I don't know how much the staying power of 5e is inherent to the system versus how much it is tied to the marketing.

That said, I think 5e may be my favorite iteration of D&D so far. I think it's a solid system that is fairly easy to tinker with. It does D&D style fantasy quite well, something for instance I think 4e failed to do.

I think what's going to be critical for 5e is the kind of supplement support it sees. I am a little troubled by the large focus on pathfinder style, hardback, adventure paths.

I would much rather see the old plastic cover modules, and hard back setting books. If they put out quality adventures that leave room for players and DM's to dick about, and produce high quality setting material then I think all is well.

Another thing I think would help with long term stability would be to release the occasional genre book. Do a science fantasy, do one on steampunk, do one on real swords and sorcery, give a line of books that offer guides on taking the system outside the stock D&D fantasy constraints.

One problem I am already seeing in my area is apathy, after the initial release mania wore off people are already shrugging at 5th and going back to  Pathfinder and 3.5. I actually think a new setting could help with this if it were well done.

Quote from: estar;821510Do you have a link? And do you have your conversion posted anywhere? I am a long time Harn fan (Just got Araki-Kalai and the new map) and repurpose a lot of their material to use in my weekly Majestic Wilderlands game.

For example I used Gardieren as the foundation for the town the PCs are visiting.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-xFLM6C40blk/VQeGxCUaTTI/AAAAAAAAEL4/hRqhvTaM6bA/s1600/Castle%2Band%2BTown.jpg

Awesome! No, I haven't, I should probably polish something up and post it. I am considering making my Obsidian Portal game publicly available as well. A couple of my players are super creative writers!

The current campaign surrounds a mystery regarding Ilvir, so I think that Araki-Kalai supplement could come in handy. They are currently fighting an "infection" of spawn in Tashal, and are getting ready to embark on the salt trail to figure out where (why) the sudden surge in activity is coming from. The fact that people and creatures can now be infected with an Ilvirian Parasite has the king of Kaldor somewhat concerned...

I dunno. Oddyssey described it as "everyone's second-favorite edition of D&D", which I can totally grok, after having played with her for a little while. It's basic enough, flexible enough, and D&D enough that, even if WotC whips out a sixth edition in a handful of years, I think people who are playing 5th now will stick with it.

Incidentally, my second-favorite edition of D&D is actually 2nd Edition. And my number one favorite is Castles & Crusades. Nobody asked me that, but -- look at that avatar. That is the avatar of a man who gives.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;821354As someone who just spent money on all the books for 5E, it's disheartening to hear that nobody really thinks it has staying power. But I suppose five years worth is plenty of enjoyment to wring out of a game.

I think it has immense staying power.

The problem is. It is being produced by a company that initiates planned obsolescence on about a 5 year time scale by their own admittance and has gone through SIX editions so far pretty close to that timetable. Which makes it really hard to have any faith in them.

I plan to get alot more than 5 years use out of 5e.

Well assuming the books hold together. My PHB binding, which I thought was fine, is starting to show signs of coming apart.

Quote from: Omega;821541My PHB binding, which I thought was fine, is starting to show signs of coming apart.

My DMG's binding started to fail right out the gate.  I called WoTC and told them about it.  They arranged for Fedex to come by and pick up the book.  They said a replacement would be sent out in a few weeks.  This was maybe two weeks ago, so hopefully it will be coming in another week or two.  Just wanted to let you know of an avenue you could take.

And.....  Fedex just dropped off the new DMG to my doorstep 2 minutes ago.

Quote from: RunningLaser;821586And.....  Fedex just dropped off the new DMG to my doorstep 2 minutes ago.

... and they say that WOTC isn't watching forums...

I think, in light of planned obsolescence, the question is really whether the mechanical legacy of 5e has any staying power.

Personally I hate Advantage / Disadvantage / Inspiration and hope they die in a fire.  I love the proficiency bonus and largely think 5e gets things more or less right otherwise.

