Some of the complaint-threads feel like attempts at subterfuge, deliberately subverting the product to create a perception of discord within the community that doesn't actually exist at large. Some of the complaints have a seed of validity, but the level of import some posters place on their own experience often feels like an attempt to incite community outrage. Is it personal? Does one need validation so much that they must convince everyone that they should be just as unsatisfied by 5e as they are?
If a previous version is deemed superior in one's opinion, go play it! If a different system is superior in one's opinion, go play it! Do you feel disregarded by the publisher? No one's making you play against your will, leave already. One thing anyone can count on is that it is in WotC's self-interest to make something that most people like, not cater to the individual; that's the nature of business. They knew that if their product sucked, they'd feel it in the bottomline and there is no room to adjust; a 6e would destroy a lot of goodwill.
Then the paranoid me starts thinking, "there can't be so many people who don't recognize they aren't special, so who benefits from seeing 5e fail by manufacturing outrage?" I know, it's crazy to think that other publishers would sow discord in order to subvert 5e and promote themselves, but it's also an entertaining thought. Do you want a tinfoil hat? I have extras.
The only thing I know for certain is that I was one of the last people who wanted 5e (it was clear what Essentials and DnDN were all about), I'm a 4e powergamer to the bone and Vancian magic seemed gross to me. I loved the multiple splatbooks that WotC published each year, it was more opportunity to optimize. But damn it, they made a believer out of me! Do I want digital tools? Hell yes! Do I want more options? Sign me up!
Until then, WotC did a great job in creating a strong and simple enough system that a character builder and compendium aren't needed. Do other systems publish their own digital tools? Honestly, that doesn't matter to me, that's not the first thing I look for in a system. As far as content is concerned, homebrewing balanced options isn't an arduous task. I never explored homebrewing in 4e, though I enjoyed looking over what others made, because there were so many moving parts (IMO), but 5e bristles with possibilities to homebrew that can be easily gauged for fun and balance.
Anyhow, this is what I think each time I see a thread pop up that says something to the effect of "is 5e a success?" or "why 5e is failing" or "my top 4 complaints about 5e".
Okay, I lied, this isn't a top X list. Yay marketing!
I was coming into this thread expecting to see something along the lines of "everyone else's complaints are BS, but my 4 are real issues," and I was prepared to roll my eyes like it was an olympic sport and I was training for the big day... so great job on that bait and switch, durntaur
On to some discussion:
Other publishers don't want D&D to fail. It might seem counterintuitive, if D&D is doing well then that is competition for them and if you have competition it is less likely that you are the best, but it is the truth. The reality is that if D&D is doing well then that means there is more exposure for RPGs in general, which in turn means more potential customers for each publisher to sell to, because D&D is not a type of product where the consumer is exclusive to one brand - you can have and play many different RPGs, unlike how most people only have/need a singular vehicle or set of laundry machines, so not all D&D sales are lost sales of other publishers.
This is especially true of D&D health being good for the entire hobby, and related hobbies, in the same way that Magic: the Gathering doing well is good for a wide variety of other games and products - anything that gets customers into their FLGS is increasing the exposure of any product stocked in said store, and creating more opportunities for a customer to have an impulse buy or develop interest in something (for example, if not for shopping in my FLGS for D&D products, I'd never have known about more than half of the board and card games that I own and enjoy). That's basically the entire reason that WotC puts so much focus on getting people into their FLGS instead of going the route every other publisher has where online stores are the focus and the FLGS happens to get products too.
As for the posters that come to this forum and behave in ways that clearly show they are trying to spread their distate for 5th edition, or at least exaggerate the popularity of their opinion, I cannot say for sure their motivation, and actually expect that each of them has their own unique reason for doing what they do.
I can share an anecdote about a person that I knew years ago that behaved in similar ways in regards to Vampire: the Requiem when Vampire: the Masquerade was shelved and the developer moved on. He wanted nothing to do with Requiem, and had only learned just enough about the game in order to be able to spread convincing misinformation and unfair comparisons, and would bring up all of his complaints any time he heard someone talking about Requiem.
One night, after having had enough time talking with him to explain each and every flaw in his complaints (Him: "there are only 5 clan options, Masquerade had like 20 with clans and bloodlines." Me: "Actually, while there are only 5 clans in Requiem there are nearly 30 different options in the Requiem core book, which is more than in the Masquerade core book. Plus comparing 13 years of Masquerade to a single book of Requiem is entirely unfair to expect all the content to be matched." and so forth), he was left with only one thing that he could say which I could not counter with objective fact: He had spent a huge amount of money and time collecting Masquerade materials and was not done playing with them yet... but many of his favorite players, myself included, weren't filling seats at the table to play Masquerade anymore because we moved on to playing Requiem, which resulted in him blaming Requiem for taking his fun away.
I know most people have a glue issue.
But when I opened my PHB a swarm of wasps flew out and stung my dog.
Would not recommend.
1: It didn't solve world hunger.
2: It didn't bring world peace.
3: It didn't create cold fusion.
4: I can't cast Wish in real life.
People like what they like and voice there opinions and that is alright. Some of them are posting here looking for validation of thier opinion a very human trait.
I do believe some of the more prolific complainers are just trolls looking for attention. Coming to WotC and complaining about 5e in the forums gets them the attention they seek. Saying megative things about 5e to a community of 5e players is going to get more attention than praising 5e, hence the trolls tactic of being negative.
I was baited and switched. Marketing indeed sir. You have my respect.
durntaur wrote:
1) It's not some other edition
2) It is some other edition
3) It has too much narrativation and not enough simulism.
4) It cancelled "Firefly".
durntaur wrote:
bawylie wrote:
bawylie wrote:
1: Advertising for it still sucks. They are not trying to market new people into the thing, thereby dooming it to a slow death
2: They've removed a lot of nice flavour bits because of backlash against 4E. Like, say, Cyclops being more than one-eyed hill giants or Archons being more than Angels+. Cyclops are still hanging out in the Feywild forever as far as I'm concerned, complete with Evil Eye. Boulders are for giants who didn't forge the weapons of the gods.
3: where's fell's five, WotC. where's my IDW D&D comic. i want to see the end of their adventure. i want to learn their secrets and mysteries
4: I still miss those nice and unique playtest things. Like that sorcerer. And the fighter that could do many things
1: Slavishly unreasonable ability score caps in the name of bounded accuracy. Unless you find yourself a Belt of Giant's Strength, which completely invalidates any investment you made in STR.
2: Ability Score advancement being exclusively tied to class level hurts multiclassing. And you have to sacrifice Ability Score advancement, if you want access to Feats. No Feats at 1st level unless you are Variant Human.
3: Subclassing is too restrictive. It's easier to multiclass to a new class, rather than gain features from another subclass.
4: Ghetto-ization of "exotic" races. It's probably due to the Basic Rules. But it still creates an unreasonable divide between Human, Elf, Dwarf, Halfling, and all other races like Tiefling, Dragonborn, Gnome, etc.
Yes. I'm aware the thread title was misleading. I just found it ironically apropos to voice my genuine complaints despite that.
Vahnyu wrote:
1. I doesn't feel very robust or ..."complete" to me yet. It needs some (what I feel are) basic options yet.
2. Delayed character identity. No feats, etc. until 3rd level, at earliest (sans variant human) feels stunted. On that note...
3. 3E-style multiclassing is an abomination. I disagree with Dave Dash in that it still feels the same way, just not quite so poignantly.
4. It still feels rather milquetoast as a whole right now, like being teased with something really tantalising, like say, Beef Wellington but then being handed an unseasoned turkey on Wonder Bread while seeing the tenderloin, pate and filo dough sitting on the counter.
Is it for everyone? No, clearly.
Is it for me? Heck yeah, it is!
Why those who find it lacking or unappealing continue to linger here is beyond me.
1. Boring(especially combat)
2. Too random(your decisions matter less than rolling well)
3. Dated(5E might make for a nice 2E experience, but it's been over 10 years since I wanted that out of D&D)
4. Gave the h4ters validation
Vahnyu wrote:
arnwolf666 wrote:
- The rules are too easy to understand. Almost anyone can understand them just by reading them. In fact, some people seem to be able to understand them without even having to read them at all. It's ruined by geek-cred.
- It's too exciting and things move too fast. I can't watch TV, fiddle with my tablet and make phone calls all at the same time as playing D&D or I miss stuff and look dumb.
- Armour never wears out. This guy is still wearing the same chainmail as he was at level 1. I want him to visit the village armourer and get sent on that quest to find the magic horseshoes but he never goes there.
- I bought Hordes of the Draggon Queens but it's not like the videos at all, It hasn't got Chris Perkins in it anywhere. I reckon they left stuff out.
thecasualoblivion wrote:
Man, I hate it when you can read and understand things. Why should we have to cater to the lowest common denominator?
