D&D 5E Players, would you play in a multi-year campaign that used only the 5.1 SRD?

[Cruentus]

I voted yes in both polls as well. I've currently left 5e and moved to OSE for its more barebones and easier to hack systems. Fewer species, fewer classes, and its been really nice to get into a character (even if short lived) without having to fight the character sheet and use up bandwidth keeping all the doodads, feats, class abilities, spells, spell like abilities, racial abilities, actions, reactions, bonus actions, etc, straight. YMMV, of course.

I'd love to play in a simpler system for a multi-year game (those are my favorite games, as are sandboxes, and games that take resources into account).

 

[Mull Ponders]

Rules don't really make a game, DMs do. I voted yes.

 

[Vaalingrade]

That few options including the worst fighter? no thanks.

 

[MNblockhead]

My answer to this poll remains the same as the first one. Yes. An enthusiastic, engaged, and inspired DM is more important to me than the system.

 

[Incenjucar]

Nope. Way too long to go with so few options. I'd start falling asleep at the table.

 

[cbwjm]

I thought I'd already voted and commented in this until I read "follow up question" answer is still a yes though.

 

[demoss]

If that was what a friend wanted to run and asked me to play, and the campaign carried for multiple years? Of course.

I cannot imagine a someone pitching a multi-year D&D campaign to me, though.

I can image a campaign lasting for multiple years easily. I think we spent like... 4 years on Curse of Stradh - but the pitch wasn't "let's play a multi-year campaign". It was "hey, this looks like a fun take on ravenloft!"

 

[jayoungr]

Yes. Lack of a wide range of options isn't a big deal if I'm going to be playing the same character for several years. I feel like I have enough choices available to create one character that I could enjoy playing for a long campaign.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Nope. Way too long to go with so few options. I'd start falling asleep at the table.

I'm not sure I understand... what kinds of options would you think you needed over and above the SRD? I mean unless you play at a table that goes all-in on feats and doesn't want to do ASIs, and your PCs die so often that you'd be turning over character options like running water... once you made your character you wouldn't need any additional class or subclasses over the 12 you were given to start with and you could create any background you wanted to give you whatever you needed for that. What other options would actually be missing if you only used the 5.1 SRD?

 

[Jer]

Would depend entirely on the DM and the group. I'm willing to play anything with the right DM and the right group.

I personally wouldn't want to run a game like that anymore (and as I'm forever DM it would probably be my call for my group) because I like games that fall outside of the typical Tolkien-inspired stuff and the tiefling and dragonborn aren't quite enough variety for the kinds of games I like to run. And restricting the players to a handful of races when the worlds I run tend to look more like the cantina from Star Wars would be arbitrary. But if someone else wanted to do it and I trusted them then sure.