D&D 5E What are/will be the main beefs of D&D Next relative to other editions?

[the Jester]

I think it's too early to predict much about the 5e reception, but I think two complaints will continue to occur, regardless of anything in the game, as they have for every edition since 2e: "Too videogamey" and "Too Magic: the Gathering."

 

[NewJeffCT]

There were massive complaints about 3.0e when it came out relative to 2e. My recollection is it was mostly about character optimization, power gaming, required rules mastery, removing power from the DM, a rule for everything, feats that strongly encouraged the use of a battlemat and miniatures (and complaints about feats in general), and the quality of the splat books.

As for Next, I have no idea. Can't really know these things without hindsight. It will be something I'm sure. Probably several somethings...like all prior editions.

You're right - there were huge complaints when 3e first came out - including that it was too video-gamey, that it was dramatically dumbed down from the previous editions and that it forced you to use miniatures.

 

[NewJeffCT]

I think it's too early to predict much about the 5e reception, but I think two complaints will continue to occur, regardless of anything in the game, as they have for every edition since 2e: "Too videogamey" and "Too Magic: the Gathering."

You forgot that it's also dumbed down from previous editions.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Likely complaints? Let's see ...

- Spellcasters are overpowered.
- Bards are gimped.
- Fighters are boring / only for beginners.
- Too much feat / class / spell bloat.
- Feels to videogamey.
- Emphasizes rollplaying over roleplaying.
- Needs more rules for exploration and social interaction.
- Needs fewer rules for exploration and social interaction.
- Needs more tactical options.
- Needs fewer tactical options.
- Still doesn't work for Middle Earth.
- Too many splats.
- Missing class/race/spell/feature [X]
- No support for flumphs as PCs.
- Just a money grab by WotC.
- Isn't a reprint of OD&D/BECMI/1E/2E/3E/4E ...

 

[NewJeffCT]

This is also what I'm seeing. The only people I know who care are 4.x people who fear losing ongoing "support". No one else I know really cares about "Next".

I certainly care about it. If Next bombs, it could basically be the death knell for D&D. Plus, while I liked a lot of what 3.5e/Pathfinder did, and I liked some pieces of 4e, neither were completely satisfying to me. So, I am hopeful that 5e will be a step forward for the game.

 

[darjr]

I think the lines of complaint will go along the lines of compromise in the ruleset between older vs newer styles. Sometimes those lines will be drawn between 4e and older players, sometimes between 3e and older players and sometimes between many editions.

For instance I think overnight healing and rests and hit dice are things that will get complaints from both camps in the older vs 4e camps, for completely valid and opposite reasons.

I think the flatter math issues at high levels will get complaints from the older vs 3e and above camps, for completely valid and opposite reasons.

Those two things, and probably others, are some of the issues that I think some of the camps can't or won't look past. I'd hoped that they would be pulled out so that each camp could plug and play the opposed things they want in play style, but it doesn't look like it's going to happen, it looks like a compromise that doesn't make either camp happy will be the baseline rule. I know that it could all change and I hope it does, but that's how I see it at the moment.

 

[Warbringer]

Ok, a little controversy.

I believe now that the point of the play test was to understand the essence of DnD, what about he game makes I'd D&D. For that WoTC gives us our thanks

But, I don't think they really overly concerned that we don't fully buy into the mechanics of the edition, as long as it holds true the the essence of the game. They know the core market place is horribly fragmented, intensely loyal to current games played and relatively small (maybe 1MM active buyers a year, double that actively playing). They will pick up decent revenue from us all (60% intenders in the poll), but they will not unite us under a single banner (it took a near RPG Apocalypse prior to 2000 to do that last time).

Instead, I believe that Hasbro is looking at several other pieces: the 25MM+ lapsed customers in the last 20+years, the rise of complex boardgames (Settlers 25MM+ copies sold), the disposable income of settled (no pun intended) families, and the value of the brand storytelling in an age where Marvel/DC comic movies dominate the box office.

I believe that the objective of the brand is to bring back 5MM players to the brand over the next 3-5 years by awakening the wonder and excitement of pretending to be an elf through a wide reaching transmedia experience: mobile games, computer games, kids entry toys, novels, online cartoons, rpg, movies.

Hasbro in short is building a product bring back lapsers to the brand first, then into the rpg/boardgame products. For that the game must be fast, enjoyable, lacking in complexity and adaptable to allow people to play concepts fueled at the table through other D&D properties.

TL;DR Hasrbo is building Next for the 25MM+ lapsed D&D players of the last 25+ years, not us long time players. They are not building a Holy Grail of D&D, they are building a quick easy game you can share with friends and family after dinner every Wednesday night for 2 hours.

-----------
*we = active loyal gamers
publisher market 50MM, spend $100 per player per year, margin 50%

 

[Greg K]

Class x sucks compared to the version in edition x
Specific mechanics suck in comparison to edition x

Likely complaints? Let's see ...

- Spellcasters are overpowered.
- Bards are gimped.
- Fighters are boring / only for beginners.
- Too much feat / class / spell bloat.
- Feels to videogamey.
- Emphasizes rollplaying over roleplaying.
- Needs more rules for exploration and social interaction.
- Needs fewer rules for exploration and social interaction.
- Needs more tactical options.
- Needs fewer tactical options.
- Still doesn't work for Middle Earth.
- Too many splats.
- Missing class/race/spell/feature [X]
- No support for flumphs as PCs.
- Just a money grab by WotC.
- Isn't a reprint of OD&D/BECMI/1E/2E/3E/4E ...

 

[Kursk]

I certainly care about it.

That's nice. But, as I don't know you it isn't relevant to my comment. As I said, I was speaking about people I know. NOT, people I don't know...

 

[adamc]

As a 4e DM, I don't see myself complaining about 5e so much as choosing something else (maybe 13th age -- still have to see if it stands up to repeated play). I don't feel a lot of rancor toward 5e at this point, but neither does it call to me.

If it were to get a truly open license and widespread support, that might change my mind, but I am highly skeptical that will happen.