I can't keep doing it

[Matt James]

Who actually viewed 3.5 as a whole new system anyways?

I did, and still do. I know many of the designers that worked on it feel the same way as well.

In short, the one day I showed up to play in a long campaign with my 3.0 books, and the DM said they moved on to something new, was the day I consider that edition to have ended.

 

[Dragonhelm]

I can't keep giving them money if they're going to keep doing this every few years.
I'm finished.

When I first heard the 5e announcement, I felt the same way. Hell, I was willing to give up on 4e and go old-school or Pathfinder.

But then, I started reading about how 5e would be an open playtest, and how it would be “D&D’s greatest hits.” I am hoping that this will be the edition I’ve wanted to play for quite some time now.

My hope, too, is that this one is here to stay.

So we’ll see. I’m giving it a chance.

 

[Elf Witch]

I can't keep giving them money if they're going to keep doing this every few years.
I'm finished.

Part of me feels this way. For me I am tired of the tweaking looking back I was perfectly happy with 2E I switched to 3E because my group switched the same with 3.5. I stopped there. Part of the reason was I disliked a lot of what they did but another part was I didn't want to learn a new system.

I kind of feel that way now I have got handle on how to best use the 3E system and I am not sure that I want to take the time to learn a new one.

 

[hanez]

I did, and still do. I know many of the designers that worked on it feel the same way as well.

In short, the one day I showed up to play in a long campaign with my 3.0 books, and the DM said they moved on to something new, was the day I consider that edition to have ended.

That makes a lot of sense, you were in effect forced to buy new books. But the difference is that it was entirely possible to play a 3.0 AND 3.5 system simultaneously, it was done a lot, somewhat encouraged and not some wacko rare thing. The same is not true for 3.5 and 4, it wasn't easy to insert a 3.5 class into 4e, so comparing the two as edition changes is not really the same thing. One was more optional, and if you want to include optional resources you could argue that the essentials line was a new edition as well.

(also you could have downloaded the page or two of changes for your character and not buy anything, there were a couple changes per class, some skills etc) but not requiring a whole book... but still I sympathise, I know DMs who forced people to buy new books then too.

Still I totally support WOTC in 5e, I just dont see 3.5 (or essentials, or 2e combats and tactics) as a new line in its own right.

 

[Aberzanzorax]

I can use my 3e, 3.5, and Pathfinder books together pretty easily. I switched to Pathfinder because of this (I have a TON of old books and want new books I buy to be usable with them).

If 5e allows me to use my 3e books easily (or 4e books if I want to play that style of D&D instead) then it will be wonderful, and I'll be buying it (and maybe FINALLY running Ptolus).



4e was a new edition, and was significantly different from 3e because the 3e market was saturated, somewhat done, and to make money they needed a reboot.

I don't think this is the same reasoning with 5e. I think they're trying to expand their market rather than simply change things up enough that people will buy all new versions of their old books (including Dark Sun, the cores, the splats, etc).


To the OP: you might want to wait and see. If they really do a great job making 5e as inclusive as they seem to be attempting, you might be able to use your old books with it as well.

 

[nnms]

Also, the release of "D&D Next" is not imminent. I think the earliest it could plausibly be released is Gencon 2013. But 2014 is likely as well.

It's not happening today.

 

[foolish_mortals]

I agree completely. One of the reasons I haven't bought Pathfinder yet is because of the endless incompatible edition experience I've had with dnd. It's like another edition of dnd and who knows what will happen with version 2 or 3 or 4? That's why other games are getting my money these days.

foolish_mortals

 

[Mark CMG]

I understand the OP's point regarding the edition cycle/treadmill. It thins the player pool. I get my (O)D&D and 1E D&D fix each year at Gary Con but it would be more difficult to find regular players with each pasing year and each new edition.

 

[Dice4Hire]

I can't keep giving them money if they're going to keep doing this every few years.
I'm finished.

I can actually only really feel sympathy if someone on DDI, who bought no or few 4E books, has this feeling. Then it hurts. Stop paying the monthly charge and lose access to it all (sans downloaded pdfs)? Now that is a hard choice.

But if you bought the books, not problem, keep playing.

But even if you buy new books every 5+ years, this is still a massively cheap hobby.

 

[jimmifett]

I did, and still do. I know many of the designers that worked on it feel the same way as well.

In short, the one day I showed up to play in a long campaign with my 3.0 books, and the DM said they moved on to something new, was the day I consider that edition to have ended.

My first game of DnD, I showed up with the 3.5 books when the table was still 3.0. The little things confused me some.