Page 2 of 3

Re: Has your interest in 5E changed?

Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 7:42 am
by Doc Necrotic
Tim Baker wrote:
Thu Jan 16, 2020 3:23 am
shesheyan wrote:
Wed Jan 15, 2020 8:37 am
I have to say the 5e Creature Codex (Kobold Press) has raised my interest in Midgard as a setting. The codex is very well done and from what I can read about that setting, in the yellow box side bars, intrigues me. I might invest in Midgard 5e books this year. ;)
Kobold Press' products are consistently a high quality. They really set the bar for third-party publishers. The Midgard Worldbook is a great place to start if you're interested in the setting, its lore, history, pantheon, geography, races, etc.
Not gonna lie, Kobold Press is one of the few things keeping me in 5E. They're fantastic, to say the least.

Re: Has your interest in 5E changed?

Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:29 am
by pawsplay
My Adventurers League character is a fighter, and honestly I can't remember ever having this much fun with a straight-up fighter in any D&D game before.

Re: Has your interest in 5E changed?

Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:48 am
by lookatroopa
Reaching back to shortly after I started playing D&D with 3.5e, I've always been into the peripheral and experimental stuff, especially material from the magazines (even built a huge spacefaring campaign primarily off of Shadow of the Spider Moon, supplemented with a bunch of unrelated articles for the purposes of Star Trek-style "planet of the day" plots). I'd say that 5e certainly has a strong core, but the dearth of material that doesn't play it safe really puts me off. I will say though, the incorporation of 2e elements that were dropped in 3.x has been an inspiration for me to go back and explore that edition myself, and it might now be my favourite version of the game overall.

Re: Has your interest in 5E changed?

Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 3:00 pm
by shesheyan
lookatroopa wrote:
Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:48 am
....but the dearth of material that doesn't play it safe really puts me off...
I don't understand this sentence. If you have time can you expand on this with more details? ;)

Re: Has your interest in 5E changed?

Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 5:11 pm
by lookatroopa
shesheyan wrote:
Thu Jan 16, 2020 3:00 pm
lookatroopa wrote:
Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:48 am
....but the dearth of material that doesn't play it safe really puts me off...
I don't understand this sentence. If you have time can you expand on this with more details? ;)
I'm referring to the fact that, outside of rare occasions with Dragon+, the only official game material that gets published for 5e is their main line of adventures and sourcebooks, none of which are particularly groundbreaking in their content. Theoretically, Descent into Avernus could've gone there, but even that felt like they were playing it very safe despite the fact that it's an extraplanar adventure.

Re: Has your interest in 5E changed?

Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2020 5:49 am
by Tim Baker
pawsplay wrote:
Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:29 am
My Adventurers League character is a fighter, and honestly I can't remember ever having this much fun with a straight-up fighter in any D&D game before.
I'm glad to hear it! What do you like about the 5e fighter? What sub-class did you choose?

Re: Has your interest in 5E changed?

Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2020 5:58 am
by Tim Baker
lookatroopa wrote:
Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:48 am
the incorporation of 2e elements that were dropped in 3.x has been an inspiration for me to go back and explore that edition myself, and it might now be my favourite version of the game overall.
What aspects of 2e do you enjoy in 5e?

Re: Has your interest in 5E changed?

Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2020 9:19 am
by pawsplay
Tim Baker wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 5:49 am
pawsplay wrote:
Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:29 am
My Adventurers League character is a fighter, and honestly I can't remember ever having this much fun with a straight-up fighter in any D&D game before.
I'm glad to hear it! What do you like about the 5e fighter? What sub-class did you choose?
Champion.

Re: Has your interest in 5E changed?

Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2020 9:28 am
by lookatroopa
Tim Baker wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 5:58 am
lookatroopa wrote:
Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:48 am
the incorporation of 2e elements that were dropped in 3.x has been an inspiration for me to go back and explore that edition myself, and it might now be my favourite version of the game overall.
What aspects of 2e do you enjoy in 5e?
Not actually sure, I'm not very rules-literate and can't spot commonalities between systems easily, but just hearing that 5e borrows a lot of mechanics from 2e is what got me curious about what those mechanics were like in that edition.

Re: Has your interest in 5E changed?

Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2020 2:31 pm
by shesheyan
Tim Baker wrote:
Thu Jan 16, 2020 3:23 am
shesheyan wrote:
Wed Jan 15, 2020 8:37 am
I have to say the 5e Creature Codex (Kobold Press) has raised my interest in Midgard as a setting. The codex is very well done and from what I can read about that setting, in the yellow box side bars, intrigues me. I might invest in Midgard 5e books this year. ;)
Kobold Press' products are consistently a high quality. They really set the bar for third-party publishers. The Midgard Worldbook is a great place to start if you're interested in the setting, its lore, history, pantheon, geography, races, etc.
Actually I was turned off from Kobold Press by the two Rise of Tiamat 5e books. Mostly because of a bad choice of paper. It was too dark making the shaded maps style muddy and hard to read. Also some of the numbers on some maps were either missing are misplaced. :facepalm:

Re: Has your interest in 5E changed?

Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2020 2:53 pm
by Havard
shesheyan wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 2:31 pm
Tim Baker wrote:
Thu Jan 16, 2020 3:23 am
shesheyan wrote:
Wed Jan 15, 2020 8:37 am
I have to say the 5e Creature Codex (Kobold Press) has raised my interest in Midgard as a setting. The codex is very well done and from what I can read about that setting, in the yellow box side bars, intrigues me. I might invest in Midgard 5e books this year. ;)
Kobold Press' products are consistently a high quality. They really set the bar for third-party publishers. The Midgard Worldbook is a great place to start if you're interested in the setting, its lore, history, pantheon, geography, races, etc.
Actually I was turned off from Kobold Press by the two Rise of Tiamat 5e books. Mostly because of a bad choice of paper. It was too dark making the shaded maps style muddy and hard to read. Also some of the numbers on some maps were either missing are misplaced. :facepalm:
While I am not a fan of the Rise of Tiamat books, I would not hold this against Kobold Press. I am a big fan of them in general, including many of their 5E books.

-Havard

Re: Has your interest in 5E changed?

Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2020 2:59 pm
by shesheyan
Havard wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 2:53 pm
shesheyan wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 2:31 pm
Tim Baker wrote:
Thu Jan 16, 2020 3:23 am
shesheyan wrote:
Wed Jan 15, 2020 8:37 am
I have to say the 5e Creature Codex (Kobold Press) has raised my interest in Midgard as a setting. The codex is very well done and from what I can read about that setting, in the yellow box side bars, intrigues me. I might invest in Midgard 5e books this year. ;)
Kobold Press' products are consistently a high quality. They really set the bar for third-party publishers. The Midgard Worldbook is a great place to start if you're interested in the setting, its lore, history, pantheon, geography, races, etc.
Actually I was turned off from Kobold Press by the two Rise of Tiamat 5e books. Mostly because of a bad choice of paper. It was too dark making the shaded maps style muddy and hard to read. Also some of the numbers on some maps were either missing are misplaced. :facepalm:
While I am not a fan of the Rise of Tiamat books, I would not hold this against Kobold Press. I am a big fan of them in general, including many of their 5E books.

-Havard
Well, I did buy their Creature Codex and like it very much, like I said in my previous post. It just took me a while to even consider looking at one of their books after my RoT disappointment.

Re: Has your interest in 5E changed?

Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2020 4:19 pm
by Havard
shesheyan wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 2:59 pm
Well, I did buy their Creature Codex and like it very much, like I said in my previous post. It just took me a while to even consider looking at one of their books after my RoT disappointment.
Sorry, I missed that. Thanks for clarifying! :)

-Havard

Re: Has your interest in 5E changed?

Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2020 3:20 am
by Tim Baker
shesheyan wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 2:31 pm
Actually I was turned off from Kobold Press by the two Rise of Tiamat 5e books. Mostly because of a bad choice of paper. It was too dark making the shaded maps style muddy and hard to read. Also some of the numbers on some maps were either missing are misplaced. :facepalm:
I heard that was a very rushed product to meet the launch deadline for 5e, while the rules were still changing from underneath the Kobold Press designers. It made for an entertaining podcast interview, but a somewhat disappointing product. I suspect the maps are on them. I'm not sure about the print quality, though. It wouldn't surprise me if WotC handled the printing side of things.

Perhaps I should qualify my previous statement to omit collaborations with other publishers. :)

Re: Has your interest in 5E changed?

Posted: Sun Jan 19, 2020 8:51 pm
by zontoxira
lookatroopa wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 9:28 am
Tim Baker wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 5:58 am
What aspects of 2e do you enjoy in 5e?
Not actually sure, I'm not very rules-literate and can't spot commonalities between systems easily, but just hearing that 5e borrows a lot of mechanics from 2e is what got me curious about what those mechanics were like in that edition.
To be honest, I'd be hard-pressed to point any aspects of 2e baked into 5e despite the fact that I've been playing the former for over 10 years now. Proficiencies would be the most obvious, fighting styles, and subclasses (kits), even though they work a little differently. I can say for certain that it does feel 2e at some times, like a strong mix between story and dungeon. I got even more 2e vibes back when it was called D&D Next, especially with nomenclature (or at least, that's what I remember).

Re: Has your interest in 5E changed?

Posted: Sun Jan 19, 2020 10:51 pm
by Tim Baker
zontoxira wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 8:51 pm
To be honest, I'd be hard-pressed to point any aspects of 2e baked into 5e despite the fact that I've been playing the former for over 10 years now. Proficiencies would be the most obvious, fighting styles, and subclasses (kits), even though they work a little differently. I can say for certain that it does feel 2e at some times, like a strong mix between story and dungeon.
It seems to me that you just provided a pretty good list, right there. :) I find that 5e has several elements that feel like 2e, although it doesn't have many mechanics that are as directly tied back to that edition. Although you did a nice job of pointing out the elements that have that more direct tie. I can note anecdotally that my DM hadn't played/run D&D since 2e, but 5e brought him back. He seems to like that it feels close enough to 2e while streamlining some of the mechanics and making it more cohesive.
zontoxira wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 8:51 pm
I got even more 2e vibes back when it was called D&D Next, especially with nomenclature (or at least, that's what I remember).
I can't quite put my finger on it, but when D&D Next was experimenting with mechanics that weren't all d20-driven, it really contributed to more of a direct 2e feel in my mind. By the time 5e was released, I felt like they were playing it safe and bringing the mechanics into much more of a simplified 3e alignment, while not completely tossing away some of the older edition feel. However, I believe the 5e product that most feels like an older edition of the game is the free Basic Rules PDF that has the original races and classes from all the way back in the White Box + Greyhawk days.

Re: Has your interest in 5E changed?

Posted: Thu Jan 23, 2020 4:53 pm
by Dread Delgath
While I don't hate 5e, I find myself becoming less enthused about running it currently. I've had a life changing decision affect my game-time, and I don't see myself playing or running 5e again for the foreseeable future.

I am moving to a low population area of the country to a very small town where most of the adults are adults and do adult things, and have zero interest in fantasy games. The kids or younger adults will have video games out the wazoo, but that's about it, and I have no interest in delving into video games or enticing video gamers into a game of D&D based on what they think they know and what they can expect from a table top game.

I will have to resort to solo games and online interactions from here on out, and I seriously doubt that I'll get what I want out of a 5e game in either format. I'll search out and use the simplest forms of D&D rules systems to fulfill solo/online games to maximize game time vs. rules time.

Re: Has your interest in 5E changed?

Posted: Thu Jan 23, 2020 7:34 pm
by shesheyan
Dread Delgath wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 4:53 pm
I will have to resort to solo games and online interactions from here on out, and I seriously doubt that I'll get what I want out of a 5e game in either format. I'll search out and use the simplest forms of D&D rules systems to fulfill solo/online games to maximize game time vs. rules time.
You will have more chances to find players on line with D&D5e. You've played 250+ games with this system, as per your other post. You should know the rules by heart now. ;)

Re: Has your interest in 5E changed?

Posted: Thu Jan 23, 2020 8:31 pm
by Doc Necrotic
Tim Baker wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 10:51 pm
zontoxira wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 8:51 pm
To be honest, I'd be hard-pressed to point any aspects of 2e baked into 5e despite the fact that I've been playing the former for over 10 years now. Proficiencies would be the most obvious, fighting styles, and subclasses (kits), even though they work a little differently. I can say for certain that it does feel 2e at some times, like a strong mix between story and dungeon.
It seems to me that you just provided a pretty good list, right there. :) I find that 5e has several elements that feel like 2e, although it doesn't have many mechanics that are as directly tied back to that edition. Although you did a nice job of pointing out the elements that have that more direct tie. I can note anecdotally that my DM hadn't played/run D&D since 2e, but 5e brought him back. He seems to like that it feels close enough to 2e while streamlining some of the mechanics and making it more cohesive.
zontoxira wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 8:51 pm
I got even more 2e vibes back when it was called D&D Next, especially with nomenclature (or at least, that's what I remember).
I can't quite put my finger on it, but when D&D Next was experimenting with mechanics that weren't all d20-driven, it really contributed to more of a direct 2e feel in my mind. By the time 5e was released, I felt like they were playing it safe and bringing the mechanics into much more of a simplified 3e alignment, while not completely tossing away some of the older edition feel. However, I believe the 5e product that most feels like an older edition of the game is the free Basic Rules PDF that has the original races and classes from all the way back in the White Box + Greyhawk days.
I won't lie, I loved the playtest era a lot. The mood and atmosphere felt quite different then, but it might have had to do with the fact that nothing was fully set in stone. Plus, there was this general hype over modularity over just playing it safe. Honestly, when the product was being finalized, that was my first strike towards burnout. I kind of want to read over some of the old playtest documents I have, just to get an idea of where they were trying to go with things.

