And all the clamor is for the upcoming books to contain what? Class Feature Variants, Racial Variant rules, new Feats, new Spells....
People want more different combinations of stuff to dig into because we already dug into everything available and already built the most interesting (to each individual) stuff we could come up with.
Here we are begging WotC to take our money for this stuff. This should be a no-brainer.
Ok. This makes more sense to me then everything else that was being said. There are options there. Every other post made it seem that there were no options. This makes the most sense to me and maybe I just didn’t see it earlier. I think I don’t have that problem as I constantly change the either the edition I play or the system that I play in. I can understand the idea that for some individuals they play a lot more of 5e and built everything that they wanted as opposed to a blanket statement of “there are no options.” Thank you. I am opposed to giving people crunch or anything else. I think it was just being said as blanket statements that there is nothing in the system.
Oh I knew I was missing something. So we just have a 6 page argument about how EN-World is basically just remaking the UA variant rules. Great.
I don't see the whole point of this argument then, people want more options, and the variant rules in the UA prove that those options aren't going to take away the simplicity of 5E. There'll always be a base set of features for people who want them, and variants for those who want more options. Assuming Wizards (if they go though with variant rules, I didn't see any reason for them not too) does them correctly, or that EN-World makes a decent 5.5E.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
And all the clamor is for the upcoming books to contain what? Class Feature Variants, Racial Variant rules, new Feats, new Spells....
People want more different combinations of stuff to dig into because we already dug into everything available and already built the most interesting (to each individual) stuff we could come up with.
Here we are begging WotC to take our money for this stuff. This should be a no-brainer.
Ok. This makes more sense to me then everything else that was being said. There are options there. Every other post made it seem that there were no options. This makes the most sense to me and maybe I just didn’t see it earlier. I think I don’t have that problem as I constantly change the either the edition I play or the system that I play in. I can understand the idea that for some individuals they play a lot more of 5e and built everything that they wanted as opposed to a blanket statement of “there are no options.” Thank you. I am opposed to giving people crunch or anything else. I think it was just being said as blanket statements that there is nothing in the system.
As a general rule of thumb, when a lot of people say things like “there are no options” what they usually really mean is “there are no options [left for me].” That’s the thing many people forget to write, and more people should mentally add when reading, and there would be fewer disagreements.
Must be a recurring theme here, authors not writing as much material as the readers want or need. 😜
My own concern is that eventually, Wizards is going to find out that 5e cannot retain players. The game needs - and I heavily emphasize that word. Here, let me emphasize it more: needs needs needs needs needs needs NEEDS - a greater degree of depth for those players who're slowly starving to death on the core 5e rules.
I can say that the only reason I'm still running 5e instead of switching to a system that does not assume everyone using it is as dumb as a sack of sand and cannot handle ANY cognitive load whatsoever is because of the DDB tool. I would've jumped ship and taken my money with me long since if not for what the DDB team built here. Even then, my playgroup is constantly looking for ways to introduce choice, depth, and diversity back into the 5e ruleset somehow, and unfortunately we're butting up against the strict limitations of the DDB tool doing it.
The rest of the 5e fanbase (or at least the DDB forum userbase here) would have me believe that me and mine are the only people in existence who're starving to death on this system's lack of depth. I'm mostly pointing to this ENWorld initiative as an argument against that mindset, and a sign that maybe - just MAYBE - Wizards should get off its f#$%ing space ass and GIVE US AN OFFICIAL 5.5E SUPPLEMENT ALREADY!!!!!! They don't need to replace the core rulebooks, which everybody knows they'll never do because it'll upset their precious money cart and piss off the newbies who only just barely got conned into spending a hundred and fifty dollars on the three big books in the first place. Nobody's asking them to do that. We know better. But they do need to give the more experienced gamers, the people absolutely desperate for something to bite into when they play the game and design characters for it, a freaking bone.
Or we. Will. Leave.
I detest Pathfinder's approach to actually running games. Numbers so high you need a telescope to see them, an extremely narrow band of content the players can do effectively due to absurd scaling of the numbers, and a set of floating static modifiers long enough to make every fight a nightmare. Not required. But man - the new PF2e character creation system has been universally and effusively lauded, from what I've seen. The three-action system is ever so much cleaner and better than 5e's kludgy mess. I could see where people might want to apply some of that to 5e's leaner battle engine and the idea of bounded accuracy. If that's what ENWorld does? Maybe there'll be something to it, if they do it well.
