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

log in or register to remove this ad


I am not a out and out fan of DDN but I can help but think the DDN does nothing new might be overstating things. For many gamers who have only played 3rd and 4th ed, quick combats might be something significantly new. The question is what drops out of 20 minute fights. Do fights have meaningful tactical choices and challenges to be worth sitting down and playing?

My guess of one beef that may come out of DDN may well be bounded accuracy not giving enough sense of progression - especially in a system where powers are not overt as 4th ed. Already when I look at DDN I have my Nigel Tufnall/Spinal Tap moments ("this one goes up to eleven") when I think about the numbers of 3rd and 4th ed just being higher.


Numbers were also higher in BECMI, 1st and 2nd as well. That lack of progression could be a problem Ie its what D&D players expect.


Mearls has said repeatedly the "D&D Next" is just a placeholder name, and ideally he'd like to just call it "Dungeons & Dragons" when it's released.

The thing that I think gets missed in these discussions is that for every group, be that TSR-era, 3.x, or 4e, there are a lot of people who play those editions not because they are ideal and perfect for them, but because they are the best version of the ones available. A lot of 3e folks went to 4e not because they absolutely agreed with everything in 4e's design, but because 4e offered them something they weren't getting from 3e. A certain degree of inter-class balance, or ease of DMing, for example. And if Next can offer that, they can do without Healing Surges, or keywords, or powers. Likewise, there are folks who didn't move on to 4e because, while 3e wasn't ideal for them, they found it gave them the kind of play they wanted more than 4e. Or perhaps they prefer the universal d20 system to the varied systems of TSR-era.

Even for TSR-era and OSR folks, there are some who play because they feel those rules get out of the way better than either WotC edition, but if 5e can provide that kind of play they'd be amenable to it. I certainly fall into this group. I'll play any edition, but B/X is the only one I want to run right now. I know it, I like the kind of play those rules encourage. But that doesn't mean that 5e can't offer me anything. If 5e can offer the same kind of play, then the only thing B/X really has going for it for me is nostalgia. And that's cool, too, in its way. But if I'm trying to get a group together and the other folks I can get together don't share that nostalgia, then 5e offers me something. Particularly if 5e can offer those varied players something that my preferred edition doesn't offer.

4e does this to an extent with Essentials. The players in one 4e group I play with love making characters, trying out different options, optimizing to a certain extent. I'm not interested in that, so for me an Essentials Knight or Slayer works fine. But I'm not particularly interested in running 4e; I like running B/X. So if 5e can offer me the same kind of experience as running B/X, but provide players with more options, without requiring me to come up with a bunch of houserules, then awesome. I'm down with 5e.


The main complaints about 5e will be
1. Too simple
2. Too complex
3. Too derivative of prior editions
4. Too much new stuff
5. Too anime
6. Too videogamey
7. Too wargamey
8. Too storygamey
9. Too vanilla fantasy
10. Spellcasters are too powerful
11. Spellcasters have been nerfed too much
12. Fighters are boring
13. Fighters have too many options
14. Unsatisfactory licensing
15. Too many wierd races
16. Not enough options at release
17. Bloated
18. DIssassociated mechanics
19. Slavish simulationism
20. Incompatible with prior editions
21. Insulting prior editions
22. Brown-nosing prior editions
23. Has skills
24. Skill system is underdeveloped
25. Too focused on combat
26. Lack of tactical combat
27. Sexist art
28. Politically correct
29. I've already got 1e/2e/3e/4e/PF
30. Fireball should be renamed fire pellet
31. They mucked up Forgotten Realms
32. They mucked up planar cosmology
33. Too minatures dependent
34. Where can I get miniatures?
35. Doesn't stop munchkinism
36. Doesn't stop killer DMs
37. Doesn't stop Monty Hall DMs
38. Not conducive to house ruling
39. Mechanics are not unified
40. Promotes Viking Hat
41. Promotes Rules Lawyers
42. Lamest adventures
43. Too much resource tracking
44. Pooor edting
45. Has classes, hit points and d20 mechanic
46. It's a smartphone app
47. Needs a computer to play
48. Too deadly
49. Too easy
50. Not enough squirrels
Last edited:


[MENTION=6680772]Iosue[/MENTION], if Mearls ends up calling 5E simply "Dungeons & Dragons" and he wants to (if only subsconsciously) continue the tradition of editionrage, then maybe WotC can rename older editions, so we'd have:

5E: Dungeons & Dragons
4E: Wizards & Warcraft
3E: Munchkins & Optimizers
2E: Worlds & White Wolves, aka "The Fluffy Edition"
1E: Gygaxians & Grey Elves
OD&D: Grognards & Greybeards

Or something like that.

I'm A Banana

My hate of NETX know no limit.

It fails in just about every aspect of a game,and it is more of a rule playign game than role playing game.

Frist off it is way to liniar.You just get better in everyway.THere is no way in avoiding it.I mena no mater what you are, you have have hit points and levels.

It is over comlicated,and simplist at the same time. IT is harder to hit a mmman in plate armor.And hammers and swords tear chaim mail the same way. Then you have the detail of when you can atack,and what range weapons have,and how far you can move.

Classes, are jokes. really.From how hits points.skill points,and bonus powers are moved about. In the end in boils down to this.

levle systems do not work.They may work on paper, but a level 12 fighter or even mag doesn't need to fear having a sword swung at them, or even getting stabed. Also with the way hit points work, your either fighting as if nothing happened or are out cold.Nothing in the middle.

the flaw of rolling a d20 is also that the best fighter in the word, taking up his most magical sword, misses 5% of the time.ALso so all fighters are just as good with all weapons they use.We all know that training with hand to hand weapons will make you great with a bow.Also if your good with guns, you must know how to use a sword.

In the end, NEXT is too many rules, and not enough rules at the same time.Has too many strick rules, while leaving many feild wide open with no reason. I am ranting here,and know this dosen't make much sense to many people.BUt in the end I would like to see one come with a good reason NEXT is a good system.

PS: Those peeps are not thinking about +n swords properly.
Last edited:

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads