D&D 5e has failed

[DrPraetor]

1) On the substance - is 5E a failure *as a game*?
This isn't so bad! I mean, my expectations were very, very low, but this is better than I expected. Admittedly, I haven't read it in great depth. Overall, this system seems like it should be relatively easy to fix with patches, if you wanted to assemble the Tome rules into a single volume and add... stealth.

So, yeah, no hiding or sneaking rules... okay, yeah, there are no hiding or sneaking rules (other than "Use stealth", and some circular references in chapter 7). Well, that's not *fantastic*, I admit. Fixable, though.

You really want shields and you *might* actually have to care about these fiddly bonuses you get from one or another source.

Frank - I command you to do a chapter-by-chapter breakdown on the entire thing, because I'm not going to read it that carefully. Other than the missing stealth rules, is anything else seriously borked?

On balance, 3e is clearly better, but this might be fixable, building on a few low-level engine changes which I think are improvements and were very difficult to "patch" in 3e. Skill ranks where a fiddly waste of time, so it's good to see those gone. There is some effort to better-balance multiclassing. Grappling is no longer broken?

Replacing this lame feat system with a better feat system will be easy, Frank and K were planning to do that with 3E anyway, and with Feats a nominally-optional rule, this will be easier to "sell".

2) On the commercial question - is 5E a failure *as an effort to revitalize interest in the brand*? Even "major garage" operations like Shadowrun make more money selling t-shirts and novels and videogame licenses than they do on the RPG itself.

Lick the tears from the failure, taste how salty they are:
http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q= ... =US&cmpt=q

I added Magic as a comparison trend-line to account for seasonal differences, total population of nerds, shifts in the earth's axial tilt, etc.

Nary a blip. So far, 5th edition is failing to generate the buzz that 4th edition did (see that spike in June of 2008?), which makes it even more of a failure.

[Scrivener]

1) On the substance - is 5E a failure *as a game*?
This isn't so bad! [snip]
So, yeah, no hiding or sneaking rules... okay, yeah, there are no hiding or sneaking rules (other than "Use stealth", and some circular references in chapter 7). Well, that's not *fantastic*, I admit. Fixable, though.

This is the problem with 5e. There is nothing to it.

There are no rules, just vague hints at rules. Now that works really well for some people, but if I want a system that has no rules I might as well start playing bearworld.

You can go through chapter by chapter and not find anything completely offensive, because there is nothing in those chapters.

I'm sure the positive press that 5e has gotten is because there are no rules, so every reviewer/fanatic has decided that the rules that are actually are in play are identical to their house rules and subsystems they have tacked on to game in the past.

[Username17]

Yeah, there's really no point in going chapter by chapter because for the most part what's interesting is what isn't there rather than what is. Almost everything dumb about what the game actually provides could be (and was) foreseen simply based on the fact that the game has a flat RNG and elects to not scale numbers very much.

So feats of strength that are very difficult or impossible for a starting character are still quite likely for a Cloud Giant to fail, because it's a flat RNG and a Cloud Giant only has a flat 20% chance of succeeding on a feat of strength where a 1st level fighter would fail. Anything a great sage is more likely than not to know, you could probably get just by asking ten people in a pub - because the great sage doesn't have a bonus that is high enough to succeed more than half the time at a task that people with no stat modifier can't succeed at. These were simply necessarily going to be true as soon as they announced the range of attribute and proficiency modifiers. It doesn't matter what the DCs are, that's going to be true, because it's true for all possible DCs. So it doesn't even matter that most DCs aren't defined - because the way it's kind of dumb is defined by the RNG and the bonus range.

On the field of battle, the most powerful can be taken out with minimal losses by a couple dozen basic soldiers. This makes abilities that generate a couple dozen expendable soldiers (lie animate dead or having some money) very powerful. But it also makes the whole D&D heroism thing pointless. The king isn't going to send away for the greatest heroes in the land when the Kraken threatens the city - the king is going to send the city guard and maybe have to pay widow's pensions for five of them after the Kraken has been killed. Now, demonstrating that actually requires opening up the monster manual and math hammering things, but we knew it was going to be like that as soon as they announced how "bounded accuracy" was supposed to work.

So 5th edition is a creative failure, but not in any interesting ways. The specific failure points were predicted accurately more than a year before the books went to print, and there isn't anything particularly new or innovative beyond that.

-Username17

[ScottS]

The thing is: these three authors are Baker, Schubert, and Noonan - three former WotC employees. Mike Mearls has gotten WotC to "outsource" adventure production to effectively rehire people they've already shitcanned.

So... Mike Mearls = Adam Sandler. That explains so much.

