Gundark
Explorer
Yes this is true, however the million dollar question is will people be happy with the Core rules? If they are then D&D 5e will most likely be a hit.
Last edited:
There are going to be a lot of people disappointed.
- Thread starter enrious
- Start date
Yes this is true, however the million dollar question is will people be happy with the Core rules? If they are then D&D 5e will most likely be a hit.
darjr
I crit!
I do think the buzz will fade. I don't know if it'll be to much. But the playtest process has potential to keep people tuned in.
I know that I will be disappointed at one thing or another, sure. Still I have hope that if enough is right I'll over look those. Every edition has things I'd like to change.
I know that I will be disappointed at one thing or another, sure. Still I have hope that if enough is right I'll over look those. Every edition has things I'd like to change.
IronWolf
blank
I think a good bit depends on how they release it. If they release a core rules book and then sell the "modularity" in additional books, then I see a greater chance of people being unhappy. But what if they have the core assumption in the first few chapters and then the "modularity" tacked on in later chapters in the book.
Then a person buys one book and has what they need in one book. Want simple and rules light? Stick with the core chapters. Want a more complex system or a mix and match? Add in later chapters as needed to enhance your game.
I think physical presentation of this new D&D offering is going to have a rather large bearing on people's like and dislike of it.
I think almost everyone is hopeful. Some more than others. This is just how things go though. An edition is more than just some rules. It's memories and emotions too and part of holding onto an edition is holding onto everything else attached to it.
When people want things a certain way it isn't just because from a purely mechanical perspective it is superior. It's because that's what the game is for them. OR the game is stuff not related to the mechanics very much and so a version change is fine because they just want to play some D&D with people at cons, events, stores, home, wherever.
I don't play or run 4E currently but I did both within the last 3 years. I thought a lot of what 4E did made a ton of sense and I liked many of the solutions they developed to some pretty old problems. For whatever reason though it doesn't feel 'right' to my group and so we'd rather spend that time on something that feels like D&D to us.
I will be definitely supporting 5E. I'm not sure it will replace Pathfinder for us but I will definitely be checking it out and running/playing it. By supporting it I am supporting the potential for another edition or just new rules that make 5E feel like what we're looking for. So even if 5E isn't my cup of tea. I will be making sure they get some of my money. I'm sure the ideas, writing, art (hopefully) and the like will be worth it anyway.
When people want things a certain way it isn't just because from a purely mechanical perspective it is superior. It's because that's what the game is for them. OR the game is stuff not related to the mechanics very much and so a version change is fine because they just want to play some D&D with people at cons, events, stores, home, wherever.
I don't play or run 4E currently but I did both within the last 3 years. I thought a lot of what 4E did made a ton of sense and I liked many of the solutions they developed to some pretty old problems. For whatever reason though it doesn't feel 'right' to my group and so we'd rather spend that time on something that feels like D&D to us.
I will be definitely supporting 5E. I'm not sure it will replace Pathfinder for us but I will definitely be checking it out and running/playing it. By supporting it I am supporting the potential for another edition or just new rules that make 5E feel like what we're looking for. So even if 5E isn't my cup of tea. I will be making sure they get some of my money. I'm sure the ideas, writing, art (hopefully) and the like will be worth it anyway.
I daresay not everyone has heard it, believes it, or remembers it.
Mercurius
Legend
My guess is that most of the folks that will be disappointed are those that think 5E will, or at least should, resemble a better version of their edition of choice and/or are overly attached to concrete/literal elements of their edition of choice.
When Mike & Monte say that you will be able to play in the style of different editions with 5E, they mean just that: in the style of; not a re-creation of an older edition, probably no "Save vs. Petricification, Polymorph and Putridly Pestilential Polyps." In the style of means the spirit of the law, not the letter of the law.
Some may also be disappointed that are overly attached to a specific aspect of a prior edition being part of 5E core. For instance, it is possible that 4E-style Defenses are part of 5E core, but they could also be chucked for Ability scores. I like Fortitude, Reflex, and Will, but why not just use Con, Dex, and Wis? My sense is that, with 5E's core, they're trying to dial it back as much as possible that there will be more freedom in terms of play style and modularity.
Finally, there might be some variation of Obamadisappointment. At this point, 5E sounds too good to be true; Mike & Monte are talking a good game but might be shooting higher than is possible to reach. This, of course, remains to be seen and I certainly am hopeful that 5E can be what they say it will be!
