D&D 5E How Can D&D Next Win You Over?

[Harlock]

I ask not to start an edition war. Hopefully everyone can just let people express their opinions and leave it at that, recognizing people do have different opinions and goals, no matter how unrealistic they may seem to you.

For me, I am currently converting my game to Castles and Crusades. The Edition merry-go-round is too much for me anymore. For me to pick up D&D Next it has to be simple: easy to learn and teach. It cannot just emulate B/X or 2nd Edition. It has to be better than those because I already have those. I would need a published commitment from WotC that they are sticking with D&D Next for a decade, at least. I want more fluff and inspirational materials than I do "crunch". I want settings that read like novellas with a rich history into which I can tap. I feel too old to keep converting to and learning new systems.

In that regard, D&D Next is really going to have to come through on the promise of modular expansion. I don't need another rules set in 6 years. If changes are to be made to the game, I want those to be implemented through modules. D&D Next will have to come through on its implied promise of respecting and acknowledging its past as well as building its future. Yes, that is a lot to ask of any system. Yes, I know I am probably setting myself up for heartache. But, the game can still get some or most of this right for me to at least try it.

So, what about you? What vain ambitions do you desire out of D&D Next? What promises does WotC have to deliver on? Can you be won over, and how?

 

[Jester David]

I want flexibility and to play the game I want. I want to be able to make the game fit the adventure I want to run, not change the adventure I want to run to accommodate the quirks of the system.

For example, I changed how I wrote adventures for 4th Edition. I stopped doing investigative modules or overland travel adventures because of how potent the PCs were if they fought just one creature in a day.
I had to frequently stop and wonder "how am I going to add 3-5 treasure parcels to this adventure?" or "how can I add monsters to this fight for the appropriate amount of xp?"

As a second example, my forthcoming game (starting in two weeks) is a Pathfinder game. The PCs use NPC classes only and the basic stat array (13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8). Because the game is set in Ravenloft and I want them to be afraid: I don't want them to think like heroes or assume they have the advantage and charge into combat.
I'm further customizing the game with Armour as DR rules and wound/vitality from Ultimate Combat as well as a modification of the Defence system from Unearthed Arcana and d20 Modern.

While I expect 5e to come out of the gate with a very simple version of the rules, and expansions that let you tweak the game into something closer to 3e and 4e, I hope they'll have even more customization after.
Where I can play something like my Ravenloft game. Or just as easily play a 1e mod just updating the monster statblocks and DCs and not rebuilding every encounter. Or let me play Rise of the Runelords just doing the same.

That's how they can win me over.

 

[Frostmarrow]

Earlier, both Warhammer and D&D seemed to scoop ladels full of saga from the old cauldron on to my plate. Where Warhammer kept doing it and adding spice to the old recipes D&D tried very hard to cook up original stories or by mixing old tales that wouldn't amalgamate well. Where Warhammer kept a bookmark in the Grimm brother's books and the legends of Egypt D&D begun internalizing the blander movies of Hollywood and the poorest excuses of inhouse authors' unpublished manuscripts. To me D&D took the wrong turn. Originality is good in science fiction. In fantasy it's better to stick to the sources. The best way to win me over is to go back to what actually works story-wise, distilled by generations of storytelling and leave the murdering robots, beatific horned demons, and the double-is-better logic where it belongs. In direct to DvD.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Make it modular enough to use with my current edition of the game, but with enough new temptations to make me want to try it straight out of the box.

 

[n00bdragon]

They'd have to come out and tell us the whole thing was really a huge overdone April Fool's Joke and then show me the actual game.

 

[Harlock]

They'd have to come out and tell us the whole thing was really a huge overdone April Fool's Joke and then show me the actual game.

Mind being a bit more constructive? I don't know exactly what you mean with this statement. Are you saying you hope 4e still remains a relevant choice and playstyle with the new edition? Or that the playtest doesn't offer anything you'd like to play. If it's the later, what would the playtest need to become to get you interested?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

No concrete answers from me:

It has to feel like D&D.

It has to be flexible enough to support a wide variety of playstyles.

It has to be well-thought out on a crunch AND fluff level.

No sacrificing of sacred cows- or resurrecting them- without damn good reasons.

 

[DaveMage]

I doubt it will win me over, but the only way I would even consider looking at it is if I could use my 1E, 2E, 3.xE, and Pathfinder adventure materials with it with very easy/minimal conversion.

(How's that for an impossible task?)

 

[Ahnehnois]

If it let me build every character I could think of from a D&D context, and adjudicate every situation that's likely to come up, but do so more simply and with easier customization than 3.5, I'd consider it.

 

[pauljathome]

One of two ways

1) Be so successful that I have no choice but to play it if I want to play with new groups
2) Provide me something better for me and my groups than the current alternatives. Where better is, of course, as defined by me and my groups.

As the following probably shows, I'm not optimistic that it will succeed in winning me over. I haven't yet made up my mind though.

I don't really care about modularity. I don't really care if it unifies the base. I most certainly don't want to have to select 14 different options in order to turn it into a game that is only then about as good as what I am currently playing. I care about how well it satisfies MY goals and needs in a well tested and comprehensive manner.

I can't really say what the above amounts to. I can tell you that it is NOT :

1st edition feel (been there, done that, moved on)
Untested rule modules
20th level characters challenged by orcs
characters not gaining appreciably in non combat ways as they level up
insanely unbalanced characters
insanely balanced characters (tradeoffs are good)
boring and deadly combats