How Important is OBQ in an RPG like D&D?

[chitzk0i]

"1," says I. We're talking about a tabletop role-playing game, not the latest computer game. Real D&D players don't need everything handed to them on a silver platter; they can insist on doing it themselves.

"Real D&D players"? There is no One True Way. Other people's playstyles are just as valid and no less "real".

As for the poll, I voted '4'. There's already a game that I have fun playing. If D&D Next requires rule re-writing, or module swapping, or a drastic social contract to be fun, then I'm not interested.

 

[Dausuul]

I picked #4. I recognize that a new system will always have issues, but I've had more than my fill of RPGs with broken mechanics. 5E needs to exceed the standard set by 4E, which means vastly outdoing pretty much all other RPGs.

 

[Vegepygmy]

"Real D&D players"? There is no One True Way. Other people's playstyles are just as valid and no less "real".

That was tongue-in-cheek. I know it's a toneless medium and all, but c'mon.

 

[Hassassin]

Out of the box quality is the only quality that matters to me. On the other hand I don't mind an occasional "broken" thing, if I can just rule it away.

 

[Henry]

Out of Box playability is pretty important to me, but I am surprised when some things can be successes despite bring "broken." Look at 1st edition AD&D; A game loved by literally MILLIONS, yet the combat system actually detailed in it contains a crucial bug concerning initiative rolling for swords vs. spells in a combat, that can't be played as written. Everyone just used another version of D&D's basic combat rules, or house-ruled it their own way, and life went on as normal.

That said, I don't want any big gaping glaring holes in 5E, or ANY game I buy, for that matter, just like I wouldn't buy an obviously broken appliance. I'll live with small bugs and fix those just fine.

 

[boredgremlin]

I'll probably houserule whatever they do anyway but I would rather not HAVE TO in order to play. So its important to have a high quality right away.

 

[Aenghus]

Given regrettably low proofreading standards, and the immense difficulty of getting fiddly mechanics exactly right the first time round, I don't expect any system ever produced to be flawless.

I want it to be useable out of the box.

I actually value a constant stream of meaningful errata, errata doesn't annoy me, it means the designers care about getting things right. The percentage of errata compared to the thousands of pages of 4e material published is still pretty low, and the amount affecting PCs directly tends to be small.

 

[Hassassin]

BTW, how about errata and a second printing?

I wouldn't want to have two PHBs in the same table that say different things about rules. That's why Errata=spelling fixes only is best, IMO.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Vital.

This isn't software; we're not here to do your debugging for you. Playtest it until it's right, then release it.

 

[Invisible Stalker]

I expect #5, but I'm resigned to #4.