[Shinobi Killfist]

Is 5e d&d still going strong. My group played it initially but as it went on the simplified system wore on people. From some players in my group lack of build options. Others the illogic of advantage/disadvantage. The small proficiency bonus ruled by a d20. We haven’t played it in a while.

Sadly, 5E is the best selling edition of D&D so far.

I wonder how much of that is tied to it getting a main stream popularity boost from TV etc.

[Ixal]

Is 5e d&d still going strong. My group played it initially but as it went on the simplified system wore on people. From some players in my group lack of build options. Others the illogic of advantage/disadvantage. The small proficiency bonus ruled by a d20. We haven’t played it in a while.

Sadly, 5E is the best selling edition of D&D so far.

I wonder how much of that is tied to it getting a main stream popularity boost from TV etc.

Not much, it already performed very well before Stranger Things started. Sadly it really seems like the next generation of players is even more into simplification than the current one (or rather don't want to bother with "complex" rules). And with SR, together with Rolemaster, being considered the epitome of complexity it looked rather bleak for those systems when they try to acquire new players.
So from a business point of view simplification makes sense. Still doesn't mean I have to like it.

[Shinobi Killfist]

Is 5e d&d still going strong. My group played it initially but as it went on the simplified system wore on people. From some players in my group lack of build options. Others the illogic of advantage/disadvantage. The small proficiency bonus ruled by a d20. We haven’t played it in a while.

Sadly, 5E is the best selling edition of D&D so far.

I wonder how much of that is tied to it getting a main stream popularity boost from TV etc.

Not much, it already performed very well before Stranger Things started. Sadly it really seems like the next generation of players is even more into simplification than the current one (or rather don't want to bother with "complex" rules).

I meant more ongoing support for it. It’s initial launch was big because it’s D&D and they were rebounding from 4e which was a disaster and by basically making 5e d&d again.

Might just be all the groups I play with but simple systems have a initial appeal but their lack of depth has our interest wane over time. D&d is not that lite of a system though. They streamlined some core mechanics but it’s still meaty in other areas. It’s not like it’s savage worlds or something. Maybe it has the right middle point for generic fantasy rpg for most people.

[Ghost Rigger]

As a guy who occasionally does calculus for fun, I feel obligated to remind everyone that you don't have to be bad at math to find basic addition and subtraction to be a bothersome chore.

[Ixal]

I meant more ongoing support for it. It’s initial launch was big because it’s D&D and they were rebounding from 4e which was a disaster and by basically making 5e d&d again.

Might just be all the groups I play with but simple systems have a initial appeal but their lack of depth has our interest wane over time. D&d is not that lite of a system though. They streamlined some core mechanics but it’s still meaty in other areas. It’s not like it’s savage worlds or something. Maybe it has the right middle point for generic fantasy rpg for most people.

I don't think it is.
Yes, it is a cliché that the "youth" has very short attention spans thanks to smartphones and social media, etc. but I think it contains some grains of truth. In the entire RPG industry the simple games seem to do very well proportionally. Same goes for other entertainment like video games. The guys doing Baldurs Gate 3 are even calling 5E too complex and I have seen many people asking for more simple systems as 5E was too complicated for them (or had too many rules to remember).

Sadly Catalyst has apparently forgotten that when WotC did "a whole new edition, with new concepts and a different feel" (Jason Hardy interview) it resulted in 4E which was a huge flop and nearly tanked the brand.

[Shinobi Killfist]

As a guy who occasionally does calculus for fun, I feel obligated to remind everyone that you don't have to be bad at math to find basic addition and subtraction to be a bothersome chore.

Why I was happy thaco0 went away. I can add any time no problem but If I’m tired subtracting into the negatives is a chore for me.

[Marcus]

Is 5e d&d still going strong. My group played it initially but as it went on the simplified system wore on people. From some players in my group lack of build options. Others the illogic of advantage/disadvantage. The small proficiency bonus ruled by a d20. We haven’t played it in a while.

5e is doing very well in fact. In it's genre the only thing that might challenge it is PF2, and I'd call it very big might at the moment.  The homebrew on 5e is big now, and only looks like it's gonna get bigger. Which WotC seems to happy with. Keeping 5e to a relatively "small" number of books seems to be working fairly well for them.

[jim1701]

it's particularly galling considering the simpler shadowrun already exists and will continue to be sold; Shadowrun Anarchy.

6e is what Anarchy should have been.
That would have worked well for the more casual player who doesn't like crunch and could care less about realism / sensible outcomes and just want to throw fireballs and shoot shit up.

That would have then left the opening for 5e to be simplified and the borked subsystems fixed.

Instead we have two systems that serve the same player / market.
I have a really hard time understanding how THAT decision was made.
"We already have a rules light system, so let's build ANOTHER rules light system, but different".
That's entirely befuddling to me.

Wow you are insulting.  Could you try any harder?  Good bye.

[kyoto kid]

it's particularly galling considering the simpler shadowrun already exists and will continue to be sold; Shadowrun Anarchy.

6e is what Anarchy should have been.
That would have worked well for the more casual player who doesn't like crunch and could care less about realism / sensible outcomes and just want to throw fireballs and shoot shit up.

That would have then left the opening for 5e to be simplified and the borked subsystems fixed.

Instead we have two systems that serve the same player / market.
I have a really hard time understanding how THAT decision was made.
"We already have a rules light system, so let's build ANOTHER rules light system, but different".
That's entirely befuddling to me.

...👍

[Carmody]

it's particularly galling considering the simpler shadowrun already exists and will continue to be sold; Shadowrun Anarchy.

6e is what Anarchy should have been.
That would have worked well for the more casual player who doesn't like crunch and could care less about realism / sensible outcomes and just want to throw fireballs and shoot shit up.

That would have then left the opening for 5e to be simplified and the borked subsystems fixed.

Instead we have two systems that serve the same player / market.
I have a really hard time understanding how THAT decision was made.
"We already have a rules light system, so let's build ANOTHER rules light system, but different".
That's entirely befuddling to me.

As a fan of Anarchy (that's how I play Shadowrun now) and having access to the SR6 CRB (french traductor and member of hotfix errata team), let me disagree here.
SR6 is closer to SR5 than to Anarchy with respect to simplification.

[kyoto kid]

..OK caught about half of tonight's live play session (was busy in the kitchen).

When the sidebar chat moved to purchasing/upgrading skills I found another major downside.  Instead of it taking 2 Karma x skill rating to learn/improve a skill, it now takes 5 Karma.  Furthermore the time span is increased from days x rating (1 - 4) and weeks x rating (5+) to one full month x skill rating.  This will really stifle character advancement particularly in a homebrew to the point your character will be relatively "static" for a long time.  It will also likely mean few characters will take anything above a Low lifestyle as it could get costly (increasing your firearms skill to say, 6 suddenly costs you 12,000¥ at a low lifestyle plus the training cost). So much for what you made on that last run that you wanted to put away for that new piece of chrome or wetware.

The time factor will not have as much an impact in missions play as you can take as much downtime as needed between sessions however the resources impact will still be there. For example my character Leela who has a middle lifestyle, getting that rating 6 in a single skill would cost 30 Karma and 30,000¥ (about the price for a degree at a state college!). 

The way it was explained is that all skills are now skill groups and sub-classes (like say Pistols) are now specialisations that still require you to have the base group skill.  It wasn't explained how much it cost on time and Karma for specialisations and how far one could increase them (I came away with the impression that you need to raise the core skill first to improve the specialisation further).  If Karma awards are about the same as they currently are in 5E, it would mean very, very slow character advancement overall.  I don't know how others feel, but if I devote weeks if not months to playing and really don't see my character improving very much, I'll bag it and go find some other way to spend my time that is more rewarding (or just stay with 5E).

[Iron Serpent Prince]

It will also likely mean few characters will take anything above a Low lifestyle as it could get costly (increasing your firearms skill to say, 6 suddenly costs you 12,000¥ at a low lifestyle plus the training cost). So much for what you made on that last run that you wanted to put away for that new piece of chrome or wetware.

I don't know if I am inserting meaning you didn't intend, or not.  It reads as if you think that training time must be done consecutively without break.
I can not comment on Missions play, but in the 5e Core book you are allowed to do other things during training time - including doing runs and such to earn some dough.
If I get what your comments are about, then it shouldn't be an issue if 6e uses the same rules as 5e for training times.

Now, the real questions is what can you train simultaneously?
In 5e, someone training a Skill Group could not train anything else during that time (except Edge, as that was unique in that it required no time to train).
In that regard, once you start training Skill X from 5 to 6, you may have six months where you are incapable of training anything else....

[dim]

I mean the timeframes for training can be easily fixed by talking to the GM. Find a homebrew rule everybody is happy with, problem solved!
     

[Ixal]

I mean the timeframes for training can be easily fixed by talking to the GM. Find a homebrew rule everybody is happy with, problem solved!
     

Imo its not a good sign when people start to write lists of things to houserule before the edition is out.

[Marcus]

..OK caught about half of tonight's live play session (was busy in the kitchen).

When the sidebar chat moved to purchasing/upgrading skills I found another major downside.  Instead of it taking 2 Karma x skill rating to learn/improve a skill, it now takes 5 Karma.  Furthermore the time span is increased from days x rating (1 - 4) and weeks x rating (5+) to one full month x skill rating.  This will really stifle character advancement particularly in a homebrew to the point your character will be relatively "static" for a long time.  It will also likely mean few characters will take anything above a Low lifestyle as it could get costly (increasing your firearms skill to say, 6 suddenly costs you 12,000¥ at a low lifestyle plus the training cost). So much for what you made on that last run that you wanted to put away for that new piece of chrome or wetware.

The time factor will not have as much an impact in missions play as you can take as much downtime as needed between sessions however the resources impact will still be there. For example my character Leela who has a middle lifestyle, getting that rating 6 in a single skill would cost 30 Karma and 30,000¥ (about the price for a degree at a state college!). 

The way it was explained is that all skills are now skill groups and sub-classes (like say Pistols) are now specialisations that still require you to have the base group skill.  It wasn't explained how much it cost on time and Karma for specialisations and how far one could increase them (I came away with the impression that you need to raise the core skill first to improve the specialisation further).  If Karma awards are about the same as they currently are in 5E, it would mean very, very slow character advancement overall.  I don't know how others feel, but if I devote weeks if not months to playing and really don't see my character improving very much, I'll bag it and go find some other way to spend my time that is more rewarding (or just stay with 5E).

Just Wow. Why put in a rule that's going to have to be completely ignored? That's just doesn't make any sense. How did that get through play test?
As to the raising cost did they increase karma awards to go with it?