Serious question - are you going to invest in D&DNext?

[Shemeska]

Probably not.

Primarily because I don't really have the time to invest in learning the system well enough at the moment. Also, unless I know that it will have a 5e version of an OGL, and a well written and permissive one, I'm not sure it would be wise yet to put the time in for learning it when I'm already running and greatly enjoying a Pathfinder campaign, and nobody I know plans on running 5e. They're playing PF, or 3.x, or a different game entirely.

Secondly, while they ramped back many of the more egregious and random 4e changes to long-term D&D terms, IMO there are too many 4e'isms creeping in. Additionally, FR is still post-Spellplague rather than them actually going for a reboot, so it's no longer the same setting I enjoyed immensely in 3e, so it isn't at this stage doing much to try to bring me back. That might change, but at this point I've moved on.

That said, if there's a 5e Planescape and if it uses the Great Wheel and stays true to the 2e material and some of the 3e additions - sold -. I'd buy whatever 5e material required to use that. All would be forgiven.

 

[Mishihari Lord]

D&D left me; I didn't leave D&D.

That's how I feel about 4E. With 5E they may have something I'm interested in again.

I'll certainly buy the core and read it. It just wouldn't feel right to not own the current version of D&D. After that, it depends.

 

[Kobold Stew]

Absolutely I will buy the core books. Beyond that, we'll have to see: I can be convinced, but WOTC hasn't succeeded in convincing me to buy much further.

 

[megamania]

Nope. 3.5 is plenty good enough for me

 

[Ace]

I'll buy it in print and probably play it as much as I can get away with. It suits my needs pretty well being halfway between retro-clone and more modern version.

Having the official D&D imprimatur behind it won't hurt either as it will open up ground retro games can't reach while still allowing me to pilfer the heck out of them.

 

[delericho]

Publishing great adventures and story would be awesome too. Not plot devices for marketing reasons, but stories that enrich the mythos. Whether you like it or not, how cool is the blood war? The Temple of Elemental Evil? Tomb of Horrors?

That's a really good point. If all 5e offers is a set of rules for "pretending to be an elf", even a good set of rules for that purpose, then it has little to offer me - I already have five previous versions of the game to do that, and Pathfinder, and Savage Worlds, and... I don't need another set of rules unless it's really excellent - and since WotC need to sell books they'll need to constantly expand the rules, and that's a big negative in my book.

But if they sell excellent adventures, then that's a somewhat different matter - I'll buy the rules I need to run the adventures... and I'm always in the market for good adventures anyway.

There is a problem, though: I have no confidence in the ability of WotC to write good adventures. And their recent output, notably "Murder in Baldur's Gate", has done nothing to inspire that confidence.

 

[Quickleaf]

I don't know...the promise of D&D Next seems to be:
(A) Playtested, gamer approved!
(B) Focus on the adventure!
(D) Digital initiatives & transmedia coverage!

My question is, what has WotC's track record been with playtests, published adventures, and digital initiatives?

You know the answer and it ain't pretty.

 

[Starfox]

Probably getting the core, depending on price. Wasn't there an announcement it would be ridiculously expensive? Sooner ore later I'll almost certainly get those core books.

I have some friends I think would benefit from Next over 3.5 and Pathfinder that they are running now, but I doubt they'll even look at it seriously as 4E was such a debacle with them.

 

[Greg K]

At the moment, almost certainly not. I have seen very little that I like in any of the packets. At the moment, it is shaping up to, possibly, be my least favorite edition since I starting with Holmes Basic (not that I had much hope given the body of work that I have seen from the two people in charge. However, Rodney and Mearls each have their on a single product that I like (Star Wars: Saga Edition for Rodney and Book of Iron Might for Mearls) so I was willing to give them a chance).

Wyatt's column regarding the story team side has not been much better in my opinion (but he has had a few more hits in which I was in agreement). However, his comment in the latest column brings back memories of his statements regarding traipsing in faerie rings and talking to guards and reaffirms why I didn't like the idea of a story team- especially, with Wyatt in charge- in the first place.

That all stated, I will give the game a look in its final form before making a final decision.

 

[Raith5]

Probably not.

For me DDN captures a lot of the feeling of D&D and I like elements of the playtest, but overall it just does not strike me as an especially interesting game. Game design has just moved on, and while 4th ed may have lacked some of the feeling of D&D, it was a cracking collaborative game which my group is still enjoying. I think I am more interested in fantasy computer games next year, like the up coming Elder Scrolls and Dragon Age games.