Vahnyu wrote:
durntaur wrote:
Cyber-Dave wrote:
thecasualoblivion wrote:
thecasualoblivion wrote:
Mecheon wrote:
Shasarak wrote:
Shasarak wrote:
CCS wrote:
thecasualoblivion wrote:
thecasualoblivion wrote:
Shasarak wrote:
thecasualoblivion wrote:
Gnarl wrote:
thecasualoblivion wrote:
thecasualoblivion wrote:
1. They failed to include The Winds of Winter.
2. It's really about ethics in tabletop gaming journalism.
3. Han shot first.
4. There is somebody wrong on the internet and they don't know it.
First off Im a big fan of 5th edition, but here we go.
1. Not a fan of the simplified weapons list.
2. I do think that 5th runs better with a starting feat at first level.
3. I dont like ability gains and feats sharing the same progression.
4. Dont like how some of the fluff was changed just because its a new edition.
Now having said that, here are my solutions.
1. Working on a modified weapons system. Its still in the alpha stage at this point as Im getting some real playtime with the base system to get some data on what I need to fix.
2. After my current campaign is done I will start everyone off with a starting feat and ban varhumans. All my players started as humans after a wipe and we noticed a huge difference.
3. Im living with this as its still playable. But am keeping an eye on it for the future.
4. This is just kinda a personal pet peeve that doesnt actually affect me as I make up my own worlds and flavor it myself, just the way they did it really bugs me.
Bonus. No ****ing warlord( I hate you mearls). 
Clutchbone wrote:
Mecheon wrote:
This thread is close to turning into an example of the threads that this thread was supposed to be about ...
BoldItalic wrote:
caecafortuna wrote:
Everyone wants to validate their own experience with the game and that may take positive or negative tones. The trick is not trying to convince anyone that their experience is wrong. At that point the only objective discussions may fall to the rules or how they are interpreted. I can understand someone falling in love with the game not wanting any criticism, but on the other hand if you have some problems with the game you probably don't appreciate someone giving it high accolades or saying it is the best thing since sliced bread.
cbwjm wrote:
1eejit wrote:
Reius wrote:
1eejit wrote:
1. I don't have enough time as I want to play
2. It comes in book form that my players can read and then use to prove me wrong.
3. The bindings are okay, but the book opens and all the fun spills out.
4. Have you seen the index?
BoldItalic wrote:
1. There aren't enough books prying money out of my hands.
2. Chris Perkins won't run MY game.
3. No, seriously, I want to experience Green Flames!
4. PHB needs more Green Flames.
I and my group (who did playtests) really wanted the game to be awesome and suceed, we were looking forward to 5th. That said, for us it was a massive dissapointement. We found the books poorly made, overpriced, and over simplified. In short, it didnt do anything we had hoped. Top 4 complaints:
1. price. It was just way too expensive for so little a product, especially as almost a third of the book was spells.
2. quality. most of our books are already in shambles.
3. boring. This edition turned out to be a snoozefest on the table. Combat being the worst, but chargen, and the modules were painful.
4. retro. It felt like a major step backwards. It took too many of the things we didnt like from older editions and none of the things we did like.
there were alot of little irritants here and there with the game. There is a good chance that we got ourselves overworked up for the game and letdown was inevitable. As for wasps or bees jumping out of my PHB, fortunately that wasnt mine,. sadly it was the pages that jumped out...and got in my pizza.
Mecheon wrote:
<snip>
So 5e isn't responsible for what hapened to your dog or your pickup then? The train DID have your momma in it.
Farmer42 wrote:
Wuzzard wrote:
My 4 in no particular order:
1.) Monsters using spells which require me to look them up. I didn't like it when other editions do it and I don't like it now. I'd be fine with a few lines of "preferred" combat spells and short-hand the spell and it's effects.
ex. Fireball: Rng. 150 ft., 20-ft area, 8d6 fire damage (save DC 15 1/2) and ignites unmanaged combustables.
2.) Apprentice Tier. Didn't like it when they introudced it into the playtest. Spoke against it at every survey and I still don't like it's intended effect. Nothing to be done for it now but cut the first two level of most of our games and jump into 3rd (again, the intended method for most "veterans") but I don't like it. I'd rather have more up-front goodies and just have "Level - 0" instead.