[DrPraetor]

Yeah, there's really no point in going chapter by chapter

Yes there is because it would be fun to read.

Most of the problems aren't with the engine - they're with a failure to explain or account for basic stuff, like line of sight. So you can use the engine if you have a masters in D&Dology, because you know how sneaking in D&D works.

Is that fixable? There would certainly be an audience who would find a book, "how to actually play 5th ed. D&D so it works" useful.

Of course, you run into problems with each and every spell description, so it would take a lot of work. Spells which are neither fire nor radiant generally fail to mention what type of damage they inflict, for example (presumably because the job of writing spell descriptions was split among a team of people and no-one proof read the results?)

But even "source F" (whoever wrote the fire and radiant spells) was either not thinking clearly, or was leaning too hard on some design document or template in which terms like hostile were supposed to be defined in a way that would make "only vs hostile" a relevant tag for spells.

Search the PHB for mentions of the word hostile. It comes up a lot - it is actually defined only as a measure of their attitude, in the social interaction section. So a creature is hostile if the combat music starts playing - that's the idea. Except that it's a measure of their attitude. This distinction seems to be lost on the authors.

So half the powers in the game - including several which are not supposed to be magical - are implicitly telepathic.

Take Radiant Guardian for example - it know if they're hostile when they're unaware of you. So if you leave a Radiant Guardian sitting in some hallway and walk away for 4 hours (I *think* that is how it is supposed to work, that is what a literal reading of the spell implies, but the intent of the spell could easily be that is hovers along and follows you?) - the Radiant Guardian will murderstab anyone who comes within 10 feet if they are hostile, even if they don't know who you even are.

There's a svelt 300-some pages and as far as I can tell, it's all like that. Fun!

[LonelyBoy]

And you don't think that women are oppressed? Why do women make 75 cents for every dollar of a man doing the exact same job? When's the last time you saw a woman driving in a car commercial? Why does the internet go apeshit with death threats everytime a female celebrity gains 10 pounds, but the barely give a turd when Alec Baldwin or Val Kilmer does? Why is it that the only one of Amal Alamuddin's accomplishments anyone gives a shit about is marrying George Clooney? Fuck, man...do you want me to prove to you that rape culture exists? Because I can do it.

Not to detract from the rest of this point (which I broadly agree with), but just from watching the NFL playoffs this weekend:

1) Jan unrealistically putting a Camry through an extended powerslide
2) Acura RDX "Drive like a boss"
3) Jeep Cherokee "Test ride with a twist"
4) Mercedes M-Class "can even brake on its own"

Yes, I know this is late; the problem with getting to these long threads late.

[Lago PARANOIA]

There are no rules, just vague hints at rules. Now that works really well for some people, but if I want a system that has no rules I might as well start playing bearworld.

Now that's just rude. I'd rather play full-on rulesless freeform than play Vincent Baker's grunge-time sex solicitor that feels that the only problem with Violence Jack and Angel Cop was that those series gave the characters (who were already bland, Byronic shitbirds) way too much screentime and self-determination and did not spend enough time pulling DAHKE and EJJY Chrono Crosses.

[DSMatticus]

Yes, I know this is late; the problem with getting to these long threads late.

You could have just not responded, you know. That's like... thread necromancy, if necromancy were a thing you did to people's constituent parts rather than their whole. You basically just made a zombie out of some dude's kidney, is what I'm saying. A dude who is very much still alive, I might add - and now his kidney counts itself among the decaying and malodorous legions of the damned, presumably conspiring against him from within. I don't even know who to call when something like that happens. A zombie-hunting surgeon?

[LonelyBoy]

Yes, I know this is late; the problem with getting to these long threads late.

You could have just not responded, you know. That's like... thread necromancy, if necromancy were a thing you did to people's constituent parts rather than their whole. You basically just made a zombie out of some dude's kidney, is what I'm saying. A dude who is very much still alive, I might add - and now his kidney counts itself among the decaying and malodorous legions of the damned, presumably conspiring against him from within. I don't even know who to call when something like that happens. A zombie-hunting surgeon?

I'd call it more like... loudly chewing in the same room as someone napping, disturbing them enough they turn over but not wake up. Not like the thread was in the middle of a deep discussion on 5e anyway. I'll take "zombie-hunting-surgeon", though; that sounds much cooler.

[infected slut princess]

I'd rather play full-on freeform with no rules than play Vincent Baker's grunge-time sex solicitor who thinks that the only problem with Violence Jack and Angel Cop was that the series gave the characters (who were already bland, Byronic shitbirds) way too much screentime self-determination and not enough time pulling DAHKE and EJJY Chrono Crosses.

I find this statement hard to understand.

[Scrivener]

There are no rules, just vague hints at rules. Now that works really well for some people, but if I want a system that has no rules I might as well start playing bearworld.

Now that's just rude. I'd rather play full-on freeform with no rules than play Vincent Baker's grunge-time sex solicitor who thinks that the only problem with Violence Jack and Angel Cop was that the series gave the characters (who were already bland, Byronic shitbirds) way too much screentime self-determination and not enough time pulling DAHKE and EJJY Chrono Crosses.

I suppose you're correct. I have no idea who or what violence jack is, and I fear a Google search will turn me into Silvia, so I will take your word, and suggest people play something less offensive like FATAL or wraethru.

[OgreBattle]

Violence Jack is the sequel to Devilman in a mad-max esque world made specifically as punishment for Lucifer were he is incarnated as a mortal and constantly humiliated in gruesome ways. Amputations abound.

The titular Violence Jack is an incarnation of Devilman where his sane human elements are removed and only crazy violence remains.

Lots of rape, murder, mutilations, and man ass.

[Lago PARANOIA]

So, any evidence as of yet to people turning on 5E D&D?

The reaction to the game is surprisingly lukewarm and even skeptical on GiantITP. Which, granted, is a haven for 3E D&D holdout (5E posts already outnumber 4E D&D ones) but if 5E can't consistently appeal to these people -- accounting for the Online Shill Factor -- then the edition is doomed.

EDIT: Apparently, here's the upcoming release schedule for the edition. No class or equipment or extra rulebooks, just campaign settings.

Now, I'm of two minds about this. On one hard, I agree that the idea of having a product revolve around campaign expansion book is the way to go. There should indeed be a Year of the Underdark (warning: not an actual year, that's way too sparse for WotC) where creepy-crawly classes like the Assassin and Necromancer and Genome get released in the same book that details Menzoberranzan. The Year of Eberron can have the Artificer and Pirate classes while giving us rules for running corporate guilds. Between years, the more popular campaign settings can be backhandedly expanded upon with Adventure Paths and web enhancements and even the occasional setting-agnostic book like It's Cold Outside.

However:

Update: Chris Perkins replied via Twitter that this is 33% accurate, which is a clever way to say that of course some of this is right, but not give anything away as to which of it is right. He’s a crafty DM.

On the other hand, the release schedule they detailed (and was partially confirmed by Chris Perkins) sucks anus. Seriously, leading with Elemental Evil and Alice in Wonderland*? That's fucking bullshit. The first nine months they should lead with Forgotten Realms and/or the Underdark. Six months after that, Ravenloft or Dark Sun or Eberron. Six months after that, one of those three. Six months after that, the remaining one

* Yes, really. Alice in Wonderland. The blogger put together a fairly convincing conspiracy theory that Alice in Wonderland (or rather, a grognardized take on it) is going to be what we get after Elemental Evil.

[Korgan0]

I'm physically can't bring myself to even glance at that disgusting cesspool. but how is ENWorld handling it?

[Username17]

If you asked me to make an Alice in Wonderland inspired adventure, I'd pretty much make Planescape. Expedition to a surreal universe with a lot of talky encounters with crazy people who are also strange alien beings. Sounds like it would be Tales of the Infinite Staircase if you took out the Never Ending Story bit and gave a bigger role to the Formian Queen.

Unfortunately, I have no confidence that the slackers and grognards writing for contract to WotC at the moment can think sufficiently abstractly to understand that inspiration can be that... abstract. I think it more likely that we're going to get something not unlike Gygax's EX modules Dungeonland and The Land Beyond the Magic Mirror.



1980s style clumsy literary references where the entire joke is that you're being shown something from your childhood and expected to bark like a trained seal. Like a late period Shrek movie.

-Username17

[Ghremdal]

EDIT: Apparently, here's the upcoming release schedule for the edition. No class or equipment or extra rulebooks, just campaign settings.

Other then this blog, did you find anything official? Apart from Elemental Evil storyline, it seems like a load of conjecture.

[virgil]

When they speak of doing an Alice in Wonderland campaign, my first thought was whether they were going to call in "He Who Shall Not Be Named"; since he's recently released a sourcebook for that very setting.

[CapnTthePirateG]

Well these are the same guys who had 2 years to fuck around building a product and then decided that they needed to push back the DMG.

So I would be very, very surprised if they actually got more releases done when they say they are going to get done.

[ScottS]

So, any evidence as of yet to people turning on 5E D&D?

Second place on Roll20.

[ACOS]

So, any evidence as of yet to people turning on 5E D&D?

Second place on Roll20.