I'm uncertain about the hit dice creep, looking at the Monster Manual it's pretty clear that WotC and their designers still don't understand that 1HD IS a mook rule.  So when I look at 3 HD Kobolds and Hobgoblins I'm just not sure I like it.  If you want a level 3 encounter send 6 Kobolds per PC or 3 Hobgoblins.  It also moves 1st level PCs to a less powerful place in the general scheme of things in the world.  Still that's a quibble in the, not what I'd have done box.  Also, while I haven't done the work through, I'm pretty sure they didn't actually build the monsters as PCs and there's some oddities like Kobolds getting 1d4 + 2 damage with daggers when they have a -2 Strength bonus.  I'd need to dissect things in detail but on the surface it looks sloppy.

I think limiting the use of Heavy weapons by small characters isn't enough.  Medium weapons should be heavy for small creatures.

Magic is more complex than it needed to be in my mind.  The attempt to make it easier really fell flat as far as I can see.  Too many moving parts now.

Quote from: David Johansen;821598Personally I hate Advantage / Disadvantage

Why? I'm kind of on the fence about them myself but everyone else seems to love 'em.

Quote from: trechriron;821593... and they say that WOTC isn't watching forums...

It's the drones man, the drones....

Quote from: Simlasa;821599Why? I'm kind of on the fence about them myself but everyone else seems to love 'em.

Well, in brief at the risk of a derail:

It doesn't work for rolling massed attacks because each attack roll needs to be done separately, you can devolve it to reroll hits or reroll misses but none the less it makes it harder to run big fights.  When ten goblins roll to hit ten men at arms I want to roll 10d20 and discard the misses.

It doesn't stack and even if it did it would be messy.  I realize stacking modifiers have their own issues and modifier die types are even worse for point one.

It's a cute innovation for the sake of cute innovation that really doesn't improve the game.  Besides which they already made it much easier to succeed in general.

They could have gotten rid of stat bonuses entirely by allowing a reroll when the result was less than the attribute in question which I would approve of whole heartedly.  Could have tied size to damage die and gotten rid of Strength bonuses to damage while they were at it.

Anyhow, it's not a deal breaker but I'd like it to go away in sixth edition.

Quote from: David Johansen;821598I'm uncertain about the hit dice creep, looking at the Monster Manual it's pretty clear that WotC and their designers still don't understand that 1HD IS a mook rule.  So when I look at 3 HD Kobolds and Hobgoblins I'm just not sure I like it.  If you want a level 3 encounter send 6 Kobolds per PC or 3 Hobgoblins.  It also moves 1st level PCs to a less powerful place in the general scheme of things in the world.  

1st level characters in 5e are like 0 level characters in past editions, so 1st level characters aren't intended to be more powerful than random humanoids who have experience fighting by design.

It isn't like number of hit dice = mook is a universal constant that WoTC doesn't understand, they just don't see it the same way that you do and I happen to be in agreement with WoTC on this one.

Quote from: snooggums;8216241st level characters in 5e are like 0 level characters in past editions, so 1st level characters aren't intended to be more powerful than random humanoids who have experience fighting by design.

It isn't like number of hit dice = mook is a universal constant that WoTC doesn't understand, they just don't see it the same way that you do and I happen to be in agreement with WoTC on this one.

It may be a valid change depending on how you play but it was the standard from OD&D - 3e including every edition of basic.  It's the vestigial organ of the Wargame.  But it can be very handy when big combats happen.  If I want to ignore and abstract all npc combat I play Rolemaster or GURS where it's simply too much work to do otherwise.  But D&D was designed to handle it on table (with or without minis) from the very beginning.  So while it's not a deal breaker it's a disappointment for me.

Quote from: snooggums;8216241st level characters in 5e are like 0 level characters in past editions, so 1st level characters aren't intended to be more powerful than random humanoids who have experience fighting by design.

I think it's more accurate to say that 1st level in 5e is like 1st level in non-AD&D pre-3e (eg BX), where a Fighter-1 had 1d8 hit dice and was functionally identical to a 1 hd orc - hopefully he had a better AC.

The first session of my 5e campaign last Friday featured an exciting duel between Barbarian-1 PC and an Orc (MM stats).  The Barb was losing until he Raged in round 2, eventually killing the orc with 2 hp left. The Orc would have killed any other PC except a Fighter, I think.

