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

[PeacemakerSG]

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.

I made no such comment regarding finding a group that plays it well. I've found and enjoyed playing in groups that knew the system(s) like the back of their hand so playing the game has not been an issue. I've played with mixed groups of all ages and walks of life and there is a distinct difference in how people play, most often consistent with their age group and/or to what RPG system they were first introduced. In fact, and incidentally, WotC formerly employed me to DM in their stores, yes, paid to DM. How 'bout that. The younger the new players were, the more video-game/CCG they wanted it to be like. When I first started playing, at 10 years old, I did not have the lack of patience nor instant gratification mindset of today's youth.

I've seen just about everything so I'm a pretty good judge of the trends. WotC would be wise to maintain multiple types of games, a tactical one (based on 4e - Warammer-lite) and role playing one (edition 1-3.5 hybrid).

 

[Mr. Wilson]

I'm in the maybe field. The playtest will tell me if I buy it or not.

To be frank, I feel like they are going backwards in play design, not forward. Then again, I much prefer 4E to 3E and I liked 3E more than AD&D.

It has nothing to do with roleplaying, you can do that fine without any rules (entire sessions can be played in 4E without picking up a die, I've run them), it has more to do with balance.

Going back to Casters = Gods is not something I want to see again. I already had that with both AD&D and 3E.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I haven't been sold yet. Though optimistic, there remain some obstacles for me:

1) I will not buy 5E if they continue with the 3E/4E business model of releasing must buy supplements with imprtant feats, prestige classes, classes, etc. If they release multiple players handbooks or if I have to make multiple purchases to play the game I want (for example if they stagger the modular options over several books) I will not buy 5E. There are just too many good games that require 1-2 books to play. I am not a magic the gathering player, i am a D&D player. WOTC needs to understand there is a difference.

2) I want good flavor supplements that aren't must haves. Really what I want are GM guidebooks, stuff like module cool settings and supplements. A core game is great but the biggest rpg company in the industry should be able to put out quality flavor support. If hey dont there are other companies that do.

3) I do not want 4E, and I dont want something revolutionary. I play D&D because it tastes like D&D. There are other games that do innovative design better when I need that fix. So this edition needs to feel like D&D to me to convinve me to buy.

4) If stuff like healing surges and 4E powers are in the core and not modular add-ons, i won't buy. This is just personal preference, but these really interupted my enjoyment of 4E.

Basically, I am not interested in a game that shows me how brilliant monte cook or mike mearls are as designers (though i respect their skills here). This is about the game and bringing that D&D experience back to the table. Fine tune some of the mechanics by all means, but I am not interested in something as new and different as 4E. Bring back the flavor and realize this is as important as the mechanics themselves.

All that said, should WOTC go in another direction, I wont hold it against them. It is their game, they need to make the call on where to go with it. I've just learned over the last few years what I like and what I don't. If a game doesn't align with my tastes i wont spend money on it.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Honestly, I'm pretty tired of buying new editions waiting for classes and other things to come out that already exist in other games. It's not dissimilar to buying a new console, the lack of backwards compatibility has now become a major issue with me. I will buy 5th edition, but for collection purposes only. Starting over is extremely annoying. 3rd edition had prestige classes to make pretty much whatever you could think of. 4th edition has multi classing and hybrid classing, pathfinder has archetypes. I can't understand the logic of wanting to begin again, unless 5th edition had full compatibility with all these systems allowing a full range of options from the beginning instead of the what.. 10 or 11 classes that are standard?

My $0.02.

Lack of backwards compatibility was among the reasons I didn't buy any 4Ed beyond the Core 3 until the new guy in the group decided to run a new campaign using those rules, and one of the reasons it doesn't feel like D&D to me. Had it been more compatible with what came before, I probably would have been an early adopter.

On its own merits, 4Ed is a decent RPG...but not good enough for me to want to run a game. I'll play it happily, and I buy player-centric supplements, but they won't get me to buy MMs or DMGs or anything too DM-centric. I simply have no need for it.

5Ed, like 4Ed, will have to win me over on its inherent qualities. If it has backwards compatibility, that will be a selling point, but not a decisive one.

So, like 4Ed, I will probably buy the initial release of 5Ed, then make my decision as to whether it is a game I want to run. If it is, then I'll buy into some more products. If it isn't, then I won't buy anything unless and until someone else decides to run a game.

 

[Hassassin]

I will buy it for the reasons it is superior to what I currently play. If it is.

On backwards compatibility, I would like to be able to run an adventure for edition X in 5e easily and port a character from edition X to 5e accurately (less important). I don't need to be able to use anything as is in either direction.


(Even if it is not superior and I want to continue playing something else, I may buy a starter set or fluff products like campaign settings. Not splatbooks, though. Probably not even if I start playing it.)

 

[avin]

I will buy it and try it.

I'm not a conservative man, I like to experiment, run a few games, understand the spirit of the edition/system, then keep moving.

Not saying that it's wrong or badwrongfun, but I can't understand how some people don't have fun by just trying out new stuff... like it or not is something to decide, but it must be tried to blame or to love...

 

[thedungeondelver]

If I buy this new D&D it will be based on what the playtest tells me, and what the final product looks like (e.g., did they listen to suggestions that put it in an area I like in terms of rules mechanics and assumed defaults for various features). If I pull the trigger it will be that and the fact that I haven't purchased a new D&D product since 1983. Not "new to me", but new, as in packaged up and sent to a store. I've bought lots of D&D items - every one secondhand since then. Additionally I will buy it because it might fit a niche of "good second game" - a go-to game when I'm in the mood and the group I'm with doesn't want to play AD&D. Finally, if I buy it it will be to reward good behavior. Re-releases of AD&D? Good behavior. Saying "we intend to support all editions of D&D from now on"? Good behavior.

I reward good behavior.

 

[am181d]

WILL I buy 5e?

Ask again in 18 months.

 

[theredrobedwizard]

I've bought every new version of D&D on launch day, 5e isn't going to be any different. Whether or not I buy a bunch of supplimental material is a completely different matter.

 

[boredgremlin]

I'll probably buy because I dont like 4e at all and its easier to build a group around an existing, supported edition.