possible. But if it's not for me, I'm not gonna feel silly about playing something else.

 

[airwalkrr]

Well, I have no "deal-breakers." I just want to see what they come up with. And if I like what I see, I will buy it.