I'll admit it - I've found ideas I wouldn't mind borrowing for my S&W Campaigns.
Notice I'm not saying I'm looking to run a 5e game - I think I'd need to see the full set of releases first, but I do find that I'm not finding what I see offensive to my sense of gaming sensibilities, much as I did see in 4e.
I probably need more time to digest it all.
I suspect it should work fairly well with most OSR adventures, especially the lower to mid level ones with minimal fudging.
Of course, this could be the ramblings of someone under severe sunburn (and careless stupidity)
Be still my beating heart! :)
ReplyDeleteIt's not horrible. It could have been 31 flavors of horrible, and it isn't. I'm pleased.
ReplyDeleteI very much like the look and feel, and will cheerfully ignore the hardcovers when they hit. I'd much rather house-rule any other material I found need for.
ReplyDeleteHonestly? My only complaint was that they left gnomes out. Jerks :) At the same time, I'm impressed. I could see where they grabbed influences (such as kits from 2nd Ed, and elements of 3rd). But instead of broken mechanics, they seem to have made it all work together pretty well.
ReplyDeleteWhat is not offensive in 5e Basic that is offensive in 4e? To be honest they look pretty much the same to me.
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't have the square/grid push me pull you everyone gets differently named powers that do the same thing vibe going. It does look like its really darned easy not to die but not as much as 4e.
DeleteThat makes sense.
DeleteI just read the rules for memorizing cleric spells. Flexible with a limit. I like them. :)
ReplyDeleteI gave up on this edition half way through the introduction, when, in the play example, one of the players looks closer at the gargoyles and the DM asks for an intelligence check.
ReplyDeleteI realize everyone plays the game differently but, to me, one of the things I didn't enjoy with 3e and 4e was the default "roll for everything" mentality and 5e seems to be continuing that trend.
As a game the 5e rules are fine I suppose, it just doesn't feel like D&D to me.
And whats with the fighter class? Did they run out of ideas and just say, ah screw it, lets just give him ability score increases to fill in the gaps.
ReplyDeleteI suppose they are doing that with the fighter because this edition is ability score/modifier driven instead of feat/skill/gimmick driven.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteWell darn it I must say I'm cautiously optimistic myself. There are pieces I can see lifting and enough of them they might have sold me A PHB, Monster Manual, & DMG. Might never run it but knowing what the heck other people are talking about wouldn't hurt and Ikm pretty sure another DM could talk me into playing a PC.
ReplyDeleteI started out hating it, but as I read on it slowly grew on me. That's not to say 5e is perfect...certainly there are things I don't like. But many of the fiddly aspects of 3e/PF/4e have been vastly simplified. Maybe not OSR simplified, but much simpler than the last couple of iterations of the game.
ReplyDeleteIt still has significant stat inflation, and I suspect the monster blocks will be ridiculously long. And no doubt the hard backs will start to layer on the complexity that turns me off. But the "basic" version looks pretty decent. At the very least, it's worth looking at if only to pilfer some good house rules for your own game.
-Ed