Quote from: David Johansen;821598I think, in light of planned obsolescence, the question is really whether the mechanical legacy of 5e has any staying power.

Personally I hate Advantage / Disadvantage / Inspiration and hope they die in a fire.  I love the proficiency bonus and largely think 5e gets things more or less right otherwise.

I'm uncertain about the hit dice creep, looking at the Monster Manual it's pretty clear that WotC and their designers still don't understand that 1HD IS a mook rule.  So when I look at 3 HD Kobolds and Hobgoblins I'm just not sure I like it.  If you want a level 3 encounter send 6 Kobolds per PC or 3 Hobgoblins.  It also moves 1st level PCs to a less powerful place in the general scheme of things in the world.  Still that's a quibble in the, not what I'd have done box.  Also, while I haven't done the work through, I'm pretty sure they didn't actually build the monsters as PCs and there's some oddities like Kobolds getting 1d4 + 2 damage with daggers when they have a -2 Strength bonus.  I'd need to dissect things in detail but on the surface it looks sloppy.

I think limiting the use of Heavy weapons by small characters isn't enough.  Medium weapons should be heavy for small creatures.

Magic is more complex than it needed to be in my mind.  The attempt to make it easier really fell flat as far as I can see.  Too many moving parts now.

Not to disagree with you, as I too have my issues with 5e as with every game, but let me clarify some things:

Yes, Kobolds being 1 HD and the like was a useful visual on mook rule. Here they are 2d6-2, which averages out to 5 HP. It is a weak non-beast creature that averages less HP than almost all 1st lvl characters (lowest HD by class is 6+CON, start 1st lvl with max HP on your HD). Seems like the backwards engineered the equation 2d6-2 from the 2~10 HP (average 5) parameter. It's a sentient creature with enough heft to be dangerous in coordinated numbers (kobolds are quite deadly in 5e).

And I think they are shifting away into flat HP and damage to simplify things for GMs who don't want to be bothered. So if you are looking for creatures, you look by average HP first, not HD. Which explains why the HD equation is in parentheses after the HP average, to emphasize one over the other during quick reference.

It's basically shifting from HD as a reference measure to outright HP average, which skips rolling or calculation step. Looking back on older modules, I find it a rather helpful reference tool instead of those modules' HP ranges or equations. I don't need the HP range when I have the equation, and the average is a useful tool in high volume combat — and if I had to order those two as a reference I want the HP average first as looking up by equation crosses my eyes after a while.

Everyone starts 1st with max HD plus CON, so there's quite a bit more HP bloat built in by design. This is also tied to Prof Bonus to attack rolls and bounded accuracy. The idea is enough to give a back and forth instead of everyone whiffing all the time (because everyone likes to roll damage dice!). The give and take was back-loaded to HP instead of AC, almost everyone hits with +2 or more and almost everyone has decent HP in response.

The Dagger is a Finesse weapon, it may use STR or DEX on its attack and damage rolls. Kobolds have +2 DEX. The stat line is correct, they are using finesse to sneak that dagger into more vital spots.

Advantage/Disadvantage is basically +4/-4 big bonuses from older editions, like hitting someone who is Prone or taking a Called Shot. Since those are big changes to a situation, they don't need to be there for the regular calculation. That they cancel each other out and cannot stack also simplifies matters (except for mass combat). They are there to basically reduce big context swings into bite-sized tidbits of mutual nullification.

As for Mass Combat, they released a new .pdf for those rules. Granted 10 goblins v. 10 soldiers isn't that big, but that'd be better off managed by GM behind the screen calculations. I personally, if without a die roller program, would just roll 20d20 for Advantage and take the 10 highest. Vice versa for Disadvantage. Easy, and doesn't really matter unless those 10 soldiers/goblins are individual PCs.

The adjustment to the Heavy weapon property sounds like a lot of fun for a home game. But given the current environment the sturm und drang about "marginalizing the little people" would be ongoing even now. I myself am contemplating other weapon property adjustments for other home games. Great place to look if you are contemplating Modern, Sci-Fi, Westerns, etc.