And yeah. Additional character creation options would be excellent. Virtually all of my table's rules homebrew is groping for ways to make character creation more fun and meaningful at all levels of play. The whole "pick your species, pick your class, pick your background, wait until level 3 and pick your subclass, and now voila - you're done making significant decisions for your character for the rest of that character's life" thing can suck every last duck in existence. Including Quackthulhu.
I disagree. The people that are upset about 5e are typically looking for Pathfinder. 5e is a return to Basic - less rules and customization and more focus on the game itself. That’s the whole point of 5e, to diverge from elaborate options.
I don’t really mind people leaving to go towards PF or 5.5. 5e brought more people into the fold and BACK to the fold after the ... absolute mess... of everything between 2e and 5e.
When people equate their happiness with DnD directly related to the number of mechanical options they have... it’s a constant reminder to me as a DM to make sure that to truly live in the spirit of DnD, the mechanical sideshow should never take centre stage.
With all due respect, the original post is about how a company other than WotC is making what is effectively a 5.5e ruleset, and how Yurei hopes that either this or a different supplement/rulebook could add some additional choices and crunch that she (and others) have wanted for some time.
Unfortunately, the follow up post she made was spitefully written and rather condescending about it. I don’t oppose anyone writing splat books and options for 5e for the people that want it. But let’s be clear: WOTC is right in NOT steering the game that way and alienating their core fan base (as they did in a severe way with 3.5e from 3e, and 4e from 3.5e).
They returned to the basics because of a very defined reason - the core of dnd was imagination. If you watch any online channel where they play, they don’t talk about mechanics all day and splatbooks... they just *play*.
Well, we wouldn’t need splatbooks if they just put the stuff in the first book. That’s why Gary Gygax himself made AD&D in the first place, to put the extra stuff in the original book. So how about this, leave D&D 5e as it is, but give us an AD&D 5e then.
Well, we wouldn’t need splatbooks if they just put the stuff in the first book.
Page counts can be a problem, unless the options are super generic. I wouldn't say what you can do with the 3.5e PHB is much more flexible than what you can do with the 5.0 (sure, 3.5e has more feats and more ability to choose them, but 5e has a bunch of subclasses).
Well, we wouldn’t need splatbooks if they just put the stuff in the first book.
Page counts can be a problem, unless the options are super generic. I wouldn't say what you can do with the 3.5e PHB is much more flexible than what you can do with the 5.0 (sure, 3.5e has more feats and more ability to choose them, but 5e has a bunch of subclasses).
Well.. it's the year 2020 and they do have their official digital toolset and content management system.
I wouldn't mind if they released a purely digital "Advanced Player Options" book that can be transferred to a Kindle or something like this :D I personally don't need fancy art either, if the subclasses & feats are well written and invoke a nice mental image of my heroes (or BBEGs when I DM). So page count doesn't have to be a thing.
I hope everyone who miss all the best bits from whatever edition they love more were as active in responding to WotC's surveys attached to every UA-article, as they are in complaining to the other customers that they're not satisfied with what's on the menu.
I hope everyone who miss all the best bits from whatever edition they love more were as active in responding to WotC's surveys attached to every UA-article, as they are in complaining to the other customers that they're not satisfied with what's on the menu.
I'm going to assume not, because having been using this site for over a year, I only just learned the surveys existed about 2 months ago. You'd think that a platform they have partnered with to not only create and manage a toolset for their game system, but also to implement and distribute their playtest content would, you know... actually provide an easily accessible link to the survey about that playtest content?
I hope everyone who miss all the best bits from whatever edition they love more were as active in responding to WotC's surveys attached to every UA-article, as they are in complaining to the other customers that they're not satisfied with what's on the menu.
Many of us are pretty active with UA and the surveys actually, at least those of us in this particular thread. As drag0n_77 pointed out however, there's a lot of people all around who don't know about the surveys.
So if 3.5 was a lot crunchier and those who like that are happier with that edition, what’s wrong with playing that edition instead of 5e? If you walk into a restaurant and there’s a plain cheeseburger or a double quarter pounder with lettuce onions and tomato, why would you order the cheeseburger and ask to add lettuce onions and tomato? Just play the one ya like and don’t change the menu for the majority of us who don’t want all that extra stuff. 5e isn’t crunchy and is the most popular version of D&D in history, I highly doubt they will change that aspect of the game that made it so successful. Then again, Coke did come out with New Coke so never say never lol
I hope everyone who miss all the best bits from whatever edition they love more were as active in responding to WotC's surveys attached to every UA-article, as they are in complaining to the other customers that they're not satisfied with what's on the menu.
