D&D 5th Edition Basic Rules Review: First Impressions

I always felt like 4e was "hard to RP" because it was so hard to make what felt like a consistent character, one that conceited that picture in your head with the numbers on the sheet. Because you kept loosing and getting combat stuff and even if at level 7 you had it down, and it felt right by a couple of levels you were forced by the game to change your character almost completely.

I like the looks of 5e, i moved to Pathfinder but i can use multiple systems and have in the past. 4e really turned me off hard, even if initially i was excited i fell out of love with it in a month of time.

I was playing the old Ice Wind Dale game and it struck me just how much the spells remind me of 2e from the 5e books

You absolutely echoed my thoughts on 4E exactly. Looked at the new rules and I'm excited about it.

I liked 4e, I liked that every level you had something to chose to make your character unique. I find the Basic rule is so dreadfully VANILLA and BORING and lacking in options that I can't properly judge it. I'll need to see the PHB first to really wrap my head around it. Feats being an option in the rare cases you get stat increases is a huge turnoff. Rules seem solid enough, though it feels like a huge step back for any character who isn't a caster (or a lazer cleric) in terms of variety. The math also seems very streamlined...and while it cuts down on bonuses and stuff, it feels like, unless you're a caster gaining spells, you won't really feel like you're getting stronger. And speaking of spells I HATE the way the spell list is organized. It should be organized by LEVEL, then SCHOOL and FINALLY alphabetically! That alphabetical list is just not intuitive at all. Plus they really needed to denote which were cleric spells.

I plan on playing this and Pathfinder. I like the rules light path they are taking with this and I think 5th Ed will be great for when I want to play something a little more old school, maybe focus a bit more on adventuring. What I love about Pathfinder is all of the options. You have tons of options, so if I find I enjoy 5 e rules, I think I will play which ever suits the kind of campaign I want to run.

Actually I had a strong negative reaction to 5th edition, something that seems to echo my initial reaction to 4th edition.  However I've decided to only make my final judgement call when the basic set comes out.  I'll agree a little on the 'flavor' stuff but just to the extent that 4th ed was selling a more blank slate experience then 3rd ed had.  My largest concern with both 3rd ed and 5th lies in the tyranny of the vancian magic system and the power curves.

First of all, great vid, man. This video alone got you a sub =D. I was a part of the 5e play test and I really liked the return to form for D&D. Yet, I still play 4th edition. 4th was my introduction to the game and I think its a fun system. But I can understand the uproar that is caused since it does not feel like D&D when played. I play a 4th edition game with my brothers and I want to start another group with some friends at work. Maybe I'll get the started set and free basic rules and play a few games.

Hmm... Okay, it does sound like WotC finally woke up a bit, but I'm afraid this may be a case of "to little to late".
I play several RPGs and I see no need to pick up a new D&D type game now that we have Pathfinder, the true spiritual successor to D&D.
Paizo still seems to have the heart and spirit of gamers, whereas WotC does not.

I don't know. WotC still has massive issues with 5E -- the name, the ill-will from the 4E release, the fact it likely won't bring 4E players along, Piazo has a big market share, the expense of more books, the difficulty of getting new players into 5E if existing DMs/groups don't come on board, setting issues, the slow release schedule, lack of settings, etc.

In looking at the rules, the game is a lot more like 3.x. However, the question is... is it that much better than 3.x to get any number of Pathfinder or 3.x "hold outs" to come back. Is the game that much better than 3.x? Is reducing the complexity actually worth $100 per player from people who already know 3.x? It is worth the DMs time rewriting/adapting campaign settings for 5E rules? It looks like a tough sell for 4E, Pathfinder, and 3.x players.

My prediction... as good it might be... it is just going to split the community again -- it might take some of the 4E players, some of the 3.x, and a few Pathfinder folks... but I find it hard to believe they could move a majority of any of those groups over.