3.) An actual Warlord-esque class. No, Valor Bards and Battle Masters are not the same and they won't be the same (to me, my group, and apparently a portion of the Community as evident of the multitude of discussions we've had before the release AND now as people come up with their own versions). I don't care about the name Warlord (think it's dumb, personally) and would've been fine with Marshal (3e's roots), Tactican, or Commando instead. However I like the idea to grant people attacks (as a WHOLE action) at-will and be able to have some mechanical representation for a good Intelligence score (such as modifiers to features) a feature that boost the partys Initiative, and can heal without magic as a class feature. YES, I can emulate some of this with multiclassing, sub-paths, and Feats but to be honest that's just too much hoop-jumping for my tastes. I highly doubt we'll get anything in that does what we currently have better sans Homebrew, but I felt it was a significant eleemnt of 4E that they really did a poor job of crossing over.
4.) Critical Hits are dreadfully boring. I'm not entirely sure how to make it better but the way it is now is only slightly better than v3.5's Damage multiplier. Something that's significant but not overall gritty like limb-loss, decapitation, etc. I'm not sure if there's a middle ground here or not?
This list, however, hasn't stopped my ability to enjoy the system or the game. They're minor annoyances for the most part that only come up in conversation with my group and here online (though #1 is an actual problem I'm running into more consistantly as I DM) so I don't want to give the impression that these 4 things make the game UNBEARABLE and totally unenjoyable to the point where I'm writing off the system as a whole. Further, if a previous edition had the same troubles, I'd have a probelem there too so it's not like these are just 5E's problems.
Cyber-Dave wrote:
Diffan wrote:
Diffan wrote:
Farmer42 wrote:
Another top 4:
- It attracts the wrong kind of people. People who complain instead of getting on with what they should be doing, which is to tell jokes and amuse me,
- The books are all the same size, so if I'm reading them in the dark, I can't feel which is which.
- Anybody is allowed to play D&D. Even people I don't much like. That shouldn't be allowed
- The price of bicycles is wrong in the PHB. It needs to be errata'ed.
BoldItalic wrote:
Shasarak wrote:
Farmer42 wrote:
The internet is really such an amazing thing... I come to the forums these days to see people complaining about features that I actually enjoyed! If you don't like the edition and actually need validation from complete strangers, please seek help.
I mean, my dog loved the wasps. It was an amazing treat!
I understand that your dog may be dumb and got stung, but mine ate (most of) them all. I mean, your personal experiences, or your dog's, don't change the final product at all.
Gunthar wrote:
dmgorgon wrote:
dmgorgon wrote:
thecasualoblivion wrote:
BoldItalic wrote:
It truly is incredible just how many people did not read the thread, did not see it was a joke thread, and just posted their complaints.
It almost serves as a useful list of "Users not here to have a conversation or interact with other people - just here to whine moan and complain."
My top 5.
1. It ran over my cat.
2. 5E canceled Firefly.
3. That Hitler fellow- blame 5E.
4. My 1st girlfriend. She played 5E!
5. That fungal infection, 5E did it!!!!
BoldItalic wrote:
Mistwell wrote:
Mistwell wrote:
Mistwell wrote:
thecasualoblivion wrote:
Cyber-Dave wrote:
We’ve removed content from this thread because of a violation of the Code of Conduct.
You can review the Code here: http://company.wizards.com/conduct
Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks. You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.
Remember, a community is a joint effort of all those involved, and while we want intelligent meaningful and productive banter to ensue we also need it to be polite and considerate of others.
Thank you for your time and support as we continue to try and make a great community for everyone.
Tony_Vargas wrote:
Tony_Vargas wrote:
Gunthar wrote:
DemoMonkey wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Love 5th edition 100%. Complaint? I'm just tired of the Forgotten Realms saturation. While all materials released state you can freely change FR content to suit your own world, FR still seems like it's being shoved down our throats. If players can alter the setting, why can't WotC?
Sands666 wrote:
Sands666 wrote:
Sands666 wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
Sands666 wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
There's been a lot of editing of posts here. 
I can't post at work so I waited until i came home and now I can't find some of the odds and ends I wanted to address.....
1. Someone said that the new website deleted the art gallery.
Fixed that for you.
2. Someone said they changed the fluff of some things just to suit the new rules.
I know, and I don't agree with it either. Truth is however they do that in EVERY EDITION and it sucks each and every time. It's also totally unnecessary. I don't know why they feel the need to do that. For example the Time of Trouble in FR was invented soely as an excuse for the rule changes in the game. They admitted to it in the very book that announced it! People made about the Spellplague should know that it happened before with TOT. It's a rite of passge for new editions, sadly.