So if 3.5 was a lot crunchier and those who like that are happier with that edition, what’s wrong with playing that edition instead of 5e? If you walk into a restaurant and there’s a plain cheeseburger or a double quarter pounder with lettuce onions and tomato, why would you order the cheeseburger and ask to add lettuce onions and tomato? Just play the one ya like and don’t change the menu for the majority of us who don’t want all that extra stuff. 5e isn’t crunchy and is the most popular version of D&D in history, I highly doubt they will change that aspect of the game that made it so successful. Then again, Coke did come out with New Coke so never say never lol
I didn’t say I liked 3/3.5 better. I just wish there was a little more crunch to 5e.
So if 3.5 was a lot crunchier and those who like that are happier with that edition, what’s wrong with playing that edition instead of 5e? If you walk into a restaurant and there’s a plain cheeseburger or a double quarter pounder with lettuce onions and tomato, why would you order the cheeseburger and ask to add lettuce onions and tomato? Just play the one ya like and don’t change the menu for the majority of us who don’t want all that extra stuff. 5e isn’t crunchy and is the most popular version of D&D in history, I highly doubt they will change that aspect of the game that made it so successful. Then again, Coke did come out with New Coke so never say never lol
I can not speak for anyone other than myself, but I don't want 3.5 nor do I want 5e to be like 3.5 and I really don't believe anyone else here does either. I just want more options for this edition.
The Class Feature Variants are a really good example of the Crunch (read Rules) and Options I want.
A more extensive set Crafting Rules that also introduce other Materials with actual effects.
More Feats to allow more customization as characters level up.
Functional Psionics would be a nice addition.
A larger list of Spells for ALL casters.
This is only a short list of ideas and all of these things can be done within the existing framework of this edition without impacting how people currently play the game.
And one more time because people keeps making this assumption. I don't want 3.5 nor do I want 5e to be like 3.5. I just want more options for THIS edition.
So if 3.5 was a lot crunchier and those who like that are happier with that edition, what’s wrong with playing that edition instead of 5e? If you walk into a restaurant and there’s a plain cheeseburger or a double quarter pounder with lettuce onions and tomato, why would you order the cheeseburger and ask to add lettuce onions and tomato? Just play the one ya like and don’t change the menu for the majority of us who don’t want all that extra stuff. 5e isn’t crunchy and is the most popular version of D&D in history, I highly doubt they will change that aspect of the game that made it so successful. Then again, Coke did come out with New Coke so never say never lol
To stay with your analogy: we don't want a simple cheeseburger, but that doesn't mean we'd like to eat the five star dinner menu with subsequent BBQ.
There is a middle ground between those two... Like a cheeseburger with chips, coke and a salad because the burger alone is a bit too boring.
Another thing to note: just because you like something, doesn't mean that you have to be blind to every flaw it has. I really like my flat, but I know that the walls need painting and the floor isn't properly fixed because my vacuum pulls it up every time I clean.
I like(d) 5e, but there are parts of the rules I don't like, the lack of character progression choices is one of them. I mean, seriously, how many actually useful feats are officially published? 10? So every single character is one of 13 classes, each with on average 4 subclasses. That's 52 possible subclasses (without counting them). So... 52 possible character concepts for a game played by millions of players. No wonder one barbarian feels like the other after four or five campaigns. Maybe this one can stop enemies with an AOO, but that's about the biggest mechanical difference you get.
I would like more, and better, character creation options, yes. While 5e will never have the delightful freedom of a point buy system, they can absolutely do better than "make two, maybe three, major decisions about your character at zeroth level, and then be done making meaningful decisions forever."
I would also like more comprehensive rules covering common player activities in the game. People have never once complained about three quarters of the PHB being combat engine, tons of extra rules for making combat more interesting. Why not apply some of the same drive to things like overland travel, crafting, or other commonly requested player systems wherein the game's current answer is "Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh....okay? You, uhh...you sure you wanna do that, instead of fight this nice dragon in this swanky dungeon? ...okay. So....Hmmmmmm, yeah, here. Here's two paragraphs of stuff we obviously pulled out of our butts at the last minute and didn't bother designing or refining at all. That works, right?"