When Mike & Monte say that you will be able to play in the style of different editions with 5E, they mean just that: in the style of; not a re-creation of an older edition, probably no "Save vs. Petricification, Polymorph and Putridly Pestilential Polyps." In the style of means the spirit of the law, not the letter of the law.
Some may also be disappointed that are overly attached to a specific aspect of a prior edition being part of 5E core. For instance, it is possible that 4E-style Defenses are part of 5E core, but they could also be chucked for Ability scores. I like Fortitude, Reflex, and Will, but why not just use Con, Dex, and Wis? My sense is that, with 5E's core, they're trying to dial it back as much as possible that there will be more freedom in terms of play style and modularity.
Finally, there might be some variation of Obamadisappointment. At this point, 5E sounds too good to be true; Mike & Monte are talking a good game but might be shooting higher than is possible to reach. This, of course, remains to be seen and I certainly am hopeful that 5E can be what they say it will be!
I am expecting to be disappointed and, yet, hoping for the rare chance that I may be pleasantly surprised.
If 5e fails to excite me, it is no loss. For non-supers gaming, I still have Savage Worlds as my first choice, True20 as my first go to for players wanting class/level, and my house ruled 3e as a back up to those that will only play D&D fantasy.
If 5e fails to excite me, it is no loss. For non-supers gaming, I still have Savage Worlds as my first choice, True20 as my first go to for players wanting class/level, and my house ruled 3e as a back up to those that will only play D&D fantasy.
This weekend will set much of the tone for the coming year of playtest.
While NDA will officially limit discussion of the rules there will be plenty of posts from people that were exposed to the rules (some reports will be real exposure and some will be 'fakes' that people will put out because well, they're just that type of people).
Generally, within a week from now, we should have people constructing from 'memory' much of the base core system.
We should have a few accounts of what the system is closest to being like.
There will be some idea on whether it is a three or four defense system like 4e or it is back to an earlier 2e system (though I think that is unlikely).
You should also learn of the amount of at wills and whether daily or encounter powers have returned or been replaced by a more Essentials Stances approach.
You will likely get an idea of level 1 hit points again being closer to the 30 mark or closer to the 10 mark. You will also likely get an idea of the damage rolled on attacks by players and monsters.
The NDA will stop some of this information but the pool of people likely in the playtest and people using screen names should give off those details that can not be fully tracked back to them (or they'll say they got the information from a 'friend' that was at DDXP).
Till this weekend is over. I think it is a bit early for pronouncements of Doom, Doom, Doom!
Modularity will not likely be solved but I expect that players sitting next to each other will have some significant differences in the detail of their character sheet to 'highlight' how the characters could be built with different choices and still be able to play at the same table.
While NDA will officially limit discussion of the rules there will be plenty of posts from people that were exposed to the rules (some reports will be real exposure and some will be 'fakes' that people will put out because well, they're just that type of people).
Generally, within a week from now, we should have people constructing from 'memory' much of the base core system.
We should have a few accounts of what the system is closest to being like.
There will be some idea on whether it is a three or four defense system like 4e or it is back to an earlier 2e system (though I think that is unlikely).
You should also learn of the amount of at wills and whether daily or encounter powers have returned or been replaced by a more Essentials Stances approach.
You will likely get an idea of level 1 hit points again being closer to the 30 mark or closer to the 10 mark. You will also likely get an idea of the damage rolled on attacks by players and monsters.
The NDA will stop some of this information but the pool of people likely in the playtest and people using screen names should give off those details that can not be fully tracked back to them (or they'll say they got the information from a 'friend' that was at DDXP).
Till this weekend is over. I think it is a bit early for pronouncements of Doom, Doom, Doom!
Modularity will not likely be solved but I expect that players sitting next to each other will have some significant differences in the detail of their character sheet to 'highlight' how the characters could be built with different choices and still be able to play at the same table.
Piscivorous
First Post
The core is the key. The relatively few D&D players who hit En World and other gaming forums are the ones who pick up books outside of the Core. Most players I know own a Player Handbook and maybe a DMG or Spell Compendium. 3E here. Stuff like Cityscape, Tome of Battle or Song and Silence just isn't in their library.
If Core fails, the system fails, because most people don't want to invest too much in "yet another version."
The core is absolutely the key, which is why I think we as players (those interested in at least giving it the sniff test) owe it to ourselves and to the designers to have reasonable expectations about what can possibly go in the core.
Hence my original post.