Re: Has your interest in 5E changed?

Posted: Thu Jan 23, 2020 8:56 pm
by Dread Delgath
shesheyan wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 7:34 pm
Dread Delgath wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 4:53 pm
I will have to resort to solo games and online interactions from here on out, and I seriously doubt that I'll get what I want out of a 5e game in either format. I'll search out and use the simplest forms of D&D rules systems to fulfill solo/online games to maximize game time vs. rules time.
You will have more chances to find players on line with D&D5e. You've played 250+ games with this system, as per your other post. You should know the rules by heart now. ;)
:lol: Yes, I do know them pretty well, but knowing a rules system is much different than actually playing the game that I want to play in. ;)

I guess that my experience with the kinds of players that play the rules instead of playing the game has also soured me. 5e rules are loose enough to let rule-players ruin my enjoyment of the fantasy world.

Re: Has your interest in 5E changed?

Posted: Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:17 pm
by Princess Strega
Dread Delgath wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 8:56 pm
:lol: Yes, I do know them pretty well, but knowing a rules system is much different than actually playing the game that I want to play in. ;)
I am curious to know as to which system that is.

Re: Has your interest in 5E changed?

Posted: Thu Jan 23, 2020 11:03 pm
by Parzival
These days, I’d consider using 5e’s combat, saving throws, and skills systems, but I’d strip the classes and races to barebones, get rid of “level up Feats,” restrict the traditional thief skills to thieves (oh, okay, “rogues” :roll: ), and redo the magic rules considerably (including stripping out the combat cantrips in favor of more spells available to cast at low levels). And I’d dump everything that’s obviously based on the Forgotten Realms and insert Known World stuff instead.

But that’s too much work, when what I really want is my old school BECMI with a few house rules. And with those, I won’t have anybody bugging me about their “awesome character build” from this or that supplemental book. :P (Okay, really, it’s fine with me if others play that way; it’s just not the way I roll.)

Re: Has your interest in 5E changed?

Posted: Thu Jan 23, 2020 11:26 pm
by Dread Delgath
Angel Tarragon wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:17 pm
Dread Delgath wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 8:56 pm
:lol: Yes, I do know them pretty well, but knowing a rules system is much different than actually playing the game that I want to play in. ;)
I am curious to know as to which system that is.
5e. Or, do you wish to know what I mean when I say, "...playing the game that I want to play in."?

I firmly believe that the rules you play with set the tone of the game. Although I have attempted to run 5e as I would any of my own 0D&D, AD&D, BX D&D games, but using 5e as your rules system is an uphill battle when you play with players who play the rules and not the game.

5e doesn't offer the "risk vs. reward" paradigm that earlier systems did, and without that in place, my players would rather play the rules to advance, rather than play the game as it was intended: immersion into a fantasy realm.

The immersion into a fantasy realm has been replaced by the Power Game and the Story Game, wherein the rules have become the same: To advance, you play your character to advance and solve the story. Some players are immersed in their characters, but don't care about the current campaign plot any farther than it will offer advancement. Few more players are immersed into the campaign plot, but not the fantasy realm itself.

They may see the realm as little more than a collection of codified rules, but not as a place that their characters exist in with any ties to their decisions or consciences beyond what their alignment informs that they are.

The game I want to play in examines the realm from a character's point of view. Advancement of campaign plots or character levels are ancillary to play, although advancement is necessary for the character to exert more influence or control over the fantasy realm itself. Most players look at this system as a means to destroy, conquer, or drain of resources, rather than an entity that itself will most likely be altered for the worse. Players don't have any incentive to 'play nice' with the realm and burn their bridges too often because there is no focus on this aspect of play in 5e.

0e, 1e, BX and BECMI looked at high level characters and offer MANAGING realms for the betterment of the societies that the characters are supposed to rule or serve. From this perspective, low level characters can at least start out their potential careers in adventuring with the end goal of one day becoming a ruler.

