|
1 year ago ::
Jan 30, 2012 - 10:22PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Jan 17, 2012
|
I am asking because Monte Cook's last L&L said that 5e was all about different editions playing at the same table.
But I do not have this problem. My groups loves 3.x and no one wants to play 1e or 4e. I am sure lots of groups love 4e too and do not have a divided table.
So why should we buy 5e? Is it a marketing error or are lots of tables divided out there? I was expecting 5e to be more innovative, to propose something special to those who didn't have that problem.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 30, 2012 - 10:26PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Jan 12, 2012
|
I like 4th, another guy is diehard 3.5, and the rest of them could play either. We currently play Pathfinder because I'd feel bad telling 3.5 guy to stay home.
I'm not sure 5th will offer a real solution to this.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 30, 2012 - 10:30PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2003
|
I am asking because Monte Cook's last L&L said that 5e was all about different editions playing at the same table.
But I do not have this problem. My groups loves 3.x and no one wants to play 1e or 4e. I am sure lots of groups love 4e too and do not have a divided table.
So why should we buy 5e? Is it a marketing error or are lots of tables divided out there? I was expecting 5e to be more innovative, to propose something special to those who didn't have that problem.
Honestly I think almost all of that is hype designed to try to get as many people to buy the game as possible. Nothing wrong with that per se, but let's recongize hype for what it is. In my own experiences, I've had to deal with a divided table exactly once and that was near the end of the edition wars when Pathfinder was finally getting published for real (Aug 2001 IIRC). One person in particular in my group had hated 4e from the start, refused to even give the system a fair chance, and frankly was borderline disruptive about it...and unfortunately it was his house. Another player after running a brief 3.5 campaign and giving up on it, refused (and still refuses) to run or play anything other than fourth. It was a large group and we basically split down the middle. The seperation was what diplomats would call "correct" and I'll leave it at that. (I don't think people wound up hating each other, but feelings were bruised.)
Really other than that, when people get together they either agree to a single (usually some compromise is involved but a common ground is sought) playsytle and thus game, or they agree to play the game that is offered whether they like it or not (generally if you are new). If a player doesn't like the game, they are either welcome to run their own or find another group. I myself have walked away from one OSR group (and on very good terms....the DM is still in my friends list) simply because after a few sessions, I found that "old style" gaming wasn't as good as I remembered it was, and we agreed to part amicably. I find that is the usual situation. Gamers group with friends who share gaming styles. Nothing wrong with that, but it makes me question the "need" for a 5e at least for DnD as a hobby (now for Wotc as a business, that is likely a very different story).
-Polaris
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 30, 2012 - 10:31PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
May 11, 2009
|
Our group started with 3.5, but I recently started a secondary campaign of 4th, while our 3.5 campaign is just about to shift to Pathfinder. We recognise good and bad aspects in all these systems, so if D&D Next can pull off universality, it will be very good. I also think it will be of benefit to new players, as they would only need to learn one set of rules.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 31, 2012 - 2:05AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Mar 26, 2008
|
I have two groups I play with. I met them all at the same time playing D&D, but eventually some of the players got tired of 4th ed. The one group became two. One playing Pathfinder, the other playing 4th Ed with me moving between the two.
For me 4th Ed has lost it's charm and I know at least one other player in my 4th Ed group who agrees. We're going to finish our current campaigns, but hope afterwards 5th Ed can fix some of the flaws and make a game that's enjoyable once more due to the mechanics, and not just because of the people.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 31, 2012 - 6:48AM
#6
|
|
|
We started playing 3rd, all had prior edition experience, moved to 4th with some grumbling. Right now playing an old school feeling 4th game. Will move to 5th because it's probably not gonna be awful, lol.
What we could definately not decide on... what older edition to play! AD&D, 2nd and 3.5 fans... so 4th or 5th is easier for us.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 31, 2012 - 7:35AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Nov 30, 2005
|
I play with 5 groups.
- Old College Group- All play 3.5. Gave 4e a disengenuis chance, and hated it.
