Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6261036" data-attributes="member: 6696971">I'm just going to agree here with everything Primal has above.For my tastes personally I would like to see 5e have the kind of elegant, dynamic, unified conflict resolution system (such as Primal mentioned above with DitV...and also 4e) with stable, predictable math that incorporates PC build choices seamlessly and works as coherently with conflicts that escalate to violence as it does with noncombat conflicts.  Just that request alone is asking an enormous amount from this system which seems wholly predicated upon (i) adventuring day resource schemes, (ii) task resolution with objective DCs of world elements (rather than subjective environmental challenges that scale with PCs), (iii) and no unity of class builds and elements that would cohere with conflict resolution.There are plenty of other system components that I want that would require them to cohere with the system, but that one is right at the top.But that is truly beside the point.  I'm but one person (as is Primal)...but one who has plenty of systems that do what I want.  Like many TTRPG consumers, a new RPG purchase must (i) pique my curiosity with its pitch, (ii) appeal specifically to a genre I'm interested in, (iii) clearly and expressly divulge its means to meet, or exceed, the demands of my play agenda and expectant play experience.  Of those three, the only one met is two.  On 1, my curiosity has moved from piqued to abjectly disinterested.  On 3, there are only two (peripheral) elements of 5e that play to that interest.The only TTRPG market of which 5e doesn't have to worry about these things is the community that will purchase and play the next edition no matter what.  D&D on the tin is what is important to them, not a honed experience that yields precisely what they're looking for as well, or better, than another system (of which they've already paid for and have already internalized) already does.Has 5e piqued PF players' interests?  Have the designers shown that they have any ability to reproduce the (presumably quality) APs that keep them coming back for more?  Are the OSR folks paying attention anymore (if they even were after the first few playtest releases)?  Does the design impetus, the engine and component parts clearly and expressly reproduce an old-school, take no prisoners, "Gygaxian skilled play", "step on up", dungeon crawl?  I think its pretty well certain that a very generous portion of 4e players (specifically those who aren't moved primarily by playing the currently supported system with D&D on the tin + those who have "complex system fatigue") have had their interest basically flat-lined and have mentally checked out.The playtest didn't pin anything down for any of those groups I think and, in the end, just seemed to be a vacillating, amorphous collage of "D&D stuff".  Nothing noteworthy outside of the "advantage mechanic."  And virtually every single follow-up debriefing (Rule of 3 and Legend Lore et al) by the designers has been a meandering (and again, often vacillating and sometimes outright contradictory) monologue lacking in substance or bite.  Where are the "WHOA (!)" moments?  Where is the trailblazing and exciting "One Unique Thing(s)", the DW Basic Resolution/Outcome, the DitV Conflict Resolution, the XP for Gold, the Martial Forced Movement, etc etc?  Maybe they're to come but if I was running a public playtest and had the bully pulpit (each and every week), I would be highlighting something very specific, potent and revolutionary that is going to charge my audience (eg not "advantage" and task resolution by way of ability checks).In the final analysis, 5e may eventually cater to one or more of those key three groups above.  As of now though, I don't see why any of those folks have reason to have their curiosity piqued nor do I see any evidence that 5e will produce an experience comparable to, or better than, what they currently own and have internalized.  That appears to have been the goal.  If the goal was "make a new and awesome D&D (!)", my interest would have been dramatically piqued regardless.  As is, their goal wasn't particularly interesting "big tent' and I don't see any reason to believe it will turn out.Interest for AD&D 2e folks who were expecting something different than what they got with 3e?  Absolutely.  AD&D 2.5 seems to work with 5e.  People looking for a pared down "Basic" experience because they have "complex system fatigue?"  Surely.  People who will play anything because it bears the brand and is currently supported?  Self-evidently true.  New players?  No clue (but give me Dungeon World all the way for that).  Will those 3 groups yield enough initial net profit and (immediate) future investment?  I don't think so.</blockquote>

Verification