Dude, the argument that 4th ed had no role-playing is completely valid.  The claim that there's as much role-playing as you want there to be is faulty.  Why?  An RPG is supposed to foster role-playing and 4th didn't do that.  Every spell, skill, or  power had a combat application. Using your gauge for role-playing, I could play Monopoly and bark like a dog every time I pass go, and call that an RPG.  I like 4th. I still play it.  But I have no illusions of what it is and isn't.  I'm glad you see that, too.

P.S. - I play Pathfinder and 4th ed.  I like the look of 5th so far, but not enough to stop playing and running those games.  And that's mainly where they failed.

I bought 5th edition last week, how is it not out yet?

Well, you got me interested in 5e enough that I'm going to go find that .pdf, and I really didn't think that I was that interested before.  It seems sad that they had to hurry up and do another edition after only six years, but if they needed to, they needed to.

Love the video, but I disagree that there isn't enough to play the game.  Played my first 5E session on Friday night (used monsters and magic items from playtest).  I totally agree this version went back to the AD&D roots, added in the stuff that was good from every other edition.  The role-playing element is everywhere and was definitely the focus.

I agree as well that any game can have role playing in it and that is up to the group to make that happen.  I think with 4th edition it forced my players to think to much about the tactics and combat, which left them with little creative time to make the session seem fulfilled.  We typically play weekly and have 4 hours to play.  By making the game rules light and simple, it is giving us more time for role playing as opposed to roll playing.

I didn't like 4th edition, played 3.5 and Pathfinder and enjoyed them for a while.  I am planning to fully immerse into 5E as it brings the game to a place I think my group will enjoy and provide the role playing opportunities which will make my game great.

I am glad I start my 5th Ed campaign before i saw the WTOC vidcast of them playing..wow the guy being the DM was horrid and the experience players werent even helping the new players...lol all in all my group loves the new edition and am glad the Wiz decided to listen to most of our ideas, still not a big fan of channel divinity but the group loves the advantage/disadvantage rule. Dont really like the Inspiration rule seems too similar to receiving an Action Point and am really trying to keep any 4th edition feel from any of my campaigns. Your views on roleplaying is spot on but Like I always try to do...paint a good picture and then give the brush to the players...lol GJ  love this review.

The roleplaying comment on 4rth just doesn't make sense.  Your first explanation was right.  The rules are the basis and scerarios, modules, etc. are more for roleplaying.  I personally don't like it when the rules integrate roleplaying and leave that up to me.  If you go and read through the classes in 4rth I think you'll see plenty of roleplaying.  There's actually a lot of material there describing backgrounds of each class. 

I've been playing 5th edition playtest for over a year now. Playtest 032113, 082013, 091913 Respectively.  I've played AD&D since 2nd Rev 1 1989. Pretty much 2nd through 5th.

After a year of playing 5th I can only say it was definitely a playtest.

There were a frustrating amount of balance problems with many classes and I don't mean in respect to each other like the forums often compared them. I mean to their effectiveness in a group and against monsters. Example: A lvl 18 monk can one shot most monsters in one turn doing 24d12 + 144 with 8 Ki and 22 Dex.

Rules were trivialized to a point of nonsense, Example: "As part of an action" is way overused allowing exploitative Rogues Move+Hustle+Hustle+Jump movement and unlimited weapon swapping to break certain spells and abilities.

Spells were simply all over the place in their effectiveness. Protection from Evil, Fear, Ray of Enfeeblement, Plane Shift (Which has always been Imba) are simply far too effective for the level while other spells like Disintegrate, Power Word Kill and even Hold Person fall short.

I can truly appreciate trying to get back to the basics of roleplay by simplifying rules but it is also a game and a game is often good as the rules that govern it. Waiting to see the official books, which I'll prolly read in full before buying since WoTC has proven to me it'll do anything for a buck including selling bad products or perverting current ones.

RIP TSR

I agree that 5th edition has more elements that support role playing in it than 4th edition had. On the other hand: 4th edtion had no less support for role playing than the editions before.

As a self classified OSR fantasy guy it says a lot that I am interested in giving 5E a shot.  I have some gripes here and there but I'm looking to playing it.