Given that the DMG just came out (and the rest of the game is only a few months old), I actually see that as surprisingly well for 5e.
The tell will be what those numbers look like a year from now.

[FatR]

Second place on Roll20.

3.5 still has the biggest number of players of all games, kek. Though honestly I'm personally sliding into the Pathfinder camp, if only because of adventure and monster manual support.

But Wizards can take consolation in the fact that at least their post-3.5 edition aren't nWoD.

I'm surprised to see Star Wars doing so well.

[PhoneLobster]

I actually see that as surprisingly well for 5e.
The tell will be what those numbers look like a year from now.

I'm going to make a big deal of the fact that those numbers listed a significantly lower proportion of players to games compared to the other two games in the top 3 for number of games being played.

3.5e may be behind 5E on those numbers at about 16% vs about 20% of games, but it has about 43% of players vs only about 24% of players. And pathfinder at the top of the list is pretty similar with about 42% of players, only also marginally ahead on number of games with about 24%.

This looks like a lot of experimental games driven largely by GM curiosity with minimum sized (and therefore unstable) small groups of players. Which is what you would expect at this stage.

Same thing plays out in the real world anecdotally in my local board game/rpg community. Last month saw I think 2 RPGs being run (over all about 1 less than usual for the club), and 5E was indeed one of them. But 5E was one GM who really wanted to make it work (without a DMG, he totally thought it was no big deal) and like 2-3 kids he had roped in to try it out, the other RPG was something like 8 dedicated RPG players.

If those numbers from roll20 play out across the rest of the gaming community internationally then 5E has a sufficient foothold of experimental games to potentially succeed.

But it needs to turn those tiny uncertain and unstable groups into bigger stable long term groups and it needs to bring in more players. Which it could do if those experimental low numbers of players walk away and spread good word of mouth.

If on the other hand the small player base starts to crumble and return to the larger more stable games they are presumably briefly taking an experimental break from, the low proportion of players will mean that the number of games will drop to rock bottom pretty fast.

edit: And as an opinionated aside. This is one of the reasons a staggered, delayed and incomplete core rules release is so god damned stupid. Even locally the few individuals interested in 5E are done waiting they want to play it, and they want to play it NOW, but their first experiences with it, and more importantly the first experiences of any reluctant or uncertain recruits they drag with them are important, and they don't have a complete fucking rules set.

[DSMatticus]

That chart is kind weird, and I'm not really sure what story it tells.

If you order by games, you get PF > 5E > 3.5 >4E >AD&D.

If you order by players, you get 3.5 > PF > 5E > 4E.

Then if you look at the ratio of games:players (using the percents, because the sample sizes are different), you'll notice some really weird shit; AD&D has a 1:4.4 ratio (most players per game), while 5E has a 1:1.2 ratio (least players per game). I assume if you play in two different games of the same system you only get counted once, so there's room for people to play multiple campaigns to make the community healthier than the raw numbers seem, but... those are very weird numbers.

No matter how you look at it, 5E was not able to secure the #1 spot by any metric during the release of its core products, when the hype is presumably as hype as its ever going to be. That's not a good sign. And you can be pretty comfortable saying it's getting its ass kicked by both 3.5 and 3.5-but-not-colon-sure-we'll-take-all-that-money-you-didn't-want-comma-wotc.

[infected slut princess]

D&d basically became open source with the SRD and OGL. Nothing will ever be as popular as 3.x/pathfucker.

EDIT: Yes those Roll20 stats are weird. 5e has fewer players than it has games! How does that work?

[DSMatticus]

They explain their methodology in the Q3 report. The gist is that when you make a game you don't have to declare what ruleset you're using and when you make a profile you don't have to declare what games you're interested in playing, but games are far more likely to declare their ruleset than players are to declare their interests. So when they discard all the games and profiles they can't collect data from (because the relevant fields haven't been filled out), they exclude far more players than games. You'll note the player sample size is 18k, and the game sample size is 25k. The entire survey has more games than players.

But if you assume the samples are representative of the whole, then 20.06% of all games are 5E and 24.34% of all players are interested in 5E. Without the total number of games and players, we still can't really determine a true game:player ratio. But we can compare game%:player% ratios, and when we do we get this:
AD&D -> 1:4.42
3.5 -> 1:2.74
4E -> 1:2.67
PF -> 1:1.78
5E: 1:1.21
In reality, this almost certainly underestimates the number of players by a fairly large margin (I have no doubt that there are more players than games), but from it you can kind of sort of hazily infer shit like "AD&D has a shortage of DM's" and "5E has a shortage of players." Because those two are fairly crazy outliers.