D&D 5E How are people currently feeling about 5e?

[Consonant Dude]

I'm trying to keep an open mind but my enthusiasm is waning.


1. I'm not a fan of this particular design team. I figure they could always surprise me but not very hopeful.

2. I think there is a lack of vision and leadership at WotC. It's at the management level. It impacts consistency. DnD Next will be the 5th version of the game in 13 years (yes. 3.5 and Essentials are versions of the game) and that's way too much. There has been a revolving door as far as staff is concerned, the direction the game takes keeps on changing.

3. I love it when they talk about simplifying the game. Then I am constantly reminded in previews and designer interviews that their views on what "streamlined" and "simple" means are weird to say the least.

4. It seems the company insists on not understanding that roleplaying's main selling point is that they are games of imaginations, not strategy games, not tactical games, not accounting games. By and large, people are attracted to roleplaying to throw a few dice and pretend to be elves and wizards.

5. Even at its peak, WotC has always dropped the ball when it comes to supporting and enhancing the roleplaying game experience using new technologies (computers, the internet, etc...). I have given up in that respect.

6. Most of what I have read in previews like L&L is hollow. The polls, the articles, everything suggests to me that they have no idea what kind of games they want to design, much less what kind of game D&D deserves.

7. The goal of distilling D&D's essence across all versions into one new edition is destined to fail, if only because as is amply demonstrated on ENWorld and everywhere else, it doesn't look like anybody can agree on what is the essence of D&D, what should be the sacred cows and what should happily be scrapped.

 

[Fifth Element]

6. Most of what I have read in previews like L&L is hollow. The polls, the articles, everything suggests to me that they have no idea what kind of games they want to design, much less what kind of game D&D deserves.

They can't seem to win with this one. The 4E design team didn't consult with fans to find out what kind of game was wanted, they just shoved the kind of game they wanted to design down our throats. The 5E design team seems to be consulting with fans, and this shows they don't have a clear vision of what the game should be.

 

[Mallus]

It seems the company insists on not understanding that roleplaying's main selling point is that they are games of imaginations, not strategy games, not tactical games, not accounting games. By and large, people are attracted to roleplaying to throw a few dice and pretend to be elves and wizards.

This doesn't jive with the success of Pathfinder. There's a lot of "tactical accounting" required by that system, especially after the PCs acquire a few levels (says the guy playing a 12th level Wind Oracle).

Which isn't to say Pathfinder is not, primarily, a game of imagination.

 

[Stormonu]

I'm trying to remain optimistic. However, I haven't really been impressed with the articles they put out - I feel like they keep missing the underlying issues, and really dislike the polls they've been presenting.

I do applaud them for trying to reach out across the entire community and keep them engaged. I really hope they are listening to us, and taking notes - one way or the other. I'm somewhat fearful its a marketing facade to generate hype, only to put a new face on 4E and sell it to the older edition crowd. But I hope I'm wrong because that would be just silly - a short read of the rules would easily uncover that and a lot of (angry) people would just return to their old editions with even more animosity towards WotC.

I WANT to buy Official D&D products I'll enjoy. I'd love to see WotC rebuild relationships with gamers as well as Paizo, Goodman, Necromancer, Green Ronin and the others, giving us another Golden Age of D&D. Can they do it? Will they do it? I'm hoping so, and rooting for them TO do it.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

I'm cautiously optimistic that 5E will be a game that I buy and then enjoy running for my group. And for me, that's enough.

I think the idea of uniting the fan base is going to experience a slow, painful death of contact with reality. Over the breadth of "D&D Fans," familiarity seems to breed contempt. That is, even an edition that somehow manages to get us all to play is not going to unify us.

 

[Doug McCrae]

I'm feeling 100% positive about D&DNext/5E. The modular aspect seems like both a new approach and a way to keep everyone - fans of 4e, 3e, and old school - happy.

It's a pity Monte left though, he's a big name.

 

[fjw70]

I am very optimistic about 5e. I like all editions of D&D but none of them are perfect for me. So a Best of D&D edition is very appealing to me.

 

[Gadget]

The business model and design philosophies are large parts of the game itself.

What you do when designing the game, and how I have to get that game are big parts of how I'm going to feel about that game.

I'm not saying "Hey guys. Without Monte Cook I have no interest in this!" or "I dont buy things Mike Mearls writes", or anything like that. However, Monte was around before 4e, and Mearls was the main guy responsible for 4e, which I didnt like much of the game design of, and didnt have alot of fun playing. I kindof got the feeling that Mearls maybe understood some of what was bad in 4e, Cook understood what was bad in 3.x, and they might make something good together.

Now I have less confidence in the game design, but am remaining cautiously optimistic about it. I am however, a bit less optimistic about their business model, which I hope becomes more appealing.

Just a correction: Mike Mearls was by no means the "main guy responsible" for 4e. He was hired by WOTC some way into its development and was not a senior/Lead designer/developer by any stretch. I keep hearing this repeated by various folks and am baffled by were it comes from. Is it because he is a relatively well know person that works at WOTC and is active in the online RPG community? It may be safe to say that he was instrumental in 'Essentials' as he was promoted to lead designer/developer around then, but by then the 4e die had already been cast. He was made Head of D&D R&D last year after Bill left, so it will probably be safe to say that he is the 'main guy' behind 5e, as he is setting the design goals, but even then I don't know that he will be writing or developing a lot of the stuff himself, though his influence will surely be felt.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

They(the 5E design team) started off with a strong "we're sorry for 4E vibe" and pandering to those with a grudge against the most recent edition, but that tone has softened considerably over time though still present at times. They've also shown some signs of listening to concerns raised by the 4E community, which is reassuring. They have also demonstrated a lack of understanding about what the 4E community wants out of D&D, particularly Monte, but he's gone now and they at least seem to be listening.

Also reassuring are glimses of modern design, if you read closely into what they are saying. It seems more like a new beginning than a return to AD&D or 3E.

I was of the opinion that Monte Cook was a negative influence on the design of 5E, and am relieved at his departure.

My biggest concern remains that they've bitten off more than they can chew, either resulting in a watered down game that appeals to nobody, a clunky frankenstein's monster of mismatched parts, or have underestimated the immaturity and hatred amongst the wider D&D community.

 

[ArmoredSaint]

I've liked everything I've read about it so far, and am extremely optimistic at this point.

This will paint me as a shallow individual, but for me, the "make or break" factor will be the armour choices and how effective heavy armour is represented as being in the game.