D&D 5E Final playtest packet due in mid September.

[Trickster Spirit]

???


I think the main issue is a lot of the "problems" are actually playstyle preferences. So far usually each edition has focused primarily on a certain playstyle preference.

Hands down the thing I love most about Next is it's baked-in ability to support different playstyles. Whether it will be flexible enough or not at release to support OSR, 3.5 / Pathfinder and 4E players all at the same table is one thing - some things have to be decided in favor of one playstyle or another at the table level - but it's already demonstrated that it's capable of emulating any one of them.

Of course, a lot of players won't see the point in a 5E that emulates their edition or clone when they already have their edition or clone. I mean, from the start 5E been a compromise edition. For a while the argument that it would attempt to please everybody and thus please nobody sounded justified, but at this point I can actually see gamers with different preferences sitting down to play it together. Maybe friends with drastically different favorite games have been wanting to play together again, they just can't stand [insert vile, hated edition here], and Next offers them a middle ground. Maybe, just maybe, it'll be easier to get a game started with strangers if it's Next, because edition partisanship has always made that a hassle and now it's less of an issue if you know you can emulate your favorite edition's crunch-tastic tactical character next to another player dirt simple fighter, or vice-versa. Maybe a group will find the system they've been playing satisfies their playstyle, but its rules are too tightly woven to simplify or house rule easily - Next will offer them a lighter fare that can be tweaked to emulate their favorite bits of their old game.

Combine that with a Basic game that's perfect for introducing new gamers to the hobby, and that scales up easily to something crunchy enough for the more die-hard fans, and I'm willing to bet Next will do well and at least attempt it's stated goal of uniting players of disparate editions.

 

[Warbringer]

???
I think the main issue is a lot of the "problems" are actually playstyle preferences. So far usually each edition has focused primarily on a certain playstyle preference.

Those "playstyle issues" are actually "rules" issues encapsulated in the edition.

If Next truly wants to be style agnostic it has to do that from a rule perspective, and honestly, its no where near that, nor in my opinion does it truly intend to. Sure it will support options eventually, but out of the gate, we already see the base rules are taking us in a certain direction.

 

[DMSamuel]

Hands down the thing I love most about Next is it's baked-in ability to support different playstyles. Whether it will be flexible enough or not at release to support OSR, 3.5 / Pathfinder and 4E players all at the same table is one thing - some things have to be decided in favor of one playstyle or another at the table level - but it's already demonstrated that it's capable of emulating any one of them.

Maybe, but if you look at, say, Murder in Baldur's Gate, it states that it can be run with 3.5, 4e, or next. I will tell you unequivocally that ANY adventure CAN be run in any edition, and I have played them all... but this adventure, while it says that it can be played in 4e, doesn't come with ANY supporting items for that edition. Yes, I know stats are available for all three editions, but 4e requires maps and minis/tokens and a very specific style of encounter structure... none of which is provided in that adventure. It would take a ton of work for a 4e DM to run this thing.

If they are shooting for "the edition that allows all editions to be played at the table" they are going to have to support all editions in the adventures - or at least just honestly state that some editions are not compatible with the product.

Honestly, I don't care about edition wars, but when you market a product as usable by any edition, it should be usable by any edition, when it isn't it is disappointing and leads people away from the game. THIS is what is meant when people say that 4e players are being turned away more than players of any other edition.

 

[Lord_Blacksteel]

Hands down the thing I love most about Next is it's baked-in ability to support different playstyles. Whether it will be flexible enough or not at release to support OSR, 3.5 / Pathfinder and 4E players all at the same table is one thing - some things have to be decided in favor of one playstyle or another at the table level - but it's already demonstrated that it's capable of emulating any one of them.

I haven't seen anything like a full-on 4E tactical mode in the playtest material but in general I agree with you.

Of course, a lot of players won't see the point in a 5E that emulates their edition or clone when they already have their edition or clone.

This may be the biggest obstacle it has to overcome - apathy/satisfaction with other rules. If I'm happy with Pathfinder and running and playing in a PF campaign, how much interest will I have in changing over?

It is D&D so I think it's likely to be "big" but will it be as big as say the 3E launch? Hard to say right now.

 

[keterys]

Maybe, but if you look at, say, Murder in Baldur's Gate, it states that it can be run with 3.5, 4e, or next. I will tell you unequivocally that ANY adventure CAN be run in any edition, and I have played them all... but this adventure, while it says that it can be played in 4e, doesn't come with ANY supporting items for that edition. Yes, I know stats are available for all three editions, but 4e requires maps and minis/tokens and a very specific style of encounter structure... none of which is provided in that adventure. It would take a ton of work for a 4e DM to run this thing.