When I was in high school, i played a game we invented based on AD&D and something called Palladium that we invented to suit out needs...One thing we did was reward role playing with experience...Some things I did not like about 4th edition were certain kinds of skill challenges -- the social ones in particular, which I'd rather have role played...Also the fights took too long. The detail was nice but there has to be an easier way to get the fights over with so you can explore magical places and talk to people...I would rather only have 1 fight per session and the rest of the time be spent doing interaction with the world and becoming mystified...

4th edition lost me and my gaming groups.  Pathfinder filled that void and listened to it's fan base.  5th Edition looks promising.  I will cautiously give it an initial chance but am wary of it.  I do see some elements that WotC used in its old Star Wars Saga edition. 

I'll likely try it with our group when we take the next break between campaigns. However, the idea of spending $150 to start a 'new' system which is 'more like' a system I already have $400 worth of books for is kind of silly. The problem is... I don't think it can be that much better than 3.x to justify the time converting setting and convince five people to each pay $100+.

I don't think 5E can save the industry. 4E fragmented the player base and failed to draw new people into the system. Pathfinder now holds the D&D mantle. Even if 5E convinced half the Pathfinder folks to switch, half the 4E folks to leave, and half those who quit or moved to other systems... it still would likely only be back at its 3.x levels and still competing against itself. Further... I don't think any of that is likely. Pathfinder and 4E folks likely have a lot of money in their systems and won't want to start again. WotC is also in the terrible position that any new players coming along are more likely to run into a group playing Pathfinder, 4E, or 3.x and thus likely to go into that gaming system.

i started dnd this week already found a a group of new players can you recomend some books for me and my friends so that we can start playing?(i will be the DM so if you can point me to some monster books that will be great)

Great review and your 1st impressions line up with many of my own.

I loved 3.x and played 4th for a bit until our group moved to M&M. For the past couple of years we ran fantasy, urban fantasy, and supers games in that system. Never really got into Pathfinder until recently.

Here we are at 5th and I'm really liking what I'm seeing a free form rpg like AD&D with the sensible mechanics from 3.xE and 4E. I don't actually have much desire to house rule much maybe bonus languages for high intel and getting rid of the insta-heal after the extended rest for a grittier game.

I've made my 1st character a dwarven wizard with a soldier background and let me tell you I'm impressed. I could NOT make this character in any other edition of the game. He looks and feels like a fighter yet he's all wizard. It's kind of crazy and I bet there is going to be all kinds of cool gems like that once the PHB releases. The more I read the rules and explore what I can the more I'm falling in love with this version of the game.
- Nerdarchist Dave

I play 2nd edition for the most part as I love the flavor and role play vs. the roll play. I have tried 3rd edition, 3.5, pathfinder and 4th... And honestly I prefer the 2nd, but now with 5th I like what I see so far. My opinion may change with time but I will give it a go and we will see.

A have playtested de D&D Next (5e) and my overall impression is that Wizards of the Coast made a effort to make D&D a cool game again, but Cubicle 7 has already done that better with The One Ring RPG. I have played all editions of D&D and I stared roleplaying in 1988. It was all about D&D until I got The One Ring.

Hey I've watched a few of you're vids. Really enjoy them man! I was hoping If anyone could help me.
I'm new to D&D and I am confused about character creation, I understand when you play D&D 4e or 3 or 3.5 or even next. Etc etc. You play by the rules as in combat how things is calculated etc. But for example can I grab let's say an avenger from PHB2 and create one using 5e rules and play it in there? Or a different race or a spell or feat?

Thanks in advance

I bought path finder because fifth edition sold out in a weekend

I skimmed through the entire just released Player's Handbook for about 30 minutes, and I found nothing there better or an improvement on 3.5. Again, I only spent 30 minutes overlooking it and could not get into the fine details. There is a whole section similar to the PHB2 of 3.5 with personalities and backgrounds, except it seems very forced and I found it weird. The DM rewards you for role playing and you can use that inspiration point to roll advantage. Plain stupid to me. The Classes are exactly the same as 3.5, and it seems kind of like 3.5 light. You will notice it's easier to read with some details taken out, if you want simpler. The art looked Disney to me and the cover felt like a textbook of elementary school. My guess is the only people who would chose this over 3.5 or Pathfinder is if you don't have the mental capability to comprehend 3.5 or you simply want to just play the latest edition. The plus side is it seemed so similar to 3.5, I bet you can use the new adventures with minor conversion to 3.5. Wizards of the Coast, you should have just left it alone after 3.5.

