Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
jdizzy001

DND next

Recommended Posts

Be advised if this becomes an "edition war" thread we will lock it down.

 

ALL RPGs have their loyal fans, and we will not have people belittled for personal preferences.

 

I personally enjoyed 2e, 3e, 4e, and Pathfinder, and enjoyed the 5e Playtest I was in.  I also enjoy Fate/Fudge based games, White Wolf's WoD stuff, Alternity, Spirit of the Century, HERO system, Marvel Heroic RPG (Coretex plus), MARVEL RPG (FASERIP), WEG Star Wars, Chaosium's Call of C'thulhu, and a score of others.  2e, 3e, 4e are all very different from each other, and are the same game in name only.  Just as there is no reason to hate Call of C'thulhu because it is not Spirit of the Century, there is no reason to hate 4e because it is not 2e or 3e.  

 

I can agree with the sentiment that mechanics can make or break a system, but I also think that the group mindset is equally as important.  A group that is open minded and having fun will enjoy a game with wretched mechanics, because they enjoy each other's company - and then they'll vote never to play that game again (in my experience).  

 

Dilike a game for it's own (lack of) merits, not because it is inferior or different from a previous iteration by the same name.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a couple of packages per class, but not a billion customizing options like 3.5.  

For now.  It won't take too long for the inevitable splatbooks to start coming out.  The question is, do they learn from Paizo and slowly grow them over many years, or do they just churn them out monthly like they did for previous D&D editions.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I will ever be investing in any other D&D books/supplements other than the version I have (AD&D 2e).  It's what I started playing when I first played and what I have been collecting for the past 15 years, I don't really see the point in starting over lol I'll just continue to complete my collection.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I signed up to receive some play test stuff. It was a bit confusing for me because I have never played any 4e. So the, what's different from 4e portions, were a little lost on me. Also, the NDA was puzzling.

 

In the welcome letter section they hoped I would gather a group and we'd play. But without me disclosing any of the rules... ...it really said that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have also heard various rumors about a GenCon release. I kept meaning to try some of the play test packets, but never got around to it. 

 

I am sure I will buy a copy, unless it is priced at a truly ruinous level. Whether it becomes one of my groups regularly chosen systems remains to be seen.

 

 

 

I can agree with the sentiment that mechanics can make or break a system, but I also think that the group mindset is equally as important.  A group that is open minded and having fun will enjoy a game with wretched mechanics, because they enjoy each other's company - and then they'll vote never to play that game again (in my experience).  

 

Dilike a game for it's own (lack of) merits, not because it is inferior or different from a previous iteration by the same name.  

 

 

I would say that a good group can have fun RPG experience with any system.

 

On the other hand, you will have more fun if you pick a system that you and your group actually like. [Noting, of course, that different people like different things.]

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but I also think that the group mindset is equally as important.  A group that is open minded and having fun will enjoy a game with wretched mechanics, because they enjoy each other's company - and then they'll vote never to play that game again (in my experience).  

 

This.  I will play just about any system (except Heroes / Champions - most worstest game ever, IMO) as long as the group is good.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

but I also think that the group mindset is equally as important.  A group that is open minded and having fun will enjoy a game with wretched mechanics, because they enjoy each other's company - and then they'll vote never to play that game again (in my experience).  

 

This.  I will play just about any system (except Heroes / Champions - most worstest game ever, IMO) as long as the group is good.

 

 

^_^

 

My favorite system, and by quite a bit.

 

There's no accounting for taste.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

but I also think that the group mindset is equally as important.  A group that is open minded and having fun will enjoy a game with wretched mechanics, because they enjoy each other's company - and then they'll vote never to play that game again (in my experience).

 

This.  I will play just about any system (except Heroes / Champions - most worstest game ever, IMO) as long as the group is good.

 

^_^

 

My favorite system, and by quite a bit.

 

There's no accounting for taste.

In our time we played an awful lot of Champions.

 

We mocked the mechanics mercilessly. They were atrocious. But we enjoyed the campaigns.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

but I also think that the group mindset is equally as important.  A group that is open minded and having fun will enjoy a game with wretched mechanics, because they enjoy each other's company - and then they'll vote never to play that game again (in my experience).

This.  I will play just about any system (except Heroes / Champions - most worstest game ever, IMO) as long as the group is good.
 

^_^

 

My favorite system, and by quite a bit.

