D&D 5E Are you going to buy the 5e Core Books?

[Scrivener of Doom]

At this point, here is my (unscientific but informed) takeaway from this (unscientific) poll and the earlier polls.

4e sold to about 65% of the ENworld population. If I remember correctly, that coorelated, at first, into about 50% playing it. Enthusiasm for the edition waned over the period of about a year and a half until there were nearly equal amounts playing 4e and Pathfinder until finally Pathfinder cornered the market and gained ascendancy.

Enthusiasm for 5e seems far more muted than it did for 4e (about a 15% reduction) but the numbers are looking like about 60-65% plan on at least buying it, only marginally less than with 4e. However, the lack of enthusiasm means its going to have an even higher hurdle than 4e to cross if it seeks to be the reigning, long-term industry leader. I would not be surprised if it didn't lead in sales for a quarter or two, but unless it can garner more enthusiasm it will wane even quicker than 4e (that's my prediction, so take it for what its worth). I think WotC should look very hard at what it needs to do to make people want to play their game above and beyond shiny new rules. Adventure support, consistency in vision for that support and for what they want from their own game, and support for the broader gaming community (cough - OGL - cough) would all be steps in the right direction.

Those are some interesting observations.
[MENTION=1]Morrus[/MENTION]: Have you thought about putting together a well-designed poll you could repeat every three or so months after Next's release and track this sort of information? I know you're expanding your data gathering but this could provide an interesting angle along the lines of [MENTION=221]Wicht[/MENTION]'s analysis.

 

[Hammerforge]

Funnily enough, I think I would have been all over this if it had published in 2000 - after all, I do call it Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Third Edition

I don't know a whole lot about 5E at this point, but being an AD&D fan, this description is interesting. Could you elaborate a bit on why you think DNDN will be "AD&D 3rd edition"?

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

I don't know a whole lot about 5E at this point, but being an AD&D fan, this description is interesting. Could you elaborate a bit on why you think DNDN will be "AD&D 3rd edition"?

I can't speak for Scrivener of Doom, but for me, it's a combination of elements, including:

• The focus on ability scores as the resolution mechanic.
• Magic items being disintegrated from character progression.
• Lighter combat rules
• More robust exploration rules.
• Smaller numbers overall.
• Simpler monsters.
• Proficiencies everywhere!

So, to me, D&DNext feels like they took what they learned from Third and Fourth Editions and remade AD&D.

 

[Hammerforge]

I can't speak for Scrivener of Doom, but for me, it's a combination of elements, including:

• The focus on ability scores as the resolution mechanic.
• Magic items being disintegrated from character progression.
• Lighter combat rules
• More robust exploration rules.
• Smaller numbers overall.
• Simpler monsters.
• Proficiencies everywhere!

So, to me, D&DNext feels like they took what they learned from Third and Fourth Editions and remade AD&D.

Sounds pretty awesome. Knowing my love for D&D, I will likely get at least the PHB just to learn the system.

The focus on ability scores as a resolution mechanic is a great move, IMO. I've been saying for a long time that most of the skills and feats that later editions offered were unnecessary because the same thing can be resolved with ability checks. In my 1E game, ability checks are much more common than saving throws and used a lot.

Are the proficiencies going to be like skills?

 

[Weather Report]

Sounds pretty awesome. Knowing my love for D&D, I will likely get at least the PHB just to learn the system.

The focus on ability scores as a resolution mechanic is a great move, IMO. I've been saying for a long time that most of the skills and feats that later editions offered were unnecessary because the same thing can be resolved with ability checks. In my 1E game, ability checks are much more common than saving throws and used a lot.

Are the proficiencies going to be like skills?

You gain proficiencies in skills, weapons, saving throws, and get a bonus for proficiencies starting at +1 for 1st level, capping at +6 for 20th.

 

[Mistwell]

At this point, here is my (unscientific but informed) takeaway from this (unscientific) poll and the earlier polls.

4e sold to about 65% of the ENworld population. If I remember correctly, that coorelated, at first, into about 50% playing it. Enthusiasm for the edition waned over the period of about a year and a half until there were nearly equal amounts playing 4e and Pathfinder until finally Pathfinder cornered the market and gained ascendancy.

Enthusiasm for 5e seems far more muted than it did for 4e (about a 15% reduction) but the numbers are looking like about 60-65% plan on at least buying it, only marginally less than with 4e. However, the lack of enthusiasm means its going to have an even higher hurdle than 4e to cross if it seeks to be the reigning, long-term industry leader. I would not be surprised if it didn't lead in sales for a quarter or two, but unless it can garner more enthusiasm it will wane even quicker than 4e (that's my prediction, so take it for what its worth). I think WotC should look very hard at what it needs to do to make people want to play their game above and beyond shiny new rules. Adventure support, consistency in vision for that support and for what they want from their own game, and support for the broader gaming community (cough - OGL - cough) would all be steps in the right direction.

The old poll didn't have a "maybe" category. Split that between a yes and a no equally, and you're getting virtually identical results to 4e levels of interest.

4e sold extremely well at first, and then dropped heavily. Presumably, because enough people didn't like the game.

I predict 5e will sell extremely well at first. And then if it is a good game that those people like, it will continue to do extremely well. And if it is not, because not enough of those people who buy it initially like the game, then it will drop heavily in sales.

But I am seeing no difference at all in the level of interest for 5e, relative to the level of interest there was for 4e. I think the only difference in poll results is the additional vague middle answer. Otherwise, even with lower interest level in EnWorld in general, you're getting roughly the same results as the one from years ago.

 

[Salamandyr]

I will almost certainly buy the new books, and hopefully will even find a group to play it with.

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

I can't speak for Scrivener of Doom, but for me, it's a combination of elements, including:

• The focus on ability scores as the resolution mechanic.
• Magic items being disintegrated from character progression.
• Lighter combat rules
• More robust exploration rules.
• Smaller numbers overall.
• Simpler monsters.
• Proficiencies everywhere!

So, to me, D&DNext feels like they took what they learned from Third and Fourth Editions and remade AD&D.

You know, until now I had not managed to explain what's so great about this playtest to me, and you kind of did it. In the future, it will probably be easier for me to explain why I believe Next will be awesome!

Cheers,

 

[Wicht]

But I am seeing no difference at all in the level of interest for 5e, relative to the level of interest there was for 4e. I think the only difference in poll results is the additional vague middle answer. Otherwise, even with lower interest level in EnWorld in general, you're getting roughly the same results as the one from years ago.

The overall picture is similar, but the two categories showing unequivocal interest (Sight Unseen vs. Absolutely) have a 15% difference. That's a fairly apples to apples comparison in my opinion. But people can make up their own minds.

 

[Mistwell]

The overall picture is similar, but the two categories showing unequivocal interest (Sight Unseen vs. Absolutely) have a 15% difference. That's a fairly apples to apples comparison in my opinion. But people can make up their own minds.

Ah, you're right, there is a difference in the "top two" answers, and I agree it's pretty good comparison language. Fair enough.