Could I find those rules elsewhere? Of course. I already have; if I need to do an extensive Journey bit in any future games of mine I know exactly where the framework Angry built is and can go dig it up and put some meat on it. Could I take time to try and design them myself? Yes, I could. I have other shit to do with my time, however, and theoretically we are supposed to be paying these guys for their time and expertise as game designers.
Homebrew should be for adjusting systems we disagree with (i.e. the reworked Injury rules I've been fiddling with lately) or creating niche rulesets covering things that only tend to come up in our games, i.e. Maker's 'Soul Purity' chart for Tursk. The game developers should not be expecting us to homebrew common, major parts of the game that are likely to happen at every table at least once or twice, if not all the time. And if I sound salty about that? Well...unfortunately it's because I'm salty about that.
I do not expect EN World to solve the issue directly. My hope was to show people who constantly assume that the 5e rules are absolutely perfect for absolutely everyone, that 5e is The Perfect Game and never needs anything new or changed ever again, that this is not the case. I have resoundingly failed in that task. Secondarily I had hoped to try and illustrate that well-designed crunch, proper rules and game design work, does not restrict the imagination but rather augments and empowers it. I have resoundingly failed in that task, as well. Intensely frustrating, but it is what it is.
I have no interest in 3.5e or either edition of Pathfinder. Four hundred discrete floating random bonuses is spending one's complexity profligately for mediocre returns. An elegant system minimizes the amount of bullshit necessary at the table; any complex calculations required (for a given definition of 'complex') should be able to be done before a session and recorded for use. Hell, one of my own personal rules for designing homebrew content - anything from feats to items to subclasses to whatever else - is that anything which is expected to be done in a combat turn should be no more complex to resolve than a basic attack. I get two die rolls for any such thing. No more. Anything more complicated than that, I need to go back and redesign until dice are only thrown twice or less. Sticking by that rule and a few others, with an awareness of 5e's overall design ethos, I've been able to build a number of rules, as well as homebrew items/feats/things, that my table has enthusiastically embraced.
I just also have a full time day job and my own game to run. I don't have heckin' time to redesign half of 5e to better fit its own design ethos. That's supposed to be what Wizards of the Coast is for, but we've all seen where that idea leads. Ugh.
I hope everyone who miss all the best bits from whatever edition they love more were as active in responding to WotC's surveys attached to every UA-article, as they are in complaining to the other customers that they're not satisfied with what's on the menu.
I played a lot of AD&D and 2E, was not playing actively during 3E/4E (though I have the core books), and is back now with 5E.
For me and my players, 5E is perfect with a loose and simple rule system that allows us to put fun and story in the first room. I have core PF2, and I won't even try to push that onto my players - they just ain't into the number crunching, rule-for-everything aspect of gaming, and 5E is really comfortable to DM for me. I paid my crunchy dues with Space Opera, Bushido and Aftermath back in the days, so I ain't scared of big chunks of rules and tables, but I neither have the time nor inclination to calculate my way through adventure these days.
With that said, if EN see a market for advanced 5E products, good for them. I can't see them putting a significant dent in WOTC sales, so I just wish them well and hope they can cater to more ruleshungry gamers. The only opinion I have is that - as I understand it - their 5.5 stuff won't be backwards compatible, which is sad. I would happily buy stuff with rules options, but isn't interested at all in a new game version.
Ok. This makes more sense to me then everything else that was being said. There are options there. Every other post made it seem that there were no options. This makes the most sense to me and maybe I just didn’t see it earlier. I think I don’t have that problem as I constantly change the either the edition I play or the system that I play in. I can understand the idea that for some individuals they play a lot more of 5e and built everything that they wanted as opposed to a blanket statement of “there are no options.” Thank you. I am opposed to giving people crunch or anything else. I think it was just being said as blanket statements that there is nothing in the system.
Oh I knew I was missing something. So we just have a 6 page argument about how EN-World is basically just remaking the UA variant rules. Great.
I don't see the whole point of this argument then, people want more options, and the variant rules in the UA prove that those options aren't going to take away the simplicity of 5E. There'll always be a base set of features for people who want them, and variants for those who want more options. Assuming Wizards (if they go though with variant rules, I didn't see any reason for them not too) does them correctly, or that EN-World makes a decent 5.5E.
