• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D General How Long Does It Take to get Sick of an Edition?

Richards

Legend
Like several others upthread, I have never gotten sick of an edition. I played AD&D 1E until 2E came out, and then I played 2E with plenty of 1E still mixed in there. I converted to 3.0 and 3.5 when they came out and enjoyed them so much I have yet to see a reason to move on. I have enough 3.0/3.5 material to last me the rest of my life.

When 4E came out I was immediately turned off by the changes they'd made and actively disliked it enough to not even bother giving it a try. 5E looks like it could be interesting, but not to the extent I'm willing to give up on my 3.5 campaigns (or future campaigns, for that matter). I've come to grips with the idea that D&D has passed me by, but I'm content to remain where I am, with a group of 3.5 diehard players who enjoy the system as much as I do.

Johnathan
 

log in or register to remove this ad

oreofox

Explorer
It isn't the system that I get tired of, but the players. I bought my 2e books in 1998 or 1999 (the silver 25 year anniversary editions or whatever the black cover books were). Switched to 3e when it came out (which surprised me as I had no idea it was in the works). Played that off and on until 2012 when I joined a group for Pathfinder. Enjoyed the hell out of that until one fateful day when I joined a Wrath of the Righteous game on roll20. After sticking it out for a year (9 months longer than I should have), I haven't touched Pathfinder since. Those donkeyholes destroyed the system for me. Luckily by that time 5e came out and it looked good (after hating on it during the playtest) and moved over to that. Been playing that with about 18 months of hiatus over those 5 years.

To me, it depends on the people, with the system being secondary. I enjoy DMing 5e, so unless 6e is even more amazing, I don't see myself changing the system anytime soon. Though I have tossed around the thought of trying out 2e again. Even had the idea of playing through my setting's history through the various D&D editions (starting with 1e).
 


oreofox

Explorer
"Donkeyholes" - I love that! I've never heard the term before but will be incorporating it into my everyday language from now on.

Johnathan

Glad you liked that. It's a more... polite?... way of saying a different word on the internet, so I try to use that instead of the other word for donkey that is the same word for those slabs of fat people sit on. :)
 

GameOgre

Adventurer
I played Basic D&D for years but left it behind because I was a big kid now and played AD&D.
When AD&D 2ed came out we moved to it right away because obviously it had to be better it was newer!
By the time 3.0 hit I was DEEP in 2E. Registered that it came out but I maybe flipped through the players handbook once and thought "?" and went back to my 2E.
When 4E came out I tried it and my books bleed. Ink was everywhere. I took them back to the store and they gave me store credit that I used to buy 3.5 books.
Played 3.5 from the start of 4E till then very end. When they announced D&D Next we started playing 4E essentials.
When 5E hit we changed to it right away. We loved it!

Then after a few years I noticed I didn't really love it. I liked some things about it but loathed others.(Hate the simple math and all the things that come with it. Hate the way spells work now. HATE the magic items and concentration and just a lot more) but that's what everyone wanted to play still so that's what I ran.

Now i'm eyeballing other editions again and other games.

I'm still running 5E. Still having fun at the game table in spit of how i feel about the game system itself. I don't see myself still playing in six months.
 

Argyle King

Legend
I'm not exactly sure how to answer the original question. I feel as though a lot of factors go into my feelings toward a particular system or game, and I'm honestly not entirely sure that I completely understand my own mind when it comes to that.

D&D-wise, I started with 3rd Edition. I was happy to play that for quite a while, but I feel that it benefited from a combination of novelty value and my lack of familiarity with other game-mechanic styles. While I did, at some point, notice issues with how the game worked, I just kinda accepted them as part of how a tabletop game worked.

4th Edition was a mixed bag for me. It somehow managed to simultaneously fix the problems I had with 3rd Edition while also removing elements of 3rd edition which I highly enjoyed. I would say that I was content enough with 4th as a player to mostly enjoy it, but it was also the game which prompted me to look into how other systems did things. From the DM side of things, I liked the mentality behind encounter design and the plug-and-play aspect of how things were generally built, but I also struggled to find a happy medium between the stories I wanted to tell and the "physics engine" (for a lack of better words) underneath the 4E gameworld. At one point, I started fiddling with the numbers to try to make things work more how I wanted, but eventually it became easier to just run a different system. Oddly, I'm in the minority of people who liked a lot of the 4E cosmology changes.

I think I played 3rd and 4th for roughly the same amount of time, which was somewhere between 5-10 years for each. I would need to go back and think about dates and times for a more exact answer. Though, for whatever it's worth, I likely spent more on 3rd and bought more of the later books than I spent on 4th. I stopped buying new books fairly early in the life of 4E.

Pathfinder had a very enjoyable, but also very short-lived run among my usual group. It fixed just enough of 3rd to be enjoyable early on (and the boxed set with the goblin adventure was fun), but eventually some of the issues the group had with 3rd still popped up. I vaguely remember the group's last PF game going somewhat haywire due to issues with a Summoner PC being somewhat broken. I do still buy the occasional Pathfinder product (see below). Overall, I'd say PF lasted roughly a year.

I'm not exactly sure how to express where I'm at with 5th. I wouldn't exactly say I'm tired of it. I still generally enjoy playing, but I play less frequently, and -similar to 4E- it's been quite a while since I've bought a new book. I enjoy 5th, but I might categorize my relationship with 5th as being more casual and more shallow.

In contrast, I've been playing the same edition of a different system (and growing more fond of it) since shortly after D&D 4th came out, and I am not tired of it. If anything, my increased familiarity with it means I'm doing more with it now. It's a "modular" system (and I've gotten fairly proficient at building things with it), so I sometimes buy the occasional older D&D module or Pathfinder monster book or whatever so that I can convert an idea I like to the system. (note: I'm not specifically naming the system because I do not want to detail the thread by getting off the topic of D&D.)
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
I'm not exactly sure how to answer the original question. I feel as though a lot of factors go into my feelings toward a particular system or game, and I'm honestly not entirely sure that I completely understand my own mind when it comes to that.

D&D-wise, I started with 3rd Edition. I was happy to play that for quite a while, but I feel that it benefited from a combination of novelty value and my lack of familiarity with other game-mechanic styles. While I did, at some point, notice issues with how the game worked, I just kinda accepted them as part of how a tabletop game worked.

4th Edition was a mixed bag for me. It somehow managed to simultaneously fix the problems I had with 3rd Edition while also removing elements of 3rd edition which I highly enjoyed. I would say that I was content enough with 4th as a player to mostly enjoy it, but it was also the game which prompted me to look into how other systems did things. From the DM side of things, I liked the mentality behind encounter design and the plug-and-play aspect of how things were generally built, but I also struggled to find a happy medium between the stories I wanted to tell and the "physics engine" (for a lack of better words) underneath the 4E gameworld. At one point, I started fiddling with the numbers to try to make things work more how I wanted, but eventually it became easier to just run a different system. Oddly, I'm in the minority of people who liked a lot of the 4E cosmology changes.

I think I played 3rd and 4th for roughly the same amount of time, which was somewhere between 5-10 years for each. I would need to go back and think about dates and times for a more exact answer. Though, for whatever it's worth, I likely spent more on 3rd and bought more of the later books than I spent on 4th. I stopped buying new books fairly early in the life of 4E.

Pathfinder had a very enjoyable, but also very short-lived run among my usual group. It fixed just enough of 3rd to be enjoyable early on (and the boxed set with the goblin adventure was fun), but eventually some of the issues the group had with 3rd still popped up. I vaguely remember the group's last PF game going somewhat haywire due to issues with a Summoner PC being somewhat broken. I do still buy the occasional Pathfinder product (see below). Overall, I'd say PF lasted roughly a year.

I'm not exactly sure how to express where I'm at with 5th. I wouldn't exactly say I'm tired of it. I still generally enjoy playing, but I play less frequently, and -similar to 4E- it's been quite a while since I've bought a new book. I enjoy 5th, but I might categorize my relationship with 5th as being more casual and more shallow.

In contrast, I've been playing the same edition of a different system (and growing more fond of it) since shortly after D&D 4th came out, and I am not tired of it. If anything, my increased familiarity with it means I'm doing more with it now. It's a "modular" system (and I've gotten fairly proficient at building things with it), so I sometimes buy the occasional older D&D module or Pathfinder monster book or whatever so that I can convert an idea I like to the system. (note: I'm not specifically naming the system because I do not want to detail the thread by getting off the topic of D&D.)

I don't think mentioning a different game is at all derailing the thread, details man!
 



Eric V

Hero
Then after a few years I noticed I didn't really love it. I liked some things about it but loathed others.

Now i'm eyeballing other editions again and other games.

I'm still running 5E. Still having fun at the game table in spit of how i feel about the game system itself. I don't see myself still playing in six months.

This is a good description for what's going on in our groups. For each previous edition, we switched when the shiny new one came out; this is the first edition that we're going to drop* before the next iteration comes out. It's true that the stories should take precedence, and that can be done with any system, so it's just about the game (by which I mean, the product sold by WotC) itself. In that...it's just not doing it for our group, on both sides of the screen. We feel more "sameness" in this edition than any other before (yeah, even 4e); could be the virtually identical spell lists, the available actions, and probably more. Because it's a "greatest hits" D&D, it tries to be a lot of things but ends up being weirdly counter to itself; for example, magic items are completely optional, but the section on magical items in the DMG goes from pages 135-227 (29% of the book for one aspect)...that's a lot of space for something to just throw out. It also goes against all the culture of all previous versions of D&D. Yet...for balanced encounters, you need to make them really rare, because a lot of defense for monsters is their resistance to non-magical weapons; it makes a huge difference.

Mind you, with attunement, once players get certain items, additional items are not very tempting. My players have bemoaned how in previous editions (going all the way back to 1e) getting treasure was a huge thing to look forward to, but now...not really. And that's weird for players who have been playing every edition of D&D for over 30 years.

From the DM side, using casters is a huge pain (especially if there are multiple) and while bounded accuracy is great in theory (I loved it when it was introduced) in practice...that's a lot of bookkeeping. My last fight with spellcasters required so much prep beforehand (looking up all the spells), and as for BA...my group fought a gnoll warband and some demons. They banished the marillith, killed the vrocks, and while there were over 20 gnolls...it was just a lot of rolling to miss. Sure, BA worked in that one in every 8 attacks hit, but it wasn't a real danger. 5e makes challenges through numbers and I'm not saying it doesn't work, but it requires more work than is fun for our group. I need something easier to DM.

So, as for the original inquiry, I guess the answer is 5 years. We're going to wrap up the story of our current 5e game then move to another system. It's weird because it means we probably won't play D&D again*, since I really believe 5e's success means another edition won't come out. Minor changes, maybe, but the evergreen concept means I won't see "6e" or anything like that in my lifetime. I really believe that. It's so popular.

*Never say never though; I bought all the AiME books and they're fantastic. In a low-magic setting like Middle-Earth, a lot (but not all) of the issues we have with the system might disappear. I guess we'll see.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top