D&D 5E So why are you buying 5th edition?

[Aegeri]

After the nonsense with essentials, declining quality in Emagazines/books and lack of support for the elements of the game I loved in 4E, there is no way I am going to be foolish enough to invest in 5E until I give it a fair amount of time. They have to really impress me and frankly, everything I've read about 5E has basically made me think very little of it. So it looks very much like the end of me playing DnD anymore, except for the odd one shot 1E, 2E or Gamma World Campaign when the mood arises for a break from Call of Cthulhu.

Which is a shame, because I put a lot of time, love and effort into 4E but in the end, Wizards just stopped making what I wanted. So I stopped giving wizards my support and money. Simple exchange really.

 

[Invisible Stalker]

As long as it's a real printed and bound dead tree book, I'll get it.

 

[PeacemakerSG]

So new generation D&D is worst than your generation D&D? Very good to hear...

No, later editions of D&D have added so much complexity that even creating the basic of characters is an immense labor. The systems have become convoluted. They were not well thought out in terms of organization. While each new edition, and bevy of supplements, have added to play options to cater to the it-needs-to-be-about-my-obscure-interest generation, it has done so in a convoluted manner that has become a barrier to play. At the same time, the new generations, while loving the attention, do not enjoy the effort role playing takes. This is what led to 4e, a option-heavy game for the impatient.

More recent generations of players tend to not have the same patience and thoughtfulness as their elders, and thus less creative input and investment in the game. Products of their times where so much is done for them (or little expected of them) that they need not, nor have they learned to problem solve (you can see this if you are outside of their generation). This is why 4e is more to their liking, more procedural than creative. There are exceptions, so please do not go crazy defending your youthful creativity.

One 20-something said one evening during our 3e session in a Planescape themed campaign, "I would pay more attention if this were real role playing". This from a girl stuck in her telephone device all night between naps. She is too impatient and self oriented to invest in the group story.

Role playing is not a video game, it's a story, the more drawn out, the more immersive, the better. But immersive, while maintaining flexible play options, does not necessitate chaotic rules as has been the pattern in later system engineering. I know a proper system can be built because not only do I design business processes for a living, I've created the framework for a RP system that I believe handles all of the many interest that our community has been asking for for decades. So when I read the early releases from WotC regarding 5e, I see that they are on the wrong path, again, to achieve the maximum buy in. I hope they can get it right because then I can stop my work on my own system and move on to any one of my dozens of other personal projects. I'd feel relieved and probably very happy and have no problem plunking down for the books needed to play the game.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

No, later editions of D&D have added so much complexity that even creating the basic of characters is an immense labor. The systems have become convoluted. They were not well thought out in terms of organization. While each new edition, and bevy of supplements, have added to play options to cater to the it-needs-to-be-about-my-obscure-interest generation, it has done so in a convoluted manner that has become a barrier to play. At the same time, the new generations, while loving the attention, do not enjoy the effort role playing takes. This is what led to 4e, a option-heavy game for the impatient.

More recent generations of players tend to not have the same patience and thoughtfulness as their elders, and thus less creative input and investment in the game. Products of their times where so much is done for them (or little expected of them) that they need not, nor have they learned to problem solve (you can see this if you are outside of their generation). This is why 4e is more to their liking, more procedural than creative. There are exceptions, so please do not go crazy defending your youthful creativity.

One 20-something said one evening during our 3e session in a Planescape themed campaign, "I would pay more attention if this were real role playing". This from a girl stuck in her telephone device all night between naps. She is too impatient and self oriented to invest in the group story.

Role playing is not a video game, it's a story, the more drawn out, the more immersive, the better. But immersive, while maintaining flexible play options, does not necessitate chaotic rules as has been the pattern in later system engineering. I know a proper system can be built because not only do I design business processes for a living, I've created the framework for a RP system that I believe handles all of the many interest that our community has been asking for for decades. So when I read the early releases from WotC regarding 5e, I see that they are on the wrong path, again, to achieve the maximum buy in. I hope they can get it right because then I can stop my work on my own system and move on to any one of my dozens of other personal projects. I'd feel relieved and probably very happy and have no problem plunking down for the books needed to play the game.

On the other hand, just because you've had trouble finding a group that plays newer editions of the game well, doesn't mean we all have.

I've played D&D an average of twice a week for 27 years with a few hundred different players, and I've seen good ones and bad ones in all editions, of all ages, all that time.

While my current group is almost all 30-40ish, I've played recently with 10 year olds who role-play better than some of the adults I've played with.

 

[darkwing]

Even if I think I'll hate it, I'll probably buy the PHB anyway just to check it out and see if there are any ideas worth using.

 

[Raith5]

I will buy if it is better than 4th ed. I can live with the problems of 4th ed. If DDN avoids the problems of pre 4th I think I will give it a try.

 

[Stormonu]

After my debacle with 4E, I don't buy any WotC products anymore sight unseen (except maybe Dungeon Tiles). I'll be taking a long, hard look at this at the book store (if they're still around and carrying RPGs, that is - and that seems to be a pretty decent IF).

I want to like 5E, but I cannot ignore how much I disliked late 3E and 4E. It will really have to be a "wait and see" proposition.

 

[Sirot]

I don't hold any particular allegiance to any system and I'm always willing to risk a bad experience on the off-chance that it is something new and fun.

 

[BASHMAN]

It seems to combine a lot of the things I like from BECMI, 2e, 3.x, and my own homebrew add-ons that I really liked, and makes the things about 4e that I didn't like, like skill challenges "die in a fire".

So from BECMI, it is going back to a more basic style of game. I like that. Also weapon types getting special abilities as you improve, that seems to be a bit of a throwback to BECMI Weapons Mastery (which as I've said before, was the best thing any edition of D&D ever did at any time in the history of all roleplaying games). Also we go back to the "jolly hobbit" halflings and not the tiny lithe cone-heads of 3.x or the boot-wearing river nomads of 4e.

I like that (at least from what I can tell so far) they are going with "what makes sense" and "what sounds cool" than by "what's balanced?" and "what's the math formula again for figuring out saves/to hit/etc per level." That's old school, in a good way.

From 2e, we have "Themes" which seem to be akin to "Kits" which I envision as a very good way to make subclasses, etc, without having to make entirely new classes.

From 3.x we have true multi-classing, but hopefully without the "saving throw suicide by design" wonkiness that happened in 3e with some multi-class combos.

From my own homebrew, we have ALL THE STATS mattering for saves. In BECMI my house rules were STR bonus adds to save vs. Paralysis, Con adds to poison/death, Dex to Breath/Traps, Int to Spells, Wis to wands & other magic items and Fear, and Cha affected to all saves (so don't use it as your dump stat). What they seem to be saying is very similar; that you may need to make a STR save vs. Paralysis, or being grappled, or to burst free of some ropes; but you may also be able to argue with the GM that you could slip free of the ropes using Dex. I like that.

I also have to say I like the descriptive skill system. Get +X to whatever I make up that I do with STR. Cool. So I could get +3 to STR checks to bend bars/lift gates, or +3 to STR checks vs. poison, or +3 to Str Checks for doing athletics, or wrestling, or whatever else I want to describe. That's nice because it doesn't confine me to a finite list of "what you can do (and the unsaid "and what you can't do" part that I hate about such lists). It really allows me to do anything. If I realize at the end of a session that I wish I were better at escapology, maybe later on when I have some points, I'll put some towards that.

On top of all this, it seems like "we may be getting the band back together". As in the adventuring band... my group that FRACTURED over 4e (the GM and 1/3 of the group really liked 4e; the remaining 2/3s (among whom was the homeowners where the weekly game was held) hated it with unabashed fury. I was ambivalent to it. Since I drove over an hour to get to game sessions and my wife limited me to 1 game a week, this meant throwing my lot in with the players who didn't like it. I just wasn't going to drive an hour to play 4e D&D, but I'd drive an hour to GM BASH! for the group.*


*The one major upside regarding 4e for me is I (who normally never got to GM this group) got to run a couple really long BASH! and Honor + Intrigue campaigns because the regular DM was no longer DMing the group due to the 4e Schism.

 

[Spinachcat]

- but when it comes down to it, I only get that "special " fuzzy feeling when I play a D&D game. It may be psychological, nostalgia, but it is the truth.

Kudos!

It's important to be honest about nostalgia. I know that plays a part in some of my gaming choices.

BTW, I did find a RPG that hit all those "nostalgia buttons" for me that is D&Dish, but has some fresh ideas. It's a free PDF. Worth a look.

Mazes & Minotaurs
M&M