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
As a general rule of thumb, when a lot of people say things like “there are no options” what they usually really mean is “there are no options [left for me].” That’s the thing many people forget to write, and more people should mentally add when reading, and there would be fewer disagreements.
Must be a recurring theme here, authors not writing as much material as the readers want or need. 😜
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I disagree. The people that are upset about 5e are typically looking for Pathfinder. 5e is a return to Basic - less rules and customization and more focus on the game itself. That’s the whole point of 5e, to diverge from elaborate options.
I don’t really mind people leaving to go towards PF or 5.5. 5e brought more people into the fold and BACK to the fold after the ... absolute mess... of everything between 2e and 5e.
When people equate their happiness with DnD directly related to the number of mechanical options they have... it’s a constant reminder to me as a DM to make sure that to truly live in the spirit of DnD, the mechanical sideshow should never take centre stage.
Unfortunately, the follow up post she made was spitefully written and rather condescending about it. I don’t oppose anyone writing splat books and options for 5e for the people that want it. But let’s be clear: WOTC is right in NOT steering the game that way and alienating their core fan base (as they did in a severe way with 3.5e from 3e, and 4e from 3.5e).
They returned to the basics because of a very defined reason - the core of dnd was imagination. If you watch any online channel where they play, they don’t talk about mechanics all day and splatbooks... they just *play*.
Well, we wouldn’t need splatbooks if they just put the stuff in the first book. That’s why Gary Gygax himself made AD&D in the first place, to put the extra stuff in the original book. So how about this, leave D&D 5e as it is, but give us an AD&D 5e then.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Page counts can be a problem, unless the options are super generic. I wouldn't say what you can do with the 3.5e PHB is much more flexible than what you can do with the 5.0 (sure, 3.5e has more feats and more ability to choose them, but 5e has a bunch of subclasses).
Well.. it's the year 2020 and they do have their official digital toolset and content management system.
I wouldn't mind if they released a purely digital "Advanced Player Options" book that can be transferred to a Kindle or something like this :D I personally don't need fancy art either, if the subclasses & feats are well written and invoke a nice mental image of my heroes (or BBEGs when I DM). So page count doesn't have to be a thing.
I hope everyone who miss all the best bits from whatever edition they love more were as active in responding to WotC's surveys attached to every UA-article, as they are in complaining to the other customers that they're not satisfied with what's on the menu.
I am one with the Force. The Force is with me.
I'm going to assume not, because having been using this site for over a year, I only just learned the surveys existed about 2 months ago. You'd think that a platform they have partnered with to not only create and manage a toolset for their game system, but also to implement and distribute their playtest content would, you know... actually provide an easily accessible link to the survey about that playtest content?
Many of us are pretty active with UA and the surveys actually, at least those of us in this particular thread. As drag0n_77 pointed out however, there's a lot of people all around who don't know about the surveys.
So if 3.5 was a lot crunchier and those who like that are happier with that edition, what’s wrong with playing that edition instead of 5e? If you walk into a restaurant and there’s a plain cheeseburger or a double quarter pounder with lettuce onions and tomato, why would you order the cheeseburger and ask to add lettuce onions and tomato? Just play the one ya like and don’t change the menu for the majority of us who don’t want all that extra stuff. 5e isn’t crunchy and is the most popular version of D&D in history, I highly doubt they will change that aspect of the game that made it so successful. Then again, Coke did come out with New Coke so never say never lol
I fill out every one of them.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I didn’t say I liked 3/3.5 better. I just wish there was a little more crunch to 5e.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I can not speak for anyone other than myself, but I don't want 3.5 nor do I want 5e to be like 3.5 and I really don't believe anyone else here does either. I just want more options for this edition.
This is only a short list of ideas and all of these things can be done within the existing framework of this edition without impacting how people currently play the game.
And one more time because people keeps making this assumption. I don't want 3.5 nor do I want 5e to be like 3.5. I just want more options for THIS edition.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
To stay with your analogy: we don't want a simple cheeseburger, but that doesn't mean we'd like to eat the five star dinner menu with subsequent BBQ.
There is a middle ground between those two... Like a cheeseburger with chips, coke and a salad because the burger alone is a bit too boring.
Another thing to note: just because you like something, doesn't mean that you have to be blind to every flaw it has. I really like my flat, but I know that the walls need painting and the floor isn't properly fixed because my vacuum pulls it up every time I clean.
I like(d) 5e, but there are parts of the rules I don't like, the lack of character progression choices is one of them. I mean, seriously, how many actually useful feats are officially published? 10? So every single character is one of 13 classes, each with on average 4 subclasses. That's 52 possible subclasses (without counting them). So... 52 possible character concepts for a game played by millions of players. No wonder one barbarian feels like the other after four or five campaigns. Maybe this one can stop enemies with an AOO, but that's about the biggest mechanical difference you get.
I would like more, and better, character creation options, yes. While 5e will never have the delightful freedom of a point buy system, they can absolutely do better than "make two, maybe three, major decisions about your character at zeroth level, and then be done making meaningful decisions forever."
I would also like more comprehensive rules covering common player activities in the game. People have never once complained about three quarters of the PHB being combat engine, tons of extra rules for making combat more interesting. Why not apply some of the same drive to things like overland travel, crafting, or other commonly requested player systems wherein the game's current answer is "Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh....okay? You, uhh...you sure you wanna do that, instead of fight this nice dragon in this swanky dungeon? ...okay. So....Hmmmmmm, yeah, here. Here's two paragraphs of stuff we obviously pulled out of our butts at the last minute and didn't bother designing or refining at all. That works, right?"
Could I find those rules elsewhere? Of course. I already have; if I need to do an extensive Journey bit in any future games of mine I know exactly where the framework Angry built is and can go dig it up and put some meat on it. Could I take time to try and design them myself? Yes, I could. I have other shit to do with my time, however, and theoretically we are supposed to be paying these guys for their time and expertise as game designers.
Homebrew should be for adjusting systems we disagree with (i.e. the reworked Injury rules I've been fiddling with lately) or creating niche rulesets covering things that only tend to come up in our games, i.e. Maker's 'Soul Purity' chart for Tursk. The game developers should not be expecting us to homebrew common, major parts of the game that are likely to happen at every table at least once or twice, if not all the time. And if I sound salty about that? Well...unfortunately it's because I'm salty about that.
I do not expect EN World to solve the issue directly. My hope was to show people who constantly assume that the 5e rules are absolutely perfect for absolutely everyone, that 5e is The Perfect Game and never needs anything new or changed ever again, that this is not the case. I have resoundingly failed in that task. Secondarily I had hoped to try and illustrate that well-designed crunch, proper rules and game design work, does not restrict the imagination but rather augments and empowers it. I have resoundingly failed in that task, as well. Intensely frustrating, but it is what it is.
I have no interest in 3.5e or either edition of Pathfinder. Four hundred discrete floating random bonuses is spending one's complexity profligately for mediocre returns. An elegant system minimizes the amount of bullshit necessary at the table; any complex calculations required (for a given definition of 'complex') should be able to be done before a session and recorded for use. Hell, one of my own personal rules for designing homebrew content - anything from feats to items to subclasses to whatever else - is that anything which is expected to be done in a combat turn should be no more complex to resolve than a basic attack. I get two die rolls for any such thing. No more. Anything more complicated than that, I need to go back and redesign until dice are only thrown twice or less. Sticking by that rule and a few others, with an awareness of 5e's overall design ethos, I've been able to build a number of rules, as well as homebrew items/feats/things, that my table has enthusiastically embraced.
I just also have a full time day job and my own game to run. I don't have heckin' time to redesign half of 5e to better fit its own design ethos. That's supposed to be what Wizards of the Coast is for, but we've all seen where that idea leads. Ugh.
Please do not contact or message me.
Same
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I played a lot of AD&D and 2E, was not playing actively during 3E/4E (though I have the core books), and is back now with 5E.
For me and my players, 5E is perfect with a loose and simple rule system that allows us to put fun and story in the first room. I have core PF2, and I won't even try to push that onto my players - they just ain't into the number crunching, rule-for-everything aspect of gaming, and 5E is really comfortable to DM for me. I paid my crunchy dues with Space Opera, Bushido and Aftermath back in the days, so I ain't scared of big chunks of rules and tables, but I neither have the time nor inclination to calculate my way through adventure these days.
With that said, if EN see a market for advanced 5E products, good for them. I can't see them putting a significant dent in WOTC sales, so I just wish them well and hope they can cater to more ruleshungry gamers. The only opinion I have is that - as I understand it - their 5.5 stuff won't be backwards compatible, which is sad. I would happily buy stuff with rules options, but isn't interested at all in a new game version.
Hey. I homebrew. A lot. That doesn’t mean I want to have to homebrew everything.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting