There are going to be a lot of people disappointed.

[MatthewJHanson]

And Wizards of the Coast won't be to blame.

To be fair, they are marketing it as "the edition to unite everybody" which is easy to interpret as "this game will have everything you love in it." Plus so far we have no details about the actual mechanics of it. This is pretty much a prefect formula for rampant speculation, some of which will (or course) lead to disappointment.

 

[enrious]

To be fair, they are marketing it as "the edition to unite everybody" which is easy to interpret as "this game will have everything you love in it." Plus so far we have no details about the actual mechanics of it. This is pretty much a prefect formula for rampant speculation, some of which will (or course) lead to disappointment.

True, but as I said measure what they state their design goals to be against what they actually accomplish, not against what you imagine them to be.

For example, they never said you'd be able to use your 1e book at the same table as someone using a 3e book, but that was readily found uttered in the various threads here.

 

[enrious]

While my OP tended to focus on items excluded from the "core", needless to say (but I'm doing so anyway) that inclusion is the same thing.

As it is, there are threads now saying that including something the poster disagrees with is egregious (such as warforged or warlords) and thus it's not the game for them.

I offer this trade secret to those with such viewpoints: The inclusion of an item you disagree with was not done by the designers because they hate you. They are trying to appeal to as many people as possible and thus, there will ideally be items you like, items you don't like, and items you're ambivalent towards. If this is true, then they have a greater chance of success than catering to your every whim.

 

[Argyle King]

I'm trying to keep an open mind. However, yes, I am preparing to be slightly disappointed.


This by no means is intended to say I do not believe 5th edition will be a good game. However, I have some questions as to whether or not I'm part of the target audience.


Though, oddly, I feel 5th Edition is getting more of a fair chance from me by virtue of me leaning toward slightly negative than 4th Edition did with me being overly positive at release. I believe I jumped into 4th before I really knew what I was getting into; while that was good for WoTC's profits, I would not consider it a fair chance because I bought it blindly. As such, I feel my view on 5th will be more fair and balanced now that I'm not someone who will blindly purchase a product based on a specific brand name. I have other games (one in particular which is a great modular system which does most of what 5E claims to be capable of) to compare the product to and evaluate now.

 

[enrious]

I'm trying to keep an open mind. However, yes, I am preparing to be slightly disappointed.


This by no means is intended to say I do not believe 5th edition will be a good game. However, I have some questions as to whether or not I'm part of the target audience.

Honestly, I'd say you are part of the target audience, although with the realization that while WotC would like 100% of that target audience adopting 5e, it won't happen.

As long as you have realistic expectations, know what you want and don't want, but have realistic expectations about what you want the core do do and not what the core should have, then I think you're part of that audience. Indeed most people here who are at least interested in looking at it are.

In short, I think WotC wants a fair evaluation of 5e - indeed, they can ask for nothing more.

 

[MichaelSomething]

An all inclusive edition means it will include stuff you won't like

 

[Argyle King]

Honestly, I'd say you are part of the target audience, although with the realization that while WotC would like 100% of that target audience adopting 5e, it won't happen.

As long as you have realistic expectations, know what you want and don't want, but have realistic expectations about what you want the core do do and not what the core should have, then I think you're part of that audience. Indeed most people here who are at least interested in looking at it are.

In short, I think WotC wants a fair evaluation of 5e - indeed, they can ask for nothing more.

I have a pretty good idea of what I'd like the core to be able to do. I simply don't feel that my ideals concerning what an rpg should be and my ideal playstyle are easy to reconcile with the current ideals which 4th is based upon. As I expect 5th Edition to branch off of some of the same game design ideals which 4th was built around, I also believe I'll potentially have that same issue with 5th.

I also acknowledge that many of my ideals are not favored by most people who play D&D (or probably rpgs in general for that matter.) As such, I have a feeling that not many changes will be made with the type of gamer I am in mind. I could be wrong, and I hope I am, but I just don't see it at this point in time.

I'm still open minded. If I wasn't willing to at least look at the product, I wouldn't bother following it. Whether I'll buy it after looking at it remains to be seen. I won't begrudge the game if it turns out to be built for an audience I'm not part of. Maybe once more information about how the game actually works comes out I'll feel more positive. I can only wait and see.


edit: I understand an all inclusive edition will include things I may not be fond of. That's not what I mean by saying I believe my ideals will be difficult to reconcile with the game. From what I've heard/read so far, it seems as though a few of the ideals in 4th I was not particularly fond of may be being embraced more so than they already were. At this point in time, I am unsure how the end product will appeal to me. On the other side of the same coin, there are aspects I like about 4th which I feel 5th should embrace even more, but it doesn't seem as though it will; that also makes me unsure about whether or not I'm part of the target audience and/or if 5th edition will be a game which appeals to me.

edit 2: I am also somewhat worried about whether or not all styles of play will be equally supported. There's already some disparity between support for various races and classes. I hope there's more equality concerning what styles are viable with 5th Edition. This ties into my original statement. As I believe (but hope I am wrong) my particular likes and dislikes are in the minority, it seems reasonable to expect things which cater to my likes and dislikes to get less attention. That is smart business sense; it just kinda sucks for me as a customer if I want to buy a WoTC product.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

I'm prepared to be disappointed as well. If 5e has anything from 4e, such as healing surges, aggro mechanics, minions, powers, rituals, a ton of hp at first level as core, I'll pass. I won't mind seeing those as options for those that want them, but removing them is more trouble than it's worth.
That said, I'm not holding my breath for this to be an all inclusive edition. Including 4e mechanics will turn off fans of AD&D, not including them will piss off 4e players, and 3e fans will be stuck somewhere in the middle. Even if it's a really simple core with tons of optional addons, then I'll have a 400 page book with 100 pages I'll ever use. WOTC has their hands full with this one, and I think they're down to their last strike.

 

[Nivenus]

I think it's fair to say that no one (or at least so close as to no one so that it is irrelevant) will get exactly what they want from D&D Next. People simply are too diverse in their opinions and preferred playstyle. Hell, getting a single gaming group to agree on what to do and how to play is hard enough - you can't convince an entire market.

The key, I think, is as the OP said to be open to not getting your way. As I stated in the thread about whether 5e should have any new rules or what-not, I fully expect many (though hopefully not most) of the things I'd like to see in the game either not happen or have only marginal support outside of the core rules. And I'm okay with that, because at the end of the day, I'm only one customer and my opinions don't have some arbitrary importance that makes them better.

However, I think it's fair to say that 5e, if WotC follows through on their idea of modularity successfully, will probably have a better chance of displeasing fewer people than 4e did and hopefully pleasing many more. It's hard to say. It all depends on how flexible both WotC and the fanbase end up being.

 

[trancejeremy]

While my OP tended to focus on items excluded from the "core", needless to say (but I'm doing so anyway) that inclusion is the same thing.

As it is, there are threads now saying that including something the poster disagrees with is egregious (such as warforged or warlords) and thus it's not the game for them.

The trouble though is that sometimes including stuff diminishes the things you like.

The Warlord, for instance, by including him, you're are saying the Fighter now has a very limited role, rather than being the leader of men he was portrayed as in D&D/1e (where he eventually got to rule over a castle with followers), he's just a got that never talks and hits things with a sword (or axe).

Beyond that, it reduces the role of role-playing. Players should be leaders, not their class.