Is this WotC's pipe dream?

[dagger]

I am a RC/1e/2e player and I would NOT change to Next

I am a 3.x/PF player and I would NOT change to Next

 

[Mengu]

I'm a skeptical snowflake . I play 4e, and other non-D&D things. I *may* add 5e to the list of things I play, if I like it. Will it eventually replace 4e? I don't know, maybe, maybe not, too early to tell.

 

[Tehnai]

I'll buy in, that's for sure. And probably change it as my main DnD edition, at least for the first year after it's release. It was my experience with 4E, I doubt it'll be different, at least at first.

The real test, for me, will come about 6 to 12 months in, when I will either become bored by the system, or stick with it. I know myself as having a notoriously short attention span. If this game can keep my focus better than 4E did (for about 8 months), it may just replace the host few retro-clones I use as my go-to systems for fantasy.

 

[Ranganathan]

Where do you feel the current playtest rules are on that scale? Or have you not had a chance to play them yet?

With the exceptions of higher starting hit points and at-will spells for casters, this basically is AD&D with an updated core. Admittedly a very stripped down core, but it's there. I think themes and backgrounds will go a long way to bring in the versatility and customization of 3E (which is good) while making how players interact with those customization points much easier (if the players wants to just take a package, again, this is good). There's quite a bit that 4E got right, I think, namely monster design, interesting powers for everyone, more healers than just the cleric, and encounter based resources (powers, healing, self-healing, etc). But there's also a few things it got wrong such as the mandatory grid, condition swapping, feat taxes, Christmas tree based math, inflated numbers, and absurdly long combat. Just to name a few.

All that said, I also want a lot more emphasis on exploration and interaction. I'm one of those guys who wants to see rules for those bits that are just as weighty, or just as interesting, as the combat rules. In the core or as optional modules, I don't care. I just want that style of play supported for a change. If WotC can pull it off, it will be great for everyone. We can all play D&D in our own ways and they can make money off a wider range of gamers. Win-win.

 

[KesselZero]

I play 4e pretty much exclusively because that's what my group plays (with a handful of PF players as well). Speaking personally I'm ready for a change from 4e; it doesn't support the style of game I want very well, and the long combats are wearing on me quite a bit. I intend to switch to 5e as soon as possible-- maybe even when the first chargen/adventure prep playtest materials come out-- because I had an awesome time playing the playtest, and I believe it will much better support my style of play. I've thought about reverting to an older system but I don't think I could drum up enough interest in my extended group; they tend towards playing whatever is currently supported.

 

[Obryn]

I guess I'm a sparkly snowflake. I don't choose a rule-set and then dig in against all change forevermore... If a game is fun I will probably end up playing it.

Oh, me either - but I only get to run one game a week. That's all I mean about "change" - it's a question of play time.

I love playing a lot of games, and in fact think it's important to "get around a bit" so to say. But when it comes down to it, most people (including me) end up devoting most of their time to one or two games, though. So, I consider myself a 4e player. It is far from the only game I like or enjoy.

-O

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Lemon curry.

It's too soon to tell, frankly.

 

[Blue]

Why must "ditch your current games and switch" or "never touch it" be the only options? I'm happily running 3.5 and playing in several 4e games. 5e will probably get a spot, it looks interesting.

More game systems is like more tools. Find the one for the job at hand / the campaign you want to run.

 

[Obryn]

Why must "ditch your current games and switch" or "never touch it" be the only options?

This gives me a sadface.

.-( <--see?)

(1) This is a poll, so the answers are necessarily broad.
(2) I agree 100% re: systems being tools. I've often said the same myself; a game system isn't a life choice like having kids or switching jobs. But assuming you don't have the capacity to run every single game you want to - due to time, group availability, family, work, and financial concerns - the question is, "Will this replace one of the other games in your normal rotation?" In other words, will you "switch."

So for me, I run 4e right now once per week. I was running a 1e game on weekends, but when my toddler was born, that had to go the way of the dodo. So - do I switch my regular game to 5e or keep with 4e? That's the sort of thing I'm asking.

That's all. If you don't like the broad wording, either don't vote or go with "special snowflake." But these options are necessarily not comprehensive, and nobody is implying you should throw out your (1e/2e/3e/4e) books.

-O

 

[Quantarum]

I'm not very impressed with what I've seen so far, but it seems to be very much in flux to me. I'm sticking with PF for the foreseeable future; but anything is possible. -Q.