 

There's no accounting for taste.

In our time we played an awful lot of Champions.

 

We mocked the mechanics mercilessly. They were atrocious. But we enjoyed the campaigns.

 

 

Oh, I love the mechanics, but I won't even suggest HERO for most groups I play with. (See also: GURPS.)  ^_^

 

There's an elegance to the rules, but only if you can internalize a rather complex set of very crunchy mechanics. Absolutely not right for people who want the mechanics to be as invisible as possible.

 

But if you like to have lots of buttons to push and knobs to twiddle to tune the game exactly the way you want, there's (IMO) nothing better. They're perfect for me.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have also heard various rumors about a GenCon release. I kept meaning to try some of the play test packets, but never got around to it. 

 

I am sure I will buy a copy, unless it is priced at a truly ruinous level. Whether it becomes one of my groups regularly chosen systems remains to be seen.

date and price leaked here.

 

 

A starter set will release for $19.99 on July 15th, with the Player's Handbook releasing a month later on August 19 for $49.95.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really enjoy 4e! id like to see 5th Ed kickstarter'd! I don't really want to get a starter set and then players manual monster manual etc etc and need to invest in a new bookcase. I would also like to see online content taken advantage of. The 4e char builder is great (I don't even have a players manual) I hope they make one as good if not better for 5e . I think I'll wait till Afew books are out until I buy in

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also signed up for the playtest, but didn't end up doing anything with it it because my group (and Husband, the DM) were pretty heavily invested in Pathfinder already and really like it. We are now even more heavily invested in Pathfinder, and I fear for the lifetime of our shelf of gaming books (Pathfinder books tend to be big and heavy), so I think the only way I'll play Next is if someone else is running it.

 

Non sequiter: Husband and I have been a little puzzled about the name chosen, and wonder what the edition after Next will be called. Next-er? Next 2.0?  :huh: Not at all trying to make fun of it, we're genuinely curious what they'll decide to do.

 

Huzzah!

--OneBoot :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also signed up for the playtest, but didn't end up doing anything with it it because my group (and Husband, the DM) were pretty heavily invested in Pathfinder already and really like it. We are now even more heavily invested in Pathfinder, and I fear for the lifetime of our shelf of gaming books (Pathfinder books tend to be big and heavy), so I think the only way I'll play Next is if someone else is running it.

 

Non sequiter: Husband and I have been a little puzzled about the name chosen, and wonder what the edition after Next will be called. Next-er? Next 2.0?  :huh: Not at all trying to make fun of it, we're genuinely curious what they'll decide to do.

 

Huzzah!

--OneBoot :D

Barnes & Noble screenshots before the products were taken down did not feature the word "next" in the product titles, suggesting that the Official designation will be Dungeons & Dragons, with "Next" being the code for the edition - WotC will likely call it D&D Next where fans say D&D 5e.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I've played DnD since basic.  I really took a shine to 3 and 3.5.  I didn't like 4, but did like Pathfinder.  I played a demo of 5 at Origins last year.  It had some interesting ideas, but I still like Pathfinder better.  If I were to characterize it as any particular flavor of DnD, to me it felt most like basic.

 

I'll probably look at the books when they come out.  I hope to make my saves and not buy them though.

Yeah, that about sums up my feelings about 5e as well.

 

I don't hate it in the same fashion that I loathe 4e - but I like Pathfinder better.

 

On the other hand... WotC didn't fumble their Profession [Marketing] roll this time. (A big hint - insulting your old player base is not an effective way to get them to use your new system when they still like the older one.)

Now I'm curious (as I tend to be oblivious to ad campaigns and missed most of this). Can you point to some examples?

 

I am afraid that could venture too close to the battlefied of the Edition War, hopefully I can keep from straying into the minefield.... But a quick Google will give you more information than you are likely to want.

 

It became a couple of memes for a while -  'You're Doing It Wrong' and the ever popular 'Bad Wrong Fun'.

 

But it came down to WotC trying to downplay previous editions of D&D rather than just trying to play up 4e.

 

4e was created with a distinct play style in mind, and WotC managed to make it sound like folks that prefered other play styles were 'doing it wrong', mostly in their internet statements and in the preview books for 4e.

 

That distinct playstyle, I think, was about WotC wanting to simplify their goals - but the result was WotC playing up 4e as all combat all the time, to the exclusion of such things as 'traipsing through the faerie rings to interact with the little people'. (That line, in Races and Classes by James Wyatt, more than any other, was why I started disliking 4e before ever it appeared in the stores.)

 

More anger over the Guards at the Gate comment - stating outright that 'An encounter with two guards at the city gate isn’t fun. Tell the players they get through the gate without much trouble and move on to the fun. Niggling details of food supplies and encumbrance usually aren’t fun, so don’t sweat them, and let the players get to the adventure and on to the fun. Long treks through endless corridors in the ancient dwarven stronghold beneath the mountains aren’t fun. Move the PCs quickly from encounter to encounter, and on to the fun!'

 

A lot of folks have direct experience that contradicts that statement. (All that it needed was one more word - 'If''. Had Wyatt said 'If an encounter with two guards at the city gate isn't fun' then a lot of anger, angst, sturm, and drang could have been avoided. That was a pretty big 'if'.)

 

Because WotC wanted to jetisson the OGL they made a lot of changes, mostly in order to prevent folks from using the OGL to emulate 4e.

 

4e was not so much a new edition as a new game - and I think that in a more ideal world WotC would have kept the 3.5 and 4e architectures in parallel - they did not occupy quite the same niche, and did not need to compete - 4e was more of a tactical boardgame than a classic RPG. (Not a complaint, by the way - I am very much enjoying Deadzone, which is marketed as a tactical boardgame!)

 

Enough people have used 4e to run games that are not just combat scenarios that I think that it is fair to say that narrowing their marketing in that way was a big mistake for WotC.

 

Even in the playtests enough people had negative reactions to the changes that WotC became more than a bit defensive of the new game. (The ad with a dragon pooping on critics does kind of stick in the mind. Way to keep it classy, WotC.)

 

WotC tried to quash negative feedback rather than addressing it. It is a lot easier to try to defend your decisions than to admit that mistakes were made, especially when your goals are immovable. *EDIT* WotC had some largely unattainable market goals for D&D - Hasbro had changed some of their internal policies, and products under a certain value were likely to be marginalized. So... they looked at the numbers for 3PP sales and added it to their own current numbers - making the 50 meter conclusion jump into a pit trap.

 

All was avoidable, but... there is a reason not to let the game designers do your marketing. (It is amost certain that some of the negative feedback was, uhm... vocal... energetically so - Wyatt & Co. likely felt that they were protecting their wee bairn of a game.)

 

The early missteps with the GSL not being released until after the game itself became available, then needing to be rewritten because nobody liked it, meant that 4e had little 3PP support at release.

 

It meant that WotC lost the support of many of the 3PP that could have been their biggest advantage - most especially the company that had been publishing Dungeon and Dragon magazines. Losing Paizo meant that they had created their own Nemesis.

 

When I first saw that Pathfinder was outselling 4e... I just chalked it up to my personal bias - that it couldn't really be outselling D&D.

 

Then I convinced myself that it was just a local phenomenom.

 

Then I realized that, no, my local area didn't just have better taste in RPGs - that Pathfinder was outperforming D&D nationwide.

 

Then Essentials came out, and, I gather, flopped. (Which I do not entirely understand - the price point was good, and paperbacks allowed them to avoid the returns that retailers hate so much. I may have hated 4e, but I had high hopes for Essentials - I wanted to see the market grow again.)

 

But, however I may feel about 5e (I refuse to call it 'Next'), at the very least WotC has avoided the marketing traps that they fell into during the release of 4e.

 

Also... I think that the comment that WotC saw the sales of 3e products as sales lost has some truth - but they were surprised to discover that just because folks are not purchasing your competitor's products does not mean that they are purchasing yours.

 

Hopefully I have avoided being too much of an Edition Warrior - I really do not like 4e, and would not have liked it even without the shennanigans and perceived shennanigans.

 

I have not bought any WotC products since 4e came out, aside from some Rhemoraz singles from the minis line.

 

The Auld Grump

Edited by TheAuldGrump
  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My biggest curiosity is going to be which system provides more adventure content.  Pathfinder has a lot of people in love with the adventure paths they crank out, simply because it takes a lot of the work out of DMing a long-running campaign. 

 

We're still happily playing 3.5, but we're running low on content these days... (as well as time to generate our own content.)   A switch to whichever game system has the best stories might be in the cards, but not for a while. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...