- Regular Group - Were a really hard sell on 4e, and now that I am trying to go back to 3.5, some refuse, and some dont care either way.
- Wife one on one - Play 3.5. Both enjoy it. Convereted her from 4e which she learned DND on.
- College Friends - Seperate group than above entirely. Play PF because its "more balanced [relative to 3.5] and they don't see as many over powered VOP Monks". They tried 4e during early release.
- Wifes Friends - Play 4e, but really push for second edition or savage worlds as often as possible.
I strongly prefer in this order 3.5 > 4e > PF > 2nd. Side note, wife hates playing with her friends but we go because its an awkaward situation to back out of and they get really offended. We are fairly divided, and I'd love to get a system I can play with all or most of my groups. I can tell you right now, the old college group probably won't give it a fair shot, the regular group will grumble and then play the new edition, the wife and I will convert if we like it, college friends may give it a shot and may change but probably not. Wifes friends will change, and still push for 2nd edition. Most of those predictions are made knowing the people, and knowing that the actual quality of the system won't matter.
5e comments and thoughts all in one place. Check it out to provide feedback, mock, or steal ideas.
http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/28835423/Krusks_5e_Design_Goals?sdb=1
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 31, 2012 - 8:04AM
#8
|
|
|
I am asking because Monte Cook's last L&L said that 5e was all about different editions playing at the same table.
But I do not have this problem. My groups loves 3.x and no one wants to play 1e or 4e. I am sure lots of groups love 4e too and do not have a divided table.
So why should we buy 5e? Is it a marketing error or are lots of tables divided out there? I was expecting 5e to be more innovative, to propose something special to those who didn't have that problem.
4e has divided the D&D community. That's nothing new of course (happens to some extent with every edition change). 4e was a very different kind of D&D game however, and this time, there is competition out there. Some real concerns for business I think.
The Next game will be an 40th anniversary edition of D&D (so to speak). There's a golden opportunity here to bring the community back together. I'm not convinced a single game can be everything to everyone (as the designers have implied) but I hope the Next game finds as wide an audience as possible.
= = =
We had one player leave the table during the switch from v3.5 to 4e. When D&D Essentials came out, he came back. He liked the Slayer but never took to the PHB fighter. I hope the Next game of D&D is able to do this for other divided tables (we can't be the only ones  ).
There are a lot of different games of D&D out there right now, all in print and supported: Pathfinder, Castles & Crusades, Laybrinth Lord (both Basic and Advanced versions), OSRIC, Swords & Wizardry, Hackmaster (all inspired by earlier editions). That's off the top o' my head; there's prolly a half dozen others I'm forgetting or not aware of.
We can pick our game and play, unlike other times in D&D history. Once an edition went out of print, that was it for on-going support. The Next game of D&D proposes it seems, to bring us all back to the same table. I'm all for it.
/\ Art
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 31, 2012 - 8:13AM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Sep 25, 2007
|
My group breakdown is as follows:
2 of us prefer AD&D 2nd edition in nearly all situations.
1 of us prefers 4th edition in all cases other than epic battles in unique locals which tend to end up taking much much longer than he would like.
6 of us prefer Pathfinder for the class/archetype/skill/feat portions.
If 5e can do what it wants to do, I can see us all prefering it over other options because our 2 AD&D folk could stick to mostly bare-bones no-optionals characters while each of the other 7 digs deeper into the optional levels of complexity and customization to their satisfaction... and yet we could all be playing the game and getting our desired style of character at once (as opposed to in turns while we switch from Pathfinder to AD&D and back from time to time, and leave the 4th edition guy to play with a different group of players 1 day a week).
Careful, man. That much logic might be illegal on the internet. - Salla
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 31, 2012 - 8:39AM
#10
|
|
|
All of my group's players have experience in previous editions and we've recently mostly given up on 4e.
Well, not given up on, exactly but we've all decided we'd much rather play Pathfinder.
I'm looking forward to seeing what the final prodcut for 5e/Next will be, though.
|
|
|
