D&D 5th Edition

[X-Osoerde (Alan)]

So, I've been running 5th edition for some friends online for about 2 months now, and it is seriously growing on me.  Has anyone else had the opportunity to play around with it?  Any thoughts?

[Ruideside/OM (RP)]

You know, it's funny. I used to be the guy who was right at the cutting edge. I got 2nd edition books as soon as they came out, same with player's option and all the handbooks, now here I am just finally moving over to 3rd edition and you young whippersnappers are all talking 5th edition.

[X-Osoerde (Alan)]

I'd skip 3e and 4e and just go to 5th.

[Talinie & NIT/TD (Linde)]

I like 5th edition as well. It seems to offer the choices that 4th edition didn't. But without flooding you with choices like 3rd edition.

[Wanderer (Garth)]

I started with 2nd edition.
I played some 3rd edition.
4th edition was unappealing to me.
I read the rules and after doing so I was never interested in even trying it out.
It's not surprising that Pathfinder has been more successful than 4th edition.

I have read the rules for 5th edition.
- I don't like how wizards are treated.
- Being basically a sorcerer that can reset his spells known daily is odd.
- The fact that spells scale with the slot expended to cast them as opposed to the traditional scaling with caster level is odd too.
- Druids also seem to have been handled poorly in a system that is clearly striving to balance character power, because there seem to be too many ways to abuse the wild shape ability...  again.
- I will say that I find the gnome's advantage on Int/Wis/Cha saving throws vs. Magic to be the single greatest factor in the last 15 years to make the gnome race a popular choice.

For the last year I have been running a 2nd edition game, and I have been reaching back to 1st edition rules and supplements to expand content.
There were just under 900 books printed for Dungeons & Dragons under the TSR name, and that doesn't include all the (sometimes great, sometimes not) content in Dragon Magazine over the years.
I can understand the appeal of a simpler system like 5th edition, but I prefer the way that a 1st/2nd edition game varies so much from DM to DM just based on the style of that particular individual, and his preference for or focus on certain optional rules among the many available.

[Ruideside/OM (RP)]

I am much like you Garth, except I started with the original three little booklets, but I also stopped at 2E, though I sort of switched over to d20/3.5 sort of rules when I tried my abortive Zaidan campaign.

My opinion of 4e is exactly like yours, I just couldn't be bothered.

As for 5e, well I am taking a look, and we'll see what I go with.

Personally, I would prefer to run using a heavy 2e base with a bunch of the 3.5 stuff layered on top -- I much prefer the 3.5 AC/THAC0 rules, and I like the skills and feats. The saving throws are simpler as well.

However, since I am trying to make a playable setting, I am limited as to how much home-brewing I can do.

[Ruideside/OM (RP)]

I'd skip 3e and 4e and just go to 5th.

Well seeing as the core mechanics of 5e are basically those of 3e, I think I will pretty much take your advice.