There is a chain of command in these rules that reinforces a very neglected resource in D&D: reliance on other players or NPCs. Of course, the downside is that the characters may become just a 'cog in the works' that fulfills a societal function that the player may find beneath them, or railroaded into following orders from a superior officer or noble - but is an inherent part of the Real World - and without it in the game, feels wrong.

Bargaining (without Charisma checks) is a lost art. Whenever I, as DM attempt to bargain with the characters through a NPC vendor, the NPC offers a price. I expect a counter price from the character. Instead the player hardball it every time, setting their own price, or walk away. This is not how medieval people bargained, and again is part of players not willing to 'play nice'. :?

Mayhap its not that my interest in 5e that has changed, but along with a 180 degree direction change in my IRL, I've gained a new perspective on D&D on the whole as a role-playing game that is not so positive. Perhaps I am simply suffering from burn-out?

In either case, my Real Life woes are causing me to break from the game whether I want to or not, and have also freed my mind of the burdens of running a 5e campaign world, so I can think about the game of D&D that I really want to play. :cool:

Re: Has your interest in 5E changed?

Posted: Fri Jan 24, 2020 12:09 am
by Illuminatus
Nope. Still at 0.

Re: Has your interest in 5E changed?

Posted: Fri Jan 24, 2020 12:10 am
by shesheyan
Dread Delgath wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 11:26 pm
Angel Tarragon wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:17 pm
Dread Delgath wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 8:56 pm
:lol: Yes, I do know them pretty well, but knowing a rules system is much different than actually playing the game that I want to play in. ;)
I am curious to know as to which system that is.
5e. Or, do you wish to know what I mean when I say, "...playing the game that I want to play in."?

I firmly believe that the rules you play with set the tone of the game. Although I have attempted to run 5e as I would any of my own 0D&D, AD&D, BX D&D games, but using 5e as your rules system is an uphill battle when you play with players who play the rules and not the game.

5e doesn't offer the "risk vs. reward" paradigm that earlier systems did, and without that in place, my players would rather play the rules to advance, rather than play the game as it was intended: immersion into a fantasy realm.

The immersion into a fantasy realm has been replaced by the Power Game and the Story Game, wherein the rules have become the same: To advance, you play your character to advance and solve the story. Some players are immersed in their characters, but don't care about the current campaign plot any farther than it will offer advancement. Few more players are immersed into the campaign plot, but not the fantasy realm itself.

They may see the realm as little more than a collection of codified rules, but not as a place that their characters exist in with any ties to their decisions or consciences beyond what their alignment informs that they are.

The game I want to play in examines the realm from a character's point of view. Advancement of campaign plots or character levels are ancillary to play, although advancement is necessary for the character to exert more influence or control over the fantasy realm itself. Most players look at this system as a means to destroy, conquer, or drain of resources, rather than an entity that itself will most likely be altered for the worse. Players don't have any incentive to 'play nice' with the realm and burn their bridges too often because there is no focus on this aspect of play in 5e.

0e, 1e, BX and BECMI looked at high level characters and offer MANAGING realms for the betterment of the societies that the characters are supposed to rule or serve. From this perspective, low level characters can at least start out their potential careers in adventuring with the end goal of one day becoming a ruler.

There is a chain of command in these rules that reinforces a very neglected resource in D&D: reliance on other players or NPCs. Of course, the downside is that the characters may become just a 'cog in the works' that fulfills a societal function that the player may find beneath them, or railroaded into following orders from a superior officer or noble - but is an inherent part of the Real World - and without it in the game, feels wrong.

Bargaining (without Charisma checks) is a lost art. Whenever I, as DM attempt to bargain with the characters through a NPC vendor, the NPC offers a price. I expect a counter price from the character. Instead the player hardball it every time, setting their own price, or walk away. This is not how medieval people bargained, and again is part of players not willing to 'play nice'. :?

Mayhap its not that my interest in 5e that has changed, but along with a 180 degree direction change in my IRL, I've gained a new perspective on D&D on the whole as a role-playing game that is not so positive. Perhaps I am simply suffering from burn-out?

In either case, my Real Life woes are causing me to break from the game whether I want to or not, and have also freed my mind of the burdens of running a 5e campaign world, so I can think about the game of D&D that I really want to play. :cool:
From what I read part of your problem are some of the players, not the system. I've had rules lawyers and optimizers in every campaign since my first games with B/X. I talk to them on the side and if they don't want to understand that for me and the other players D&D is a roleplaying game first and foremost, I tell them not to come again.