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

DM Howard

Explorer
My main problem with Next is the trying to be all things to all people kind of deal. I think it will weaken the whole when such a design choice is taken.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
That might be true for you. However, many of us have been around this hobby for a long time and played many game systems (as in close to a hundred or more) including various iterations of D&D. We have enough experience to know what works for *us* and what does not starting at a conceptual level.

I've played since the 1970s. I learned on Basic edition and AD&D 1e. I've played probably as much as you. I've played plenty of other systems as well. So, while I appreciate you have lots of experience, I do not appreciate the suggestion that my opinion differing from yours means I have not been around in this hobby a long time.

My experience tells me that playing with a rule is another thing than reading about the rule. That sometimes, indeed often, the rules we read end up being less or more important to the game than what we thought when we first read the rule.

I've expressed this opinion before, and many older players, including some in this thread, have agreed with me that nothing can replace the experience of actually playing the game to see what ends up being more or less important.

So, my recommendation, which you can take or leave as you wish, is for you to play the game, and then judge what does and does not work. That is the purpose of the playtest, to play the test rules. Not to simply read them and speculate.
 


Weather Report

Banned
Banned
I've played since the 1970s. I learned on Basic edition and AD&D 1e. I've played probably as much as you. I've played plenty of other systems as well. So, while I appreciate you have lots of experience, I do not appreciate the suggestion that my opinion differing from yours means I have not been around in this hobby a long time.

My experience tells me that playing with a rule is another thing than reading about the rule. That sometimes, indeed often, the rules we read end up being less or more important to the game than what we thought when we first read the rule.

I've expressed this opinion before, and many older players, including some in this thread, have agreed with me that nothing can replace the experience of actually playing the game to see what ends up being more or less important.

So, my recommendation, which you can take or leave as you wish, is for you to play the game, and then judge what does and does not work. That is the purpose of the playtest, to play the test rules. Not to simply read them and speculate.


Nice, exactly, that's why I get irritated when people dismiss that 4th Ed is not my favourite by assuming I have never played/DMed it.
 

billd91

Not your screen monkey (he/him) 🇺🇦🇵🇸🏳️‍⚧️
I agree with everything everyone has posted in this thread. And that's the problem...'Next'; by trying to do everything well, does nothing well. Or distinctively.

My beef is calling it 'Next'. I hate that. Call it 5e, WotC.

While under development, I have no problem with calling something "XXX Next". That's particularly useful when you start development on some subsystems or ideas that may or may not make it into the edition at press date. Then those ideas remain D&D Next material - it's just that the Next in question is the next edition of the game. Of course, I work in the software industry where the version in which a particular project or feature debuts is a bit fluid, so that may color my perception of the issue...
 

Roland55

First Post
I've expressed this opinion before, and many older players, including some in this thread, have agreed with me that nothing can replace the experience of actually playing the game to see what ends up being more or less important.

So, my recommendation, which you can take or leave as you wish, is for you to play the game, and then judge what does and does not work. That is the purpose of the playtest, to play the test rules. Not to simply read them and speculate.

Seconded. Maybe even thirded.

Like Mistwell, I've been around since the '70s and have played every single iteration of this game. Reading the rules doesn't help much -- you've got to play it to find out.*

Why not try it? It won't hurt.

[*This goes for many things in life. I was sure that girlfriend I picked up in 1977 was just a "passing thing." Was I ever wrong -- 36 years and a rather large posse of kids later, we still wake up smiling.]
 

Greg K

Legend
I've expressed this opinion before, and many older players, including some in this thread, have agreed with me that nothing can replace the experience of actually playing the game to see what ends up being more or less important.
And, I have had many older players in threads agree with me that the designers have taken a few of the best parts of previous edition, implemented them in the worst way and then combined them with the worst aspects of previous editions and some horrible "new" ideas which, when combined, override the few potentially decent things about Next
So, my recommendation, which you can take or leave as you wish, is for you to play the game, and then judge what does and does not work. That is the purpose of the playtest, to play the test rules. Not to simply read them and speculate.

I don't need to playtest it. The game does not inspire me to playtest it. For my tastes,
1. The races I find a step back from some of the better parts of 4e (removing the non-biological parts and making them feats) and the giving of humans +1 to all ability scores is uninteresting.

2. The only two classes that I would want to play or have in a campaign that I run are the Land of the Circle Druid and the Mage (not that I find either perfect). I consider the other classes to be pretty pathetic in concept and/or design. Some draw from what I consider to be the worst parts of pre 3e. Others continue to draw from what I consider bad ideas of 3e and 4e and ignore good ideas from pre-3e. Then there are just new mechanics for which I don't care (e.g. Combat Superiority)

3. Skills not a fan of the level based proficiency bonus

4. multiclassing: I didn't like 3e's multiclassing rules. Ability Scores as implemented is terrible. They also don't address my issues with 3e style multiclassing (and most of them can be addressed using levels 1 and 2 as apprentice levels).

So, from a character stand point, there is little that I like. Those issues are going to override the few things that I do like or find intriguing such as Advantage.
 

Kinak

First Post
So, my recommendation, which you can take or leave as you wish, is for you to play the game, and then judge what does and does not work. That is the purpose of the playtest, to play the test rules. Not to simply read them and speculate.
That's the intent of the playtest, but playing D&D, as I'm sure you know, takes a lot more than just downloading the files and hitting run.

You have to get someone excited. They need to go out and get their friends excited... in theory excited enough to also sign up for the playtest, but whatever. They all need to set aside a time, competing with other games and other leisure activities, and actually play.

But that's exactly the same process people will be going through when they have the game in hand on launch day. If that process is breaking down, they need to know where and why.

This brings me to the flipside to your suggestion: WotC wants to get as many people playing the game as possible. Potential customers and wary customers are the ones they should be getting feedback from. The people who are sure either way are largely irrelevant.

Cheers!
Kinak
 

Ahnehnois

First Post
This brings me to the flipside to your suggestion: WotC wants to get as many people playing the game as possible. Potential customers and wary customers are the ones they should be getting feedback from. The people who are sure either way are largely irrelevant.
Good point. The people that really matter in this context are the conscientious ones who could go either way.
 

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
And, I have had many older players in threads agree with me that the designers have taken a few of the best parts of previous edition, implemented them in the worst way and then combined them with the worst aspects of previous editions and some horrible "new" ideas which, when combined, override the few potentially decent things about Next


I don't need to playtest it. The game does not inspire me to playtest it.

OK then. I guess we won't see you commenting in any more D&D Next threads, as you already made up your mind about the game without playing it. That's a shame. Ah well, perhaps I will see you in some 4e threads.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top