How many people do you know who haven't switched to 5e, and why haven't they?

[MwaO]

To be honest I liked the essentials. IMO the Essentials were an attempt to grab the feel of earlier editions, make simpler characters or ones with minimal options/big fancy powers, in order to ease new people or to appease those who hated the big fat powers. One of the complaints of 4e was "Now every class feels like a wizard" in terms of resource management, selecting options and a lot og effects. Those who wanted very few fiddly bits could've picked up a Slayer or Thief and felt very little difference. Also some of the variants it offered were nice (I liked the Paladin's aura, for instance).

However, the Essentials came way, way too late. Those who had the problem it answered had well and truly left the building and their seats had gathered dust. Had the Essentials came first and the PHB1 classes came second somehow, I think it would've stemmed quite a few issues players had with the classes.

I generally liked Essentials with three big caveats:
They used Essentials as 5e design space with the Expertise/Defense feats instead of just fixing the math by adding +1/2/3 to various things at 5/15/25 as a feat bonus. Because the various feats were so amazingly useful, most PCs had 2-3 of them by 11th. That ended up killing a lot of diversity in builds, simply because +6 to defenses total or +2 to hit is so overwhelmingly good for a single feat.

Most Essentials basic attack users needed a power called "(Insert Class Name)'s Basic Strike", which would count as an MBA and/or RBA depending on class and allow the Essentials' PC to use that power when relevant. That cleans up a lot of issues with poaching other powers. As an example Scout wouldn't use a basic attack with Dual Weapon Attack. It would only work with Scout's Basic Strike. That then fixes hybriding issues, too.

The fact that most books were really about half a book, because they repeated the information contained in the other books. That made it look really half-hearted as opposed to useful.

 

[Bigkahuna]

New guy on the forum.. first post

Interesting discussion reminiscent of a real life discussion I had recently about the same topic. I know a number of groups who switched from 3.5 to Pathfinder and haven't even looked at 4e or 5e and appear to have no interest in it at all. When I asked them why they basically told me that they had collected so many books and knew the system so intimately that switching at this point just seemed like far more of a hassle than it would be worth.

I think that this is perhaps the most convincing and understandable answer I had ever heard and I can honestly say that while I personally think 5e is the best version of D&D ever made, I can understand the appeal of pretty much every version of D&D ever made. They really all brought something to the table and ultimately I think as new versions were released many people simply committed to one or another version mentally and financially so switching from that point is less a matter of what is "better (objectively or subjectively) and really more of a "meh.. I have all these books I'm not switching" kind of a thing.

I think its far more common among role-players (gamers in general) to hold on tightly to the things they know and love, than it is to switch and try something new. Especially since switching and trying something new requires a new expenditure, time commitment (learning how to play etc..) with the caveat that you might end up after trying it (after spending money) not actually liking it as much as you did your old version.

Certainly if you got burned once that way, for example if you loved 3rd edition, bought 4th edition and didn't like it. You might not be so eager to try it again with 5th edition or Pathfinder.. or whatever.

In any case I think its actually kind of a historical problem with D&D because unlike most gaming systems that sort of evolve through an approach of improvement, D&D editions have always been about re-inventing and re-imagining the game. There was this constant push from the owners of the license to "re-create" D&D for a new generation when the reality was that new generations aren't created by supplying them with a new system or even a new product, new generations are created by the old generation of players that introduce them to the game. I have been role-playing since I was 11 (40 now) and in all of those years I have never once met a person who randomly decided to play D&D by buying books off the shelf, gathering a group and just start playing. There is always some history somewhere, some individual that introduces someone to the game and that and it catches on.

Sadly I think role-playing as a whole is suffering a great deal these days from the lack of understanding this unique element of the RPG market. You can't market an RPG game to new potential customers or new generation of gamers, the only route available is to create communities who bring in the next generation of gamers. Something that I think RPG publishers are really failing at right now because rather than expanding social media, digital communication and methods to bring people together they are actually shutting those things down. Its becoming more and more common to see RPG publishers without printed books, without forums, without digital tools for their games. They are sort of assuming these things are going to continue to be created by the general communities, and for a time they will but in the end I think these communities are going to be shrinking because they are becoming more and more fragmented.

In any case, back to the point, I think the reason why there is fewer and fewer people switching to newer systems is because communities aren't growing anymore and they are stagnating as older generation players have already found their favorite systems and so that's what they play. New generation gamers are more to seek out new game systems as they are fresh, inexperienced and more eager to try new things, but sadly there is fewer and fewer new players joining the ranks because communities are becoming so fragmented.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

New guy on the forum.. first post

Welcome to the forum!