Having run a more freeform city-based 4e campaign, I'll say that it's more flexible than you give it credit. Have a couple good street maps (flipmat, poster map, or just draw them yourself) and you're good to go.

The book actually requires a lot of work no matter the edition. Which is good if you've got the right DM. If you try running it in Next without planning, you're going to hit rest/nova problems, and some similar encounter style setup problems as 4e (not catered enough to your party with phase changes). The campaign _begs_ for the DM to take an aggressive stance on customizing for the players (which can be a feature).

 

[Gundark]

From NewbieDM on Twitter

"Asked WOTC's PR about #dndnext and Lords of Waterdeep ipad pricing..."

""Wizards of the Coast have targeted next year for the launch of #DnDNext and as of right now, there is not a price for the iPad LoW app.""

"So there you go. 2014, for the 40th Ann. Confirmed. #dndnext #dnd"

 

[innerdude]

Honestly, I don't care about edition wars, but when you market a product as usable by any edition, it should be usable by any edition, when it isn't it is disappointing and leads people away from the game. THIS is what is meant when people say that 4e players are being turned away more than players of any other edition.

I'm not so sure that's a bad thing, nor even unexpected. It may potentially hurt the market viability of the final 5e, product, but in terms of satisfying customers, I think WotC has accepted that losing the 4e "die hards" is an inevitable collateral damage. What I mean by that is that 4e is very specifically designed to provide a certain play experience. While that experience can be successfully "drifted," the default "4e mode" is aiming for a very particular kind of FRPG experience, that is frankly unique in the marketplace.

If someone is a huge, huge fan of that experience, I wouldn't expect them in a million years to migrate away from it . . . simply because there's nowhere else to go. Though I personally have zero interest in recreating or participating in the "4e experience," I respect the 4e die hards' desire to do so. If 4e is someone's favorite "brand" of D&D, there's not much else out there that emulates it, whereas for 1e/2e/3e, there's an innumerable host of alternative systems that can provide the same basic "vibe," of which 5e is hoping to become the default "go to" for being that emulator.

If 4e is truly, really, someone's far-and-away favorite edition of D&D, than yes, 5e is probably going to hold little to no interest for them. To me it feels like 5e is designed for someone who likes 4e, but isn't beholden to it, or is more accepting of getting the same general "feel" as 4e without the specifics of 4e's structure. I can see it being very appealing for this kind of 4e player to co-create a "D&D experience" that works for them, while also allowing players looking for a 1e/2e/3e vibe to participate at the same table.

 

[Dannager]

Huh.
That's, well, stupid.


It means the playtest was never actually a playtest but a concept test.

A playtest and a concept test are not separate things in this case. It was both. The fine-tuning of mechanics will occur in internal testing groups that they have more direct contact with. The structure of a public playtest makes it very difficult to collect actionable information on specific mechanics you're concerned about. Their primary goal with the public testing was to get widespread player feedback on what resonated with people as being appropriate for D&D, and what broad mechanics players found compelling. I'm sure they looked at some balance issues, but probably not much in the way of fine details.

Why did you feel it was appropriate to call the move stupid?

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

From NewbieDM on Twitter

"Asked WOTC's PR about #dndnext and Lords of Waterdeep ipad pricing..."

""Wizards of the Coast have targeted next year for the launch of #DnDNext and as of right now, there is not a price for the iPad LoW app.""

"So there you go. 2014, for the 40th Ann. Confirmed. #dndnext #dnd"

2014 is a pretty broad target. 1 Jan? 31 Dec? Somewhere in between?

 

[Rhenny]

From NewbieDM on Twitter

"Asked WOTC's PR about #dndnext and Lords of Waterdeep ipad pricing..."

""Wizards of the Coast have targeted next year for the launch of #DnDNext and as of right now, there is not a price for the iPad LoW app.""

"So there you go. 2014, for the 40th Ann. Confirmed. #dndnext #dnd"

That sounds right to me. In fact, Mearls himself has said that they are not designing D&DNext to stop people from playing editions/games that they like. I've played all editions from basic through 4e, and honestly, I like playing the most supported edition and the edition that is easiest to DM for me. 4e was that edition for a few years. Now, I'm hoping 5e will be that edition (so far I like how the simple core makes it easier for me).