People have the strangest deal-breakers

[Ichneumon]

If I open the DDN Players Handbook and find the text for the FATAL RPG inside, that's a deal breaker.

Otherwise, I fully intend to get the new version. Seeing that Vancian casting was back has been my biggest "ahem" moment so far. Though they have proposals to remove the two sucky ends of that system, via spending feats on at-will spells and trading in lower-level spells for high level ones. Which is good.

However, I do want to be able to easily adapt my 4e adventure material to run in the new version. Without this, I won't break the deal, but will be black and white, melancholy, and munch on bamboo.

 

[Hassassin]

The closest to a deal breaker I can think of is if they print the PHB in comic sans.

 

[SensoryThought]

The closest to a deal breaker I can think of is if they print the PHB in comic sans.

Comment win.

 

[Sammael]

I bought the 3 4E core rulebooks (and I already knew at the time that I had no interest in 4E), so there is no way that I am going to skip buying the 5E core rulebooks.

Whether or not I decide to drop my Fatebinder system in favor of 5E is a different matter altogether.

 

[Aldarc]

My only real deal-breaker, Monte, is a game with Angel Summoners patronizingly calling BMX Bandits "equal" partners.

 

[Blacky the Blackball]

For me, the biggest dealbreaker would be if it tries to tie me in to a supplement train or - worse - a DDI-style online subscription.

I want to be able to buy the three core books and have a complete and playable game.

From what we've heard so far I'm reasonably confident.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

If I open the DDN Players Handbook and find the text for the FATAL RPG inside, that's a deal breaker.

heh.

I think that would be an unspoken deal breaker for just about everyone. No need to call it out, it is assumed.

 

[SensoryThought]

For me, the biggest dealbreaker would be if it tries to tie me in to a supplement train or - worse - a DDI-style online subscription.

I like the online DDI tools and lack of online support would be a major hurdle for me to implement 5e.

I agree they shouldn't be mandatory with respect to continuous errata, as a substitute for poor game design. But I don't understand people paying $17/m for a mmo subscription grumping about coming up with $5/m for a character builder, monster archive, virtual table, access to every rule ever printed, and every back issue of dragon/dungeon.

 

[Reynard]

I like the online DDI tools and lack of online support would be a major hurdle for me to implement 5e.

I agree they shouldn't be mandatory with respect to continuous errata, as a substitute for poor game design. But I don't understand people paying $17/m for a mmo subscription grumping about coming up with $5/m for a character builder, monster archive, virtual table, access to every rule ever printed, and every back issue of dragon/dungeon.

Just curious: do you think that most D&D players play MMOs, or do you think that most D&D players should?

 

[ferratus]

I'm willing to say that most D&D players play MMO's.

I don't mind you (I hate fetch/kill 10 of quests), but pretty much everyone I know does.