Interesting discussion reminiscent of a real life discussion I had recently about the same topic. I know a number of groups who switched from 3.5 to Pathfinder and haven't even looked at 4e or 5e and appear to have no interest in it at all. When I asked them why they basically told me that they had collected so many books and knew the system so intimately that switching at this point just seemed like far more of a hassle than it would be worth.

I think I should start calling this group the "Pathfounders." (Not meant to be derogatory.)

I have been role-playing since I was 11 (40 now) and in all of those years I have never once met a person who randomly decided to play D&D by buying books off the shelf, gathering a group and just start playing.

*Raises hand*

Technically I had watched the cartoon, played the gold box computer games, and played some sort of unofficially "compatible with D&D" sort of choose your own adventure book that involved rolling dice. But as far as getting the actual game, I went searching for it. Found the old classic Red Box at a Toys R Us (I believe; it might have been another giant toy store that looked the same) when I was around the same age as you were when you started. But as far as contact with actual other players? Nope. I'm a self-starter like that.

 

[Greenfield]

My own group is trying 5e now.

I suspect that we won't switch systems though. There's only one of us that seems to like the new rules.

That may change, but right now it's 5e itself that's keeping us from switching.

 

[Psikerlord#]

Welcome to the forum!



I think I should start calling this group the "Pathfounders." (Not meant to be derogatory.)



*Raises hand*

Technically I had watched the cartoon, played the gold box computer games, and played some sort of unofficially "compatible with D&D" sort of choose your own adventure book that involved rolling dice. But as far as getting the actual game, I went searching for it. Found the old classic Red Box at a Toys R Us (I believe; it might have been another giant toy store that looked the same) when I was around the same age as you were when you started. But as far as contact with actual other players? Nope. I'm a self-starter like that.

I was introduced to dnd red box by my mate at about 12 yrs old, he got his red box from his dad, who bought it for his birthday. Prior to that point, we had both enjoyed Fighting Fantasy game books and Choose your own adventure books (since about 8 or 9 years old, I think?).

The best thing that came out of 5e for me is that I went looking into the history of the game for more options.... and discovered the simple joy of OSR and 1e.

 

[NotZenon]

I own all the editions, as well as a few OGL variants (trailblazer, pathfinder, castles and crusades, etc...)

I like all the editions, and i think 5th is probably my personal favourite, base on what i've read, but right now our whole group is playing 2nd ed. The main reason is the people i am playing with have the 2nd edition books and have the best system mastery of that system. They don't really want to learn a new system or buy new books. For me its been a bit of a challenge to DM it just in the sense that i keep confusing different rules from the different editions. But it has been alot of fun to play with the old rules.

 

[Mepher]

My group decided to try 5E this summer. They played with a different DM and played through LMoP. I didn't play. This October I moved into my new house and resumed our normal gaming group every Sunday. Because they had been playing 5E I decided to give it a go. We played through about half of Horde of the Dragon Queen. Honestly I hated every week. I didn't look forward to running the game anymore. Something about 5E just doesn't feel like D&D to me. We took 3 weeks off gaming due to the holidays and told my players after the last session that I wasn't interested in running 5E anymore. I am picking up our 2E campaign that we left off with back in the spring, before they tried 5E.

I really did want to like it. I bought the 3 core books, all of the spell cards, Horde of the Dragon Queen, a couple 5E adventures, and even the Tome of Beasts Kickstarter. The problem I had was just the feel of it to me. I really don't understand how people can say it feels "old school" to them. I know its all about how you run it but nothing about the mechanics give the old school feel. To me D&D was challenging. Casters had to manage their spells, parties had to explore with caution because healing was limited. Backstabs were the exception, not the norm. It just feels like 5E is the Monty Haul version of D&D. Every player can do everything all the time. Healing is trivial and with the buffed numbers challenge seems to go out the window after the first couple levels. Yes, I know as a DM I can change all of that or I can house rule the game more to my liking but what's the point? I don't like 5E's abundance of healing. I don't like that class specific skills are minimized and anyone can do anything. I hate cantrips and the fact that casters can just autofire firebolts every round. Heck, in my games resources were important including light sources. In my 5E game they are just popping light cantrips left and right to nullify any ill effects of darkness. It just makes too much work for the DM when the players now seem to have an answer for everything. With all the work I would need to do to make the game more like my beloved 2E, I might as well just play 2E. The funniest part is that after my stint with 5E and my past weeks preparation for our 2E game this weekend, I even found myself reading my Moldvay Basic and 1E books again. 5E really made me appreciate it's roots that much more. I know I am probably the exception rather than the rule these days, but it just wasn't for me.

My players were given the choice of someone else taking over the 5E reigns or switching back to 2E with me DMing. They chose 2E. Don't know if that is a reflection on the system or my Dming style but either way, 5E wasn't the overwhelming hit we had all hope for in my group.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

My group decided to try 5E this summer. They played with a different DM and played through LMoP. I didn't play. This October I moved into my new house and resumed our normal gaming group every Sunday. Because they had been playing 5E I decided to give it a go. We played through about half of Horde of the Dragon Queen. Honestly I hated every week. I didn't look forward to running the game anymore. Something about 5E just doesn't feel like D&D to me. We took 3 weeks off gaming due to the holidays and told my players after the last session that I wasn't interested in running 5E anymore. I am picking up our 2E campaign that we left off with back in the spring, before they tried 5E.

I really did want to like it. I bought the 3 core books, all of the spell cards, Horde of the Dragon Queen, a couple 5E adventures, and even the Tome of Beasts Kickstarter. The problem I had was just the feel of it to me. I really don't understand how people can say it feels "old school" to them. I know its all about how you run it but nothing about the mechanics give the old school feel. To me D&D was challenging. Casters had to manage their spells, parties had to explore with caution because healing was limited. Backstabs were the exception, not the norm. It just feels like 5E is the Monty Haul version of D&D. Every player can do everything all the time. Healing is trivial and with the buffed numbers challenge seems to go out the window after the first couple levels. Yes, I know as a DM I can change all of that or I can house rule the game more to my liking but what's the point? I don't like 5E's abundance of healing. I don't like that class specific skills are minimized and anyone can do anything. I hate cantrips and the fact that casters can just autofire firebolts every round. Heck, in my games resources were important including light sources. In my 5E game they are just popping light cantrips left and right to nullify any ill effects of darkness. It just makes too much work for the DM when the players now seem to have an answer for everything. With all the work I would need to do to make the game more like my beloved 2E, I might as well just play 2E. The funniest part is that after my stint with 5E and my past weeks preparation for our 2E game this weekend, I even found myself reading my Moldvay Basic and 1E books again. 5E really made me appreciate it's roots that much more. I know I am probably the exception rather than the rule these days, but it just wasn't for me.

My players were given the choice of someone else taking over the 5E reigns or switching back to 2E with me DMing. They chose 2E. Don't know if that is a reflection on the system or my Dming style but either way, 5E wasn't the overwhelming hit we had all hope for in my group.

Thanks for adding a different perspective!

I will say that one of the most difficult things for me in running my beloved 5e is keeping the balance of party power vs. believable challenges interacting properly.

5e characters are powerful compared to most editions of the game. Sure, at 1st (and maybe at 2nd) level they are pretty squishy. But 3rd level feels like 5th level from 1e-3e as far as power level.

And most of the monsters--even classic ones that used to be scary challenges (including many undead) are now low CR creatures. Solo fights don't really work, so that means you need minions for your opponents. The difficult part is when minions don't make sense.

Take, say, the banshee. In 3e their CR was 17. I don't recall how strong they were in AD&D, but based on my recollection of other undead, I'm guessing they were pretty tough customers.

In 5e their CR is 4. That means a party of 4th-level characters should have no problem with them. A party of 3rd-level characters can probably also take them out, and a party of 2nd-level characters might even be able to pull it off with some losses.

So how am I supposed to use a banshee as a higher level threat? Either I can artificially inflate stats (which I hate), I can give her class levels (better, but I don't like it being a required modfication), add some minions that might even be more powerful than she is, and/or make it so that the actual confrontation with the banshee isn't the hard part--it's finding her and getting to that confrontation in the first place.

Now sure, this sort of thing isn't a problem if you don't mind being absurd and throwing a half dozen banshees instead of one at your mid to high level party--and my guess is that some DMs run their campaigns exactly like that. But for me, the world has to make sense. Rare sounding creatures are rare. Creatures that tend to be unique individuals rather than parts of groups generally are so.

I'm just not into the idea of using methods that strain suspension of disbelief to increase the challenges as the party advances. I prefer adventures that simply deal with more powerful foes in the way that makes sense for those foes. Since 5e downgraded the power level of so many foes (though granted, the stats make a lot of sense for many of them--and that is something I find to be a good thing), it makes it require a lot more creativity as a DM to give play-style satisfying challenges to higher level parties.

It still ends up that I like 5e the best, and am willing to creatively deal with that issue rather than the issues of the other editions.

As an aside, it doesn't sound like 5e is working for you, but for others who might like it but have problems with too much healing (I know I do), I'd recommend using both the Healer's Kit Dependency and Slow Natural Healing variants from the DMG. That generally means that a character who has used up all their health resources (including hit points and HD) will take 5 to 7 days to fully recover without magical healing. I'd also recommend changing the fighter's Second Wind to temporary hit points, and not let them activate it until they are at or below half hit points (since Second Wind is fine when everyone regains all hit points each morning, but is absurd when everyone else takes a week to recover). You might want to disallow or nerf the Healer feat also. Those rules should get you down to 3e non-magical healing levels or slightly less, which I find acceptable.

 

[Mepher]

Thanks for adding a different perspective!

I will say that one of the most difficult things for me in running my beloved 5e is keeping the balance of party power vs. believable challenges interacting properly.

5e characters are powerful compared to most editions of the game. Sure, at 1st (and maybe at 2nd) level they are pretty squishy. But 3rd level feels like 5th level from 1e-3e as far as power level.

And most of the monsters--even classic ones that used to be scary challenges (including many undead) are now low CR creatures. Solo fights don't really work, so that means you need minions for your opponents. The difficult part is when minions don't make sense.

Take, say, the banshee. In 3e their CR was 17. I don't recall how strong they were in AD&D, but based on my recollection of other undead, I'm guessing they were pretty tough customers.

In 5e their CR is 4. That means a party of 4th-level characters should have no problem with them. A party of 3rd-level characters can probably also take them out, and a party of 2nd-level characters might even be able to pull it off with some losses.

So how am I supposed to use a banshee as a higher level threat? Either I can artificially inflate stats (which I hate), I can give her class levels (better, but I don't like it being a required modfication), add some minions that might even be more powerful than she is, and/or make it so that the actual confrontation with the banshee isn't the hard part--it's finding her and getting to that confrontation in the first place.

Now sure, this sort of thing isn't a problem if you don't mind being absurd and throwing a half dozen banshees instead of one at your mid to high level party--and my guess is that some DMs run their campaigns exactly like that. But for me, the world has to make sense. Rare sounding creatures are rare. Creatures that tend to be unique individuals rather than parts of groups generally are so.

I'm just not into the idea of using methods that strain suspension of disbelief to increase the challenges as the party advances. I prefer adventures that simply deal with more powerful foes in the way that makes sense for those foes. Since 5e downgraded the power level of so many foes (though granted, the stats make a lot of sense for many of them--and that is something I find to be a good thing), it makes it require a lot more creativity as a DM to give play-style satisfying challenges to higher level parties.

It still ends up that I like 5e the best, and am willing to creatively deal with that issue rather than the issues of the other editions.

As an aside, it doesn't sound like 5e is working for you, but for others who might like it but have problems with too much healing (I know I do), I'd recommend using both the Healer's Kit Dependency and Slow Natural Healing variants from the DMG. That generally means that a character who has used up all their health resources (including hit points and HD) will take 5 to 7 days to fully recover without magical healing. I'd also recommend changing the fighter's Second Wind to temporary hit points, and not let them activate it until they are at or below half hit points (since Second Wind is fine when everyone regains all hit points each morning, but is absurd when everyone else takes a week to recover). You might want to disallow or nerf the Healer feat also. Those rules should get you down to 3e non-magical healing levels or slightly less, which I find acceptable.

I like your healing suggestions and I may try them out in the future. I DO like what they wanted to do with 5E but I really hate the implementation. I agree with you about the monsters in 5E and it was some of what I don't like about it. They took the approach that with bounded accuracy you can just throw more creatures at them and still affect a higher level party. I have seen people use monsters like kobolds as an example but to me it ruins the "feel" of the game to me. Sure with the new rules you can throw a large group of kobolds at my level 10 fighter, overwhelm me, score hits and whittle my hit points down, but you basically just made my fighter into a pansy. Nobody plays this game because they want to be high level kobold slayers. They want to tell those stories about that time they ran into that banshee or that hill giant.....and lived. Not the time they ran into those 12 banshees that killed them through attrition.

You are right, 5E doesn't work for me right now. I may give it another try again in the future. Of course when I sit down and start house ruling it, I might decide its just easier to stick with my beloved 1E/2E =)

 

[Nibelung]

Take, say, the banshee. In 3e their CR was 17. I don't recall how strong they were in AD&D, but based on my recollection of other undead, I'm guessing they were pretty tough customers.

In 5e their CR is 4. That means a party of 4th-level characters should have no problem with them.

That is not exactly how CR works on 5e. This is 3e logic, but not 5e. 5e is based on XP budgets, with some extra multipliers added if you have more than one monster in the encounter, but the multiplier is for difficulty only, not for reward.

...or something like that. I didn't read the 5e DMG. The point is that just because a monster is CR 4 do not mean it is a balanced encounter by itself against a level 4 group.