I have to admit, I had no idea you were involved with the Escapist.  How long has that been going on?

New subscriber here. Loving your videos so far. Keep it up! 

Finally got off my butt and watched this entire video.  I like the thought process.  I may actually read over the intro.
In reference to 4th ed, that contrived junk is why I'm a Pathfinder player now.  IMO, 3.5 had indicators that the franchise was starting to roll down the hill toward being a miniatures game that was horrendously mechanics-controlled/restricted.  And, if you paid attention to the company that owned it, it wasn't hard to identify the goal was to prep a conversion to a video game format.
If I do end up going to next, aka 5th ed, it will be in 3-5 years.  I'm not interested in a game format that will get a complete overhaul in 1-2 years, with the publisher abandoning it for a new version dunked in whatever fad(s) are currently considered popular  shudders at the thought
If WotC decides to put the effort into really providing a wide range of material for D&D Next, not just Forgotten Realms and one or two rushed tertiary settings, I may decide to venture over the fence.
Time will tell ;)

is this a DnD , and DnD is awesome and most of the PRGs even MMORPGS wouldnt be here if not for DnD and i some friends that have no idea what they are doing so if 5th going to be simple enough for them to get the hang of it quickly so that we dont have to stop and explain things to them. sorry long comment.

I'd argue that 2nd edition faced some very serious competition late in it's life cycle...predominantly from White Wolf though there were many other games that stole pieces of D&D's audience before WotC came up with the OGL and many companies shifted their focus away from original systems and towards providing content for 3rd ed

Thanks Rhykker for the insight. It's essential to get opinions that have an integrity and truly give an honest look and not be biased to another edition. I have ordered the new players hand book and I will be sure to give it an honest look and forget that it is another edition and look at it with fresh eyes.

More D&D 5 and Pathfinder pls.This is great.

Never had any competition? You are aware the the company that made D&D (TSR) actually went under years and years ago? Wizards of the Coast just acquired the rights to it after TSR died. One guy back then said that 'D&D created a brand new industry, that immedietly devoured it'. They apparently didn't fair too well against other rpgs that came out.

while in highschool my friends and i played what i think was the 3rd eddition. we graduated in 2006 but may have been usieing an earlyer release.  we played untill 2009 and we moved away.

D&D 5th edition is the only edition Ive been interested in since 1st edition AD&D. Ive had a 25+ year hiatus as a D&D GM once I discovered other non level and class based games such as Runequest & Call of Cthulu.

D&D 5th is the first version of D&D in recent years (Skipped 3rd entirely and read about 4th with absolute disinterest) that seems to even vaguely interesting to a roleplay heavy, systems light GM like me (Mostly been GMing CoC & Barbarians f Lemuria over the last few years). So Ive decided to give D&D another shot with my various RPG groups.

I just sat through a character creation session. I always make a fighter first in a new fantasy game because my philosophy is: if they can make fighters interesting to play, then the rest of the game will shine as well.

Altogether we spent several hours going over the rules, three of us making one character each sharing a single book. But it was the most fun we'd had making new characters with a new ruleset in a long time. 

I see 3rd in it, but also a bit of 2nd as well. They did a good job making the classes simple enough that you could play them straight from the book without having to look anywhere else to see special feats. Each class had their own feats and each class' feats were listed in the same section as that class. However, there are other feats elsewhere in the book (ch. 6 i think) and all of the classes seem to gain access to those feats at the same time (4th level). It's the special feats and skills that the crunch customization comes into play, but there are other areas that allow for further customization.

Backgrounds offer a few extra perks for your character, and there are some backgrounds that obviously go well with certain classes (Fighter/Soldier or Fighter/Folk Hero) but i don't remember seeing any stipulation that you were restricted in available backgrounds. I picked a Fighter with the Sage background as that gave the character some arcane benefits and i wanted to go into the Eldritch Knight prestige class at Lv 3.

I wish Paladin were back to being a prestige class like it was back in Greyhawk and BECMI/Rules Cyclopedia, but those days are long gone. However, the inclusion of things like the Eldritch Knight for Fighters restores some power and choice to the class that had been missing since 2e AD&D.

Looking forward to our next session when we'll actually be able to play a game. Our group is pretty diverse, a few of us like 3.5 best, one of us likes 2nd best, and a couple of us actually prefer Basic. I think 5th offers a comfortable medium that will appeal and appease us all in our respective approaches to the game, but we'll have to see.  :)

Well 4.0 killed my gameing group but if I can my read the PTF and find and good online group to play with.  But I think that it will be hard to tell I read the ptf file

I wanted to start playing D&D with some friends a couple years ago, none of us had ever played before but I managed to get the hold of a 4e manual and a 3.5 manual... And 3.5 was just so impossible to learn, it had a lot of things and very detailed, but it was just too complex to start playing out of nowhere... 4e was far simpler for us, it just told us what we needed to know and we would roleplay a lot even if the book focused more on combat...
I kind-of get why so many people hate it, but we had a lot of fun and that's what's important...
We stopped playing for a long while and now 5e is up, and we forgot most of the things... Should we repick 4e or learn 5e? We just want to keep it as simple as possible, but while roleplaying... Any advice?

how come these videos stopped? I love them man and would like to see more, especially now 5th edition is now out

I played quite happily through 3.5. Hated 4, played a little Pathfinder, and then just stopped playing. I'm so glad that 5 exists. I will probably give it a shot as soon as I find a group nearby. Thanks for the cogent analysis.

I recently played a 5e game on Roll20. I can't say for sure if I like it, because the DM using a lot of homebrews. I do like how they did bring back the role-play aspect, but seems a bit simpler compared to 3.5 and 4e.

Fake voice great lip sinc

I had absolutely no idea you were into Dungeons and Dragons, until I took a closer look at your channel. You produce great content and you're very helpful with Diablo, HOTS, and now DnD! Keep up the excellent videos!

Well 3 years later I took a look at D&D 5th, It's gone back to its roots I started back AD&D 2nd edit. I didn't like 4th edit, because there was just too much micro managing combat. Drawing combat to redictulious lengths, Now, my crew we don't play with a preset world maps We just use our imagination as we move long. All of use has played fantasy games, watch movies (still my favoret is Skrall.) like conan, Excalibur, ect, ect. So naturally we role play as badasses and have the DIE god/goddess fuck with us as we react to the what ever the DM comes up with. But sadly RL demon of all creation with its Wives, acolytes and Hell spawn minions of player warp. disbanded my gaming crew. I feel great sarrow not having play 5th edition without anyone to play with. Our style was when you play any class and age of your character is more than 16 years of older. You are still going to get training as if you where born and raised around that class. Unless you start as a outcast of some sort. So starting out everyone is a level 2 to 5. Because we all start out with our own DM class intro, to intro out C's. Then the main DM takes over and brings us together. Over 7 years of playing over the weekends fridays to sunday morning on school days. Then during the summer entire week 5 to 6 days, depending how excited we were to continue from where we left off. To keep everything fresh we rotate players as DM's just to start a different story but fun would have it each of these different campaigns end up combined with main one we all took notes along the way. When It was all done. Everyone was level 45. lol and at this point our C's where so God like we started to go anime style, but we decided that we built a world from scratch. Turn our C's into legend and started a new, but we started to branch out to other games like Shadowrun, Demon the Fallen, Vampire the Masquerade. but we were more hooked on shadowrun than anything else. Good times. Damn I type to much. lol

So this is what you look like with your hat off! :P