D&D 5E So, have we missed the boat on simple character creation?

[Li Shenron]

Complexity and faithfulness to D&D tradition are probably my only 2 dealbreakers about the next edition.

If low-complexity, rules-light is not supported, I can never play this game because my players won't even look at it.

I don't think there's that many fans of simple rules anymore.

Only millions of people who could be playing D&D but are not. The complexity entry barrier of the game is still THE mean reason why I can't get most of my friends to even try this game. The all say "wow, looks like a totally fun idea, it's like creating a movie/book story together!" when I talk about it, but they totally hate the idea that you have to "study" the rules before you start.

WotC can choose the business strategy they want. A high complexity game means WotC customers will be only a few hardcore gamers, each of which will probably spend a lot of money. A low complexity game will open up the market to many, many more potential customers, which on the other hand will probably buy only the PHB. They can make their estimation and go with the first, if they think it's more profitable, but then they can't seriously come back weeping that "people prefer playing dumb console games" instead of D&D.

 

[Li Shenron]

I guess for me there are at least two layers of character simplicity. Generation and performance in play. It maybe simple to pick 4 high level options and be done, but if there are a lot of fiddly bits buried in those options, then it doesn't quite meet up to what I'd expect for 'simple characters'. Maybe that isn't the point of the OP and maybe they'll pull it off and have simpler choices with simpler fiddly bits.

I am glad that someone understands the issue of complexity for what it really is!

There's a lot of comments in this thread about simple vs complex character creation. That's NOT the most important thing!! I am now seriously worried because if so many gamers only think of character creation when they talk of complexity, maybe the designers are also stuck with this mistake.

One thing is complexity at character creation. This is already somehow taken care by backgrounds, specialties, traditions, schemes, fighting styles... If a player doesn't even read those descriptions, but only picks them up based on their names ("ok, I'll make a Human, Fighter with Knight background, Veteran fighting style and Archer specialty, DONE!") it can even be done in 5 minutes.

Another thing is complexity at character gameplay, and this is currently a nightmare for casual gamers... There is just so much stuff to keep track of, so many different subsystems on your character sheet, and so many choices to make at each and every turn. And there is a lot of dice to roll, which can be fun but how many times an average player will forget to roll some of them?

---------------

I remember that Mike Mearls last spring wrote a long praise of older editions fast character creation AND fast gameplay, and he swore that THIS was one playstyle that 5e MUST support at any cost. IIRC he mentioned that his design team spent 15 minutes in character creation but also played a whole adventure with many combats and other stuff in less than 2 hours, and all of them agreed that this should be one possible way of playing 5e.

But to play that way, they have to realize that "speed" requires two different things: the game should be light for the DM, and the game should be light for the players.

They are actually doing a quite good job (although it could be definitely better) on the first part, the game IS light for the DM.

But they are doing a terrible job on the second part, the game ISN'T light for the players.

And since there is one DM and at least 3-4 players around the table, it doesn't seem to me that I can play the current game very fast, unless I get players who are really expert on the rules and the material...

 

[delericho]

Complexity and faithfulness to D&D tradition are probably my only 2 dealbreakers about the next edition.

If low-complexity, rules-light is not supported, I can never play this game because my players won't even look at it.

It isn't an absolute deal-breaker for me, but I agree - low complexity really must be there, at least as an option.

It shouldn't even be too difficult - it's trivially easy to add complexity to a game using supplements (or modules within the core rulebooks), so all they need to do is make sure they present the lowest complexity version somewhere. Then anyone who wants a more complex version should be free to achieve that.

(I might even advocate that they should do the inevitable Starter Set as that lowest-complexity version, possibly with a single "Expert Set" expansion to it, while presenting the Core Rulebooks as a more complex baseline more suited to existing players.)

 

[Kobold Stew]

I am glad that someone understands the issue of complexity for what it really is!

There's a lot of comments in this thread about simple vs complex character creation. That's NOT the most important thing!! I am now seriously worried because if so many gamers only think of character creation when they talk of complexity, maybe the designers are also stuck with this mistake.

I suspect why this thread has focused on character creation is that that's what's in the title of the thread and what the OP asked about. This thread is not the place to go drawing conclusions about what the other posters or the designers think about simple gameplay.

 

[TerraDave]

Right, it feels like they have gone overboard. There are a lot of up front choices, there is a lot of fiddle stuff.

But, its still just a play-test.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

I suspect why this thread has focused on character creation is that that's what's in the title of the thread and what the OP asked about. This thread is not the place to go drawing conclusions about what the other posters or the designers think about simple gameplay.

Exactly. I was commenting specifically on character creation. Simple vs complex gameplay is another topic, though one worth exploring -- I'd personally like to see gameplay allow for simple choices, such that play is quick, that result in complex interactions, such that play remains unique and surprising. Games don't need complex design to deliver variety, engagement, and repeatability -- a wide range of games from chess to BD&D demonstrate that.

 

[BobTheNob]

Only millions of people who could be playing D&D but are not. The complexity entry barrier of the game is still THE mean reason why I can't get most of my friends to even try this game. The all say "wow, looks like a totally fun idea, it's like creating a movie/book story together!" when I talk about it, but they totally hate the idea that you have to "study" the rules before you start.

I will second this. After 4e I could never sell my player a complex system again. We need something where a character can be put together in 5 minutes without any real investment in peoples time. Ask my guys to study a book, they wont even look at twice.

Casual players : They exist.

 

[Ratskinner]

I will second this. After 4e I could never sell my player a complex system again. We need something where a character can be put together in 5 minutes without any real investment in peoples time. Ask my guys to study a book, they wont even look at twice.

Casual players : They exist.

Complexity and faithfulness to D&D tradition are probably my only 2 dealbreakers about the next edition.

If low-complexity, rules-light is not supported, I can never play this game because my players won't even look at it.

I guess I'm thirding this sentiment. My current group has recoiled/retreated to a bizarre(but very simple) mixture of BECMI and CnC as our go-to D&D.

As someone else said, my hopes for 5e hang on the idea that the current playtests are testing "advanced" systems and that the simple stuff is already done. I'm not sure how much I believe that, but there is where its at.

 

[Sunseeker]

Casual players : They exist.

There's a lot of diversity among "casual" gamers. It doesn't necessarily mean they aren't interested in an investment or dedication.

 

[erf_beto]

There's a lot of diversity among "casual" gamers. It doesn't necessarily mean they aren't interested in an investment or dedication.

True. I suppose I can be considered am a casual player by now, since I haven't played in years (and it feels me with shame to even acknoledge that!), but I'm on enworld at least thrice a week, so I don't think I'm your typical casual player. I don't need an incentive to play D&D other than an available gaming group and some free time.
Casual players are those who are either not following the game anymore and new players, either from other systems or total newbies. They need to be hooked in, and not resort to WoW or some other videogame because "D&D is hard".


Anyway, regarding character creation. Yes, I also think the new playtest looks complicated. But you are supposed to remove some parts of the game (specialties, backgrounds) and it still work. Like others have said, you should be able to just take some pre-defined options and be done about it. My concern is, how to do that, without seeming you are just using a pre-gen. I suppose weapon and spell selection would be minimum choice you'd make to differentiate your character from your buddy's.
Overall, a long chargen might not be so huge a gateway problem (in regard to entry to the game) as even some videogames are making you spend a considerable ammount of time to flesh out your character.