In the end you have to pick one version of it and stick with it or face the nightmare of the background of this race or that class changing every 5 or so years. For the most part I've stuck with the 3e definitions because that's where our group really got to know D&D (we played a little AD&D before that). It's kinda sad because I really liked the planar mechanics of 4e but we just didn't grow up with that.
3. Edition Wars.
Seriously, I am a huge 5e fan and my main edition before that was 3e, but I can find value and purpose in all the editions of D&D. In many ways I am sorry I never tried 4e. By the time our group was ready to give it a go, the 5e playtest was announced. 4e introduced some radically different concepts that I think many of us old hats had trouble transitioning to. Had the edition been able to hold out, I think our group might have made the switch. This all said, I don't see the point of edition warring. All the editions are now available to play and you can get the books as PDF no trouble and its not too much trouble to get copies of them in physical form on the internet. Just play the edition you like! (Bob Salvatore plays OD&D + Gurps, and he writes for WOTC). True, I'm sure it stinks for 4e fans who no longer have official support, but then again that's just what 3e fans went through back in 2008 as well. We are all in this thing together. 
Now, I am a huge fan of 5e. Circle it, big star. If I had some things for them to look at, however, they would be:
1. Ability caps are great! Items that shamelessly break those caps not so much!
2. Bounded accuracy is great! Items that shamelessly break that binding not so much!
3. Healing potions are hardly worth using.
4. Sorcerers only get two subclasses? Come on!
Here's how I dealt with each as a DM.
1. Belts of Giant Strength add to damage only.
2. Armor enhancement bonuses grant extra hit points instead.
3. Healing potions are more rare, but heal 1/4 your max hp.
4. No solution as of yet.
Vahnyu wrote:
Brock_Landers wrote:
SleepsInTraffic wrote:
Synjin wrote:
1eejit wrote:
RoninJT wrote:
Mistwell wrote:
I forgot number 6.
6. 5E ran over my cat. I liked my cat.
I'm gonna put that in the "plus column". Cuz I hated your cat...
That was the one piece of feedback Chris gave during the playtests. "Must kill Zardnaar's cat!"
Ranthalan wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
Reius wrote:
Hey, what's with the humor in here? This is supposed to be a complaint thread.
durntaur wrote:
Mistwell wrote:
Evidently 5e and I have a lot in common:
1) We both use our real names.
2) Evidently, our humor isn't for everyone.
3) We have very low tolerances for moronity.
4) We attract haters.
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Vahnyu wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
I wonder if a surgeon will ever be able to perform a sense of humour transplant.
Coredump00 wrote:
Ba-dum-tsch!
Yeah there are loads of threads for 5E angst, why not use them?
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Vahnyu wrote:
BoldItalic wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Vahnyu wrote:
That even Zardnaar is making jokes rather than complaining should be a hint to the people actually complaining that they're doing it wrong.
(Sorry Zard, <3)
If they're not going to stop we have to go deeper...
1. People making serious complaints ran over my grandma with their reindeer
2. The 5E angst crowd shot JR
3. Those who whine about 5E have binding problems, their insides tend to fall out making a huge mess.
4. When someone criticises WotC fairies die and unicorns turn into narwhals.
OR
1. Those who point out the iniquity of 5E shall be blessed in the eyes of the Gygax
2. Sheeple can only be saved by such brave critics
3. A slow product release schedule hides a Commie-Nazi agenda, only the true intelligentsia can see this!
4. The concentration mechanic in 5E is a dry-run before our lizard overlords implement a similar mechanic in humanity by drugging our water supply - THE PUBLIC MUST BE WARNED
1eejit wrote:
WON'T SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!?!?!?!
1eejit wrote:
danyc wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
- This edition reminds me of the game I played back in high school. The magic may be back, but I really hate being reminded of high school.
- My books don't have wasps. I'm jealous.
- Flumphs. Why did it have to have flumphs. There goes years of therapy down the tubes.
- I have to use my imagination. I hate it when that happens.
ChrisCarlson wrote:
BoldItalic wrote:
1eejit wrote:
Sands666 wrote:
- The rules that provide guidance for awareness, alertness, visibility, and hiding are a source of confusion.
- The rules that provide guidance for wielding an object, holding an object, using an object, and interacting with an object are a source of confusion.
- The rules that provide guidance for somatic components, material components, and spellcasting foci are a source of confusion.
- The rules that provide guidance for unarmed strikes, improvised weapons, dueling, and dual wielding are a source of confusion.
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Number 7. 5E killed Leonard Nimoy.
That was in extremely poor taste, Zardnaar.
To soon?
AaronOfBarbaria wrote: