On topic, I think WotC's willingness to experiment with different class subsystems (power points, Tome of Battle) is a plus over Paizo's adherence to vancian spells. Even though some of those subsystems left much to be wanted in the execution. (Hello, truenaming!) It was nice, but what I think Paizo did better than WotC in that regard, is Paizo will continue to support each class they come up with in all their books they publish after releasing the new class. WotC, however, liked to pretend all classes outside of the PHB didn't exist once the book was released. It's my fear for 5th edition when they do end up releasing a fully playtested Mystic and Artificer class, that any other book they release will act like those never existed.
I don't like at will cantrips. Especially with Detect Magic and Light.I find it good that a low level caster can do at least something magical all day. Detect Magic and Light are situationally powerful, but then look at what other party members can do at level 1.. Is your grievance with at-will cantrips just those two spells, or all the cantrips? It is easy enough to reduce the reliance on Detect Magic and Light by making them 1st level spells instead. I do agree that making them at will makes the torch useless. As for me to be more on topic, I would have to say I kinda feel like the sizes in 3.0 were better (a horse being 5x10 instead of 10x10). I am sure I know why they changed it (they wanted to release minis, and it was just easier to plop a horse on a 10x10 base instead of making the base 5x10), but it just made more sense. Also, I kinda miss the massive amount of skills from 3.0 (playing 5e with 15 skills total...).
Thank you very much, Paul! I got mine, now I just need to figure out how to use it.
Why does a 2nd Edition of Pathfinder NEED to be radically different? Paizo doesn't need to change it up so much that it invalidates all the old material (like what WotC). It doesn't need to be a completely brand new game with a new edition. If there would be a 2nd edition (I refuse to call it 2.0, as it isn't a computer program), they should go the TSR route. The differences between 1st and 2nd edition AD&D is rather minimal, especially compared to the differences between 2nd edition AD&D, 3rd edition D&D, 4th edition and 5th edition D&D. Make minimal changes to where the original Patfinder material isn't invalidated and you get the same things reprinted. Just update the CRB, maybe take out the GMing portion of the book and replace it with all the classes they have added (ACG, APG, UM, OA, etc).
Man I miss Mikaze, and hope he is doing well. His views on orcs were similar to my own. And this is really awesome of you to do. I would also like to claim one, if you so chose to pick me. Merry Mikazemas to you and everyone else out there!
I play over roll20, so I google search images to use for tokens of monsters and npcs (and PCs whenever I get to play). Finding an orc (or half-orc) that isn't some giant axe wielding mouth open screaming spiked bodybuilder is impossible (I was trying to find a half-orc druid. After about 5 hours I finally came across one). Female dwarves, gnolls (these suffer from the same image homogeneity of orcs), goblins (I either find Pathfinder goblins or Warcraft goblins, which both are bleh), and many others. If I had any sort of artistic talent, I'd just draw what I would need and not bother with the frustration of trying to find an orc in full plate that isn't dark and full of spikes, or a goblin or hobgoblin (searching hobgoblin puts out too many Marvel Hobgoblin images).
I was going to write up a big long thing, but I'm not gonna bother. It's obvious that I am not enlightened and am doing things wrong. So back to basically lurking for me, again.
Tank, in MMORPG terms, is someone who takes hits while holding all attention of the enemies while everyone else attacks it (or heals the PCs). The part of being a tank that doesn't really translate into TTRPG is the "holding aggro" where the enemy focuses solely on the guy in front of him with tunnel vision. So making a "tank" is really difficult and requires GM cooperation. Of course, most creatures who are somewhat intelligent wouldn't focus solely on one person (unless they can take him out, in which case the player would probably get angry that his tank didn't perform like he thinks it should have).
What's default fluff as opposed to fluff? My guess is what he means by "default fluff" is what is printed in the CRB/PHB.
I'd like to note that just because lot of people who are vocal about their preference in catfolk art seem to like Eade's art, that doesn't really mean its most popular since most forum posters haven't really expressed opinion about that and even then we aren't all of people who play pathfinder.True, so the fairest thing to do would be to give more representation to both versions. And since we currently have plenty of the so-called non-Eade version, what we need is more of the Eade version (which may or may not actually be Eade). I would have no problem with both. Heck, Paizo could even make the Eade version and the non-Eade version be regional variants of Catfolk, similar to how Ulfen humans look different than Varisian humans who look different from Vudran humans etc. and so on, but still have the same racial abilities. I am sure we can all agree that they still look better than the Catfolk from the Miniature's Handbook, right?
Personally, I prefer a more beastial look to my beast races. While I agree the Eade artwork is well drawn, it is not my cup of tea. It looks too anime catgirl to me, which is a look I really really do not like. Just glad they didn't go that route for any of the kitsune artwork I have seen in many of the books that featured kitsune artwork. Though, the kitsune on the cover art has a muzzle that is a little too short. But unfortunately, it seem more people like the anime catgirl look of Eade's bestiary 3 entry. I prefer the ARG version, myself.
What really slowed things down when I was playing PF, was the attempts to avoid AoOs, remembering all the various +1s and +2s (both attack and damage) and then adding them all up. Then there were the spellcasters trying to figure out what they wanted to cast (and then reading off what the spell does). It got so bad that if you were a martial, all you really did was just swing your weapon or fire your bow, because doing anything else just took up too much time. 5th edition simplified the AoO, to where you only provoked one if you moved out of a creature's reach. There also isn't the myriad of various +1s and +2s, which helps to reduce the time taken in combat. The spellcasters still end up taking up the most time figuring out what to do (unless they just go with a damaging cantrip).
I never feel hurt or left out if my name never comes up in threads like this. I never expect it too. While it does kinda suck that I haven't made much of an impression on other posters, I don't blame them. I am not nearly as active, especially compared to many of the posters who's names have been mentioned (some multiple times). Now, what would have been surprising is if my name actually was mentioned. Such an occurrance would probably have given me a brain fart on how to react. As for my list? I haven't had much interaction with many of the people on this board to make any sort of decision. I vaguely remember thinking "That person seems like they would be fun to game with", but the names that go with that statement escape me.
You don't if you don't just absolutely have to have that 18 int. Which. You know, you really don't. How dare you sir imply that not starting out with an 18 in the class's primary stat isn't needed! I had a stuttering fit just reading this! Sarcasm aside, I tend to agree. I also agree with a lot of the others here in that I prefer when the characters are (alightly above) Average Joes who aren't gods in some aspect. If you enjoy the higher point buys and breezing through things (or having the DM adjust everything to give you a challenge), then good on you. Glad you are having fun. Personally, I find it rather boring. Sure, I can find it fun for the first couple sessions, but after a while it gets old. It's one reason I enjoy 5th edition. The races don't get any stat penalties, point buy starts at 8 (instead of 10), and there's no extra points obtained from dumping a stat (as you can't have a stat lower than 8). You get 27 points (which equals out to a 15 point buy since each stat starts 2 points lower than Pathfinder), and can't have a score higher than 15 before adding in racial bonuses (Gasp! Highest score is a 17! The horror!). I have been raged at by a few people because I didn't start out with a 20 in my class's main stat. I have been ridiculed by at least one person on this message board (in a thread that has since been closed) because I said I don't like to have astronomically high numbers. I have no problem with people who like the high numbers, but apparently I do it wrong by not having high numbers. It's because of this attitude I haven't touched Pathfinder in 2 years. I would like to, but everyone I seem to come across is all about the high numbers.
Reply to bold in spoiler to hide any spoilers: If you listen to Medivh speaking to Garona alone, his dialog hints at him being Garona's father. Garona's mother was burned alive for giving birth to a half-orc, and Medivh talks about how "in my travels, I found a strong and noble people. Among them, a female, who accepted me for who I was. Who loved me."
He doesn't outright say it, but I feel it is strongly hinted at. For the longest time, "strong and noble" is basically what Metzen liked to describe the orcs of the Warcraft universe. So it wouldn't surprise me if Garona was his daughter. At least, in the movie universe. And I am sure the movie universe "canon" isn't canon for the games/books, since the orcs didn't drink demon blood to turn green.
Dragonborn are a D&D race that is not open gaming content, and as such cannot be an official part of Pathfinder. Actually, dragonborn are open gaming content now. They are included in the 5th Edition SRD, so Paizo could, if they wanted to, convert over the dragonborn to Pathfinder in a future book. It's doubtful, but it is possible, now.
While 5th edition has an SRD now, and Paizo sells 5th edition books on their site, I doubt Paizo will do anything with 5th edition unless Pathfinder declines by a huge percentage and they want to keep making stuff for something that people will play. I don't see this happening anytime soon. It's rather "easy" to convert it yourself. All you need to do is reduce some DCs, and convert over a few monsters (doesn't take long at all). It's the same with any adventure modules from previous editions of D&D.
I think thats an excuse. They just don't want to say "99% of the stuff we receive is garbage and reading it would be a waste of time".Paizo has a policy to avoid even reading unsolicited content, for legal reasons. Actually, most places the publish things have a "no unsolicited material" policy. It saves them from being sued in the case of them coming up with something similar to something someone wanted to submit to them. Of course, that doesn't stop people from trying to do it.
Most "optimizers" I have come across focus on the big damage, AC and DC numbers. Most that I have come across don't "roleplay" and are only having fun in combat, end it in 1-2 rounds, and try to hurry on to the next combat round before they have to "suffer through" more roleplaying. Do they all? No. Are they bad people? No. Do I want to play with them? No. Do they want to play with me? I highly doubt it, and I really don't care.
I have been talked down to by optimizers because I didn't make a character that had numbers shot up into space like them. I don't find it fun to obliterate an enemy on the first hit in a single round. I find that boring. My first rpg experiences were with 2nd edition, and old chat rooms on the internet, where doing such things were looked down on and you were referred to as a "god moder". Now, I do optimize to some degree. If I am playing a fighter, I will put my highest stats into Strength and Constitution; or if I am playing a wizard I will put it into Intelligence. However, I have no problem not having a 20 or even an 18 or 19 in my primary stat at 1st level. Which, apparently, is doing it wrong according to others. Making a useless underpowered waste of paper. Or so they have told me. My last group was like this. This was 2 years ago this month. I haven't touched Pathfinder since. I had been playing Pathfinder since Shattered Star was the new and hot AP. In that time, I have played with about 10 groups (most not lasting more than 3-4 sessions). Of those groups, 2 were made of people from a gaming community where their playstyles were rather similar to mine. The other 8 groups were made of random people put together over roll20. Only 1 of those groups didn't make numeric monstrosities that could slaughter the local militia at level 1 (a bit hyperbolic, but not too far from the truth). My experiences with Pathfinder is that it attracts those who prefer the numeric monstrosities, which is not something I prefer. I would love to play Pathfinder again, try out one of the new classes that came out since 2 years ago (ACG had just been released). But it will take a group of people who have a similar playstyle to mine to make me do so.
I seem to mostly just DM (still can't bring myself to say GM, just doesn't sound as natural to me). Feels like if I don't DM, then I don't get to do any gaming. I am part of a pbp game here on these boards. I'd love to play in a more "live and active" game, though. I would really love to play in a RotRL game, as I have never done it. But most games I seem to join don't last but a couple sessions.
I like rolling for stats.
As for the whole 3rd Party comment mentioned: I think it still has that terrible reputation due to the massive amount of molten poop pumped out during 3rd edition's lifespan, where there might be 1 good thing in a sea of 30 bad ones. There are still a number of terrible 3rd Party books done for Pathfinder, but there seem to be more gems compared to 3rd edition.
Primordial is all of them. It's a "relic" from 4th Edition they decided to keep. From what I remember, Aquan, Auran, Ignan, and Terran are dialects of Primordial. I can't remember which book it was in, but I think it said that if you can speak one, you have a rudimentary understanding of the others. If you know Primordial, you can understand and speak each individual ones fluently. Now I gotta look it up. "Some of these languages are actually families of languages with many dialects. For example, the Primordial language includes the Auran, Aquan, Ignan, and Terran dialects, one or each of the four elemental planes. Creautres that speak different dialects of the same language can communicate with one another."
Ironfang Invasion is the one I look forward to the most of these. I like the classic fantasy D&D feel of this, so this is #1 for me. Ruins of Azlant is up there too. I love reading and learning about the history of various settings, so getting to learn more about Azlant should be great. Strange Aeons looks as interesting to me as the Cheliax APs, and by that I mean I have no interest in this at all. The whole Lovecraft crap just doesn't interest me in the least, and seeing that this has all kinds of Lovecraft influence just makes this an instant pass for me. Lovecraft, Cthulhu, and the whole "insanity" schtick is just (in my opinion only) stupid. I never understood why putting tentacles on things (aberrations seem to be the biggest one) suddenly makes my mind shatter into insanity, yet it doesn't happen when I look at octopi or squids. But hey, people seem to really like that junk, so glad they are getting something. It just isn't my cup of tea. As for Starfinder, I have no opinion on it. I don't know anything about Starfinder, so I can't say one way or another if this is good or not to me.
Most people don't like to make that commitment where they have to be at a certain place at a certain time each week. I see that with raiding groups in MMORPGs, with comments like "I just don't want to have to schedule my life around a game." So they prefer pbp, which allows them to hop online for 3 minutes, type out an action, and then go do something else. Now, that's not true for everyone, but that's the vibe I get from the whole thing, and from comments I see about scheduling. I personally would love to play a roll20 game again. Unfortunately, my work schedule is so erratic that I can't make that kind of commitment. I still have never played Rise of the Runelords, and would love to. But it would take a special kind of group to make me play with Pathfinder rules again. Bad experience with the last couple Pathfinder groups soured me.
I bought the DVD/Bluray/Digital pack yesterday, and right underneath that was just a DVD version. So they are selling them bundled into one. As for the Zootropolis comment: Yes, they redubbed it for many European countries and Asian countries, putting in those names instead of the American Zootopia. Reasons? Name conflicts, couldn't get the trademark or whatever, etc. There's a document out there (could even be on the bluray, haven't watched that yet) as to why it is called something different in various countries. Also, the male news anchor is different depending on your country. America and Canada have a moose, China has a Panda, Japan has a tanuki, Australia has a koala, and I think some places in Europe have something different. I thought that was a nice little touch.
Not surprised. Loved that movie. Wish it had a DVD release though. The "home video" release is Tomorrow, June 7 2016. If it is like other Disney releases, it will have a Blu-ray, DVD, and Digital release version, which is usually the one I purchase. I will be purchasing this tomorrow when I am able.
There are many things I prefer in Pathfinder over 3rd edition (the no dead levels, druid's animal companion rework, sorcerer bloodlines, cmd/cmb being some that pop to mind). I also have the 3 core books (thanks to my bro-in-law. Thanks bro!), FRCS, Defenders of the Faith, Masters of the Wild, Psionics Handbook, Savage Species (made in the inbetween of 3.0 and 3.5), Monster Manual 2 from 3.0. I like to look through them and remember back on those days. One of these days, I will attempt to make my mash-up of 3.0, 3.5, PFRPG, and 5th Edition. Will it be good? Who knows, probably won't. But I can try.
One more thing: That website I mentioned earlier, where someone said they preferred 3.0 to 3.5 and gave his opinions on various changes? I found it. It even has a zip file of the various spell changes someone else came up with. The website is here and the zip file is under the heading "Major Spell Alterations". Thanks to an old thread on ENWorld, I found the website again. In case anyone was interested.
I don't own the core rules for 3.0 myself, though...maybe I'll get them once WotC releases PDF versions and try playing 3.0 then (AFAIK, 3.0 is the only pre-5e version of D&D for which WotC is not selling the core rules in PDF form.)I wouldn't hold my breath on that. I doubt WotC will put out pdfs of those 3 books, as they are part of an unsupported version and is already updated completely with the supported version (3.5 being the "supported version"). Yes, they have pdfs of 3.0 books, but they weren't converted up to 3.5 wholesale like the 3 core books. Your best bet is to either somehow get a hardcopy of them, or find them elsewhere. I am lucky enough that my bro-in-law bought them when they came out, and gave them to me when he moved away and had a kid. I knew about the list, but I honestly didn't realize the 3.0 core books were even mentioned on there. And good news indeed that they have Tome and Blood as well as Defenders of the Faith up there. That's some good news indeed, for those looking for them. And while I thank you for the link to the 3.0 SRD, Alzrius, that has to be the most atrocious thing I have ever seen. But thank you nonetheless. But if you are looking for a more readable one, this one looks better. I guess I should have done a little bit of looking before I said anything about a 3.0 srd existing or not, eh? :) Glad that one does exist.
Most of the "core" 3.x material (and some of the supplements) is available for free (under the Open Game License) on the d20 System Reference Document. Other than a few system mechanics (ability score generation and experience being two key ones) and some intellectual property (beholders, mind flayers, etc.), pretty much everything needed to run 3.x is still out there. I doubt that Wizards of the Coast, under present Hasbro management, would want to actually want to increase the demand for OGL material (which is just that, open content).I don't own the core rules for 3.0 myself, though...maybe I'll get them once WotC releases PDF versions and try playing 3.0 then (AFAIK, 3.0 is the only pre-5e version of D&D for which WotC is not selling the core rules in PDF form.)I wouldn't hold my breath on that. I doubt WotC will put out pdfs of those 3 books, as they are part of an unsupported version and is already updated completely with the supported version (3.5 being the "supported version"). Yes, they have pdfs of 3.0 books, but they weren't converted up to 3.5 wholesale like the 3 core books. Your best bet is to either somehow get a hardcopy of them, or find them elsewhere. I am lucky enough that my bro-in-law bought them when they came out, and gave them to me when he moved away and had a kid. I don't think the 3.0 core books are available legally as digital. That d20srd site is the 3.5 version. So, there is no Alchemy skill, or Intuit Direction skill, or anything else that was left out of the 3.5 revisions. So yes, core 3.0 is dead and buried deep, though core 3.5 will always be around until the Internet is no more. Is there a 3.0 SRD out there somewhere? Could be, but to WotC, 3.0 is a distant memory. Hell, you can't even get Tome and Blood, Sword and Fist, Masters of the Wild, Defenders of the Faith, or Song and Silence in pdf format as they were made obselete with Complete Adventurer, Arcane, Warrior, and Divine. Same with Psionics Handbook (3.0} and Expanded Psionics Handbook (3.5). Anything that was 3.0 and hadn't been completely redone with 3.5 (core 3, psionics, class books mostly), is (or will be) available on the OneBookShelf websites. It makes me sad, as I hate to see previous versions of things become "extinct". So, unless there is a 3.0 SRD still floating around out there, there's no way to legally obtain those 9 books digitally. And good luck finding print versions of them as well.
Reading this thread has made me desire to go back through my 3rd edition books and get a feel for it. One of my favorite books for the whole of 3rd edition was written before the revision, back when WotC wasn't adverse to making softcover books: Masters of the Wild. I don't know why I love that book so much, especially since all the art is made by 1 man whose art style I absolutely loathe, but I do. It also made me love the more naturey classes of the barbarian and druid. I think I may have to do so on my next day off. I should also really find that website that listed all the changes from original 3rd edition and the revised version.
There are a number of things that I preferred with the first iteration of 3rd edition over the revised version. There were also things I preferred in the revised. I thought the revised weapon tables were an improvement, myself (one thing I hate about 5th edition's weapon table is it is more like the original 3rd edition's where halflings can't use greatswords. Sure, the stats were basically a longsword, but still). I read a long list of the changes between 3rd edition and its revised version. Some of them I liked, and a number made me shake my head in confusion as to why they made the change. I can't remember where I read it, but it was made by someone who also preferred the original to the revised. As for the damage reduction thing, I liked some of the original. I liked monsters that you needed a +4 or higher weapon to hit, instead of just "magic". I also don't see why an adamantine weapon would harm a werewolf as well as a silvered weapon (same with a +1 steel weapon harming one the same as a silvered weapon). But I am sure I am in the minority on that part. Of course, I also think there are greater improvements with Pathfinder over either version of 3rd edition (mostly dealing with classes and races, like the druid's companion or the ability bonuses being +2/+2/-2). I felt WotC put too much faith in the cost of a +2 Str that it needed a -2 to 2 ability scores). If I could successfully merge 3.0, 3.5, PFRPG, 5th edition, and AD&D into a single rule system, taking (what I feel is) the good things about each of them and putting it into one, I think I would be happy.
Zootopia Noir, a dark and gritty story about a newbie cop who works their way up the cut throat ladder of ZPD Advancement from traffic through Homicide(Mamiliacide?) and Vice, faced with corruption, conspiracy, and prejudice, will they make it out with their morals intact or fall into the same quagmire of illicit activity as their fellows? That reminds me of the suggestion I saw for a Zootopia game. LA Noir style game. I would love something like that (never played it, but it seemed interesting, as I never had a PS3) mixed with RPG. But I doubt we will get anything better than a child's game since it is Disney and "Disney is for kids". *rolls eyes*
Adjule, what was your favorite Disney movie before this one? Favorite Disney movie before this was Robin Hood, though I love so many Disney movies (and non-Disney animated movies. Just animated movies in general). Glad to see Zootopia has surpassed Frozen's opening weekend (much deserved imo). I did like the Frozen reference in the movie. Saw it a second time, and still enjoyed it as much as the first time I watched it.
Hopefully with the influx of all this Ravenloft stuff people have made, it will convince Wizards of the Coast that their other settings are loved, and not just the damned Forgotten Realms.
In case anyone was interested, I just uploaded another elemental pdf. This time, with elemental myrmidons. PWYW located here: Elemental Myrmidons
I have to say, I am in love with this movie. Best movie I have seen in many years. Many nerds and geeks will scoff at my next statement, but I found it so much better than the new Star Wars movie and Deadpool (my opinion, which I enjoyed both of those movies immensely). I have a new favorite Disney movie. I got a good laugh at the end of the movie. One part had quite a few people jump in their seats (I may or may not have been one of them). I may have to go watch this movie again (on a day and time when hopefully there wouldn't be so many kids), something I haven't done since The Two Towers Lord of the Rings movie nearly 15 years ago (holy crap I just realized that movie came out in 2002, 14 years ago).
For some weird reason, I love me some elementals. So much so that my homebrew world has them as a central building block of the whole planet. I wasn't satisfied with only the 4 presented in the Monster Manual, so I broke out my 2nd Edition Planescape monstrous compendiums and took to converting the Paraelementals and Quasi-elementals to 5th edition, plus adding in what I call "pseudoelementals", which don't fit into the classical D&D elements, but take their influence from the 5 element system that the Wu Jen from the Oriental Adventures (3e) use (wood and metal, plus positive energy and negative energy elementals). Along with the regular elementals (Large size) similar to those in the Monster Manual, I dropped their power down (I believe) and created lesser versions (Medium size). 20 total lesser elementals, 16 total "regular" elementals (same one as the lesser, minus the 4 from the MM). I have also begun working on greater, elder, myrmidon (like those in the Princes of the Apocalypse adventure), and what I am calling "monolithic" elementals. So, in all, that's a grand total of 112 elementals. Now for the part that always makes me uncomfortable, and that is throwing out links to my stuff. I would make a terrible marketing guy. Lesser Elementals - Lesser versions of the 20 elementals, of CR 2.
Now to go rub away this feeling of being dirty for saying " 'Buy' my stuff even for free." Oh, and PS: I tried to stay close to the powers and abilities of the paraelementals and quasi-elementals as presented in the Planescape Monstrous Manuals. When able to, anyway. Some of them were a bit much for the CRs I was aiming for for these first two, but the stronger versions could possibly have those, if I can do it justice. (Really hope this isn't against any rules doing this).
I feel like a shill doing this, but if you are looking to add some elementals to your game, I have made some lesser versions and added them to the dmsguild.com. Set up as "pay what you want". CR 2 medium-sized elementals (air, earth, fire, water; ice, magma, mud/ooze, smoke; lightning, mineral, radiance, steam, ash, dust, salt, void; metal, negative, positive, wood). I also have "regular" versions of the ones not in the Monster Manual, and plan to make greater, elder, and monolithic versions of each of them. As well as myrmidon versions similar to those in the Princes of the Apocalypse adventure. Slow going, but that's the plan. (Hope this isn't against the rules)
Having players actually think things through, instead of just rolling a d20, would be so nice. Going through a dungeon (hell, even having dungeons again) with 10-foot poles, 50+ feet of rope, chalk, and all those other miscellaneous items in the equipment tables that no one ever uses anymore. People get annoyed/bored/angry about dungeoncrawls anymore. I never see dungeons or dragons much anymore. Hell, it is usually just the same few monsters in everything. I have never played Tomb of Horrors. I have seen pictures from the book, though, and heard the stories. I actually think it would be something fun to play.
Depends on how drastically WotC changes D&D from 5th edition to 6th edition, and how well the community likes the changes. WotC has decided to remake the wheel every time they release a new edition. 3rd edition was a drastic change from AD&D, 4th edition was a drastic change from 3rd edition, and 5th edition is a drastic change from 4th edition (3.0 and 3.5 are the same edition to me, so I don't make the distinction). The drastic changes from AD&D to 3rd, a lot of people liked, though many preferred AD&D (OSR type stuff we have now). Enough people liked AD&D to where they made the OSR clones, which is thanks to the OGL. The drastic changes from 3rd to 4th, a lot of people hated (just look at the forums of many rpg sites during 2008 and 2009). Pathfinder came to be thanks to WotC and their policy with creating content for 4th edition, so in order for Paizo to continue on with their Golarion stuff, they changed 3rd edition just enough that the large portion of 4th edition haters (strong word, and doesn't apply to everyone who went Pathfinder over 4th edition) who loved 3rd edition could continue playing their preferred edition, with a few slight changes. So, WotC will ultimately dictate if there is going to be another Pathfinder in regards to the switch between 5th and 6th editions. They could be smart and do what TSR did, and make the transition between them similar to the transition between AD&D 1e and AD&D 2e. But knowing them, it will be a complete rewrite from the ground up. Which will more likely lead to another Pathfinder. That's if a company can be as good as Paizo was in the sea of terrible 3rd edition 3pp. Do I hope the new SRD and OGL for 5th edition creates another Pathfinder? Honestly I am torn. The drought of products being released by WotC (which outsources the writing to other companies like Kobold Press, slaps some artwork they commission from previous edition contributors and people on deviantart (like Paizo does) and sends it to be printed) makes me want someone to emerge and make a new Pathfinder that will release both adventures and character options (and new monsters) instead of adventures only. I want someone to provide pdfs as well as printed books for those people who enjoy either or both. I would rather that "someone" be WotC, but I would take another Paizo if that is what it would take.
Through their own actions though by closing Paizo out with 4E thus forcing the competeing product.In these quotes taken from a Reddit discussion, the D&D folks at WotC have confirmed that they have no plans to add more content to the SRD aside from a few mistakenly omitted items. So, thanks to the content gap in the SRD, the biggest third-party "5e" reference site will inevitably become a D&D clone competing with (instead of complementing) D&D. *sigh*I'm not sure why you think that opening practically everything up would lead to complimentary products, instead of competing products. They opened up nearly everything in 3.5 (at least from the core rules)....which directly lead to Pathfinder...a competing product. Like RyanH said, WotC brought rise to the competing product of Pathfinder because of what they did with 4th Edition. Paizo had to make Pathfinder so they could continue with their Adventure Path line, or I am sure they would have gone out of business. If WotC would have been more lenient with the 4th edition things, Pathfinder may never have been created and many more people would have had to either stop playing or suck it up and play 4th Edition. Will we see a new "Pathfinder" out of this when the inevitable 6th Edition comes out? Well, that depends on WotC.
Out of all the things I like about 5th edition, the one thing I would love Paizo to take and incorporate would be the legendary and lair actions (especially the latter) for the BBEG of their APs. What I would like to see WotC take from Pathfinder would be a number of their class options and classes themselves (looking at you, sorcerer bloodlines most). Other than that, things are good. While I would love to see Paizo create some things for 5th edition, them focusing on Pathfinder is the better decision.
The "earlier SRD" you refer to is the free Basic Rules, which you still couldn't do anything with publishing-wise. This does open up a bit for people to use in their "basic rules" games, though. My guess, is that you could publish "Dragonborn" for Pathfinder, converting the 5th edition ones to Pathfinder, and call them Dragonborn. Just as it seems you can now take all those Pathfinder things and convert and publish them to 5th edition. All those advanced classes, hybrid classes, uncommon and rare races, the occult classes (I am assuming, I haven't really touched or looked into Pathfinder since the ACG came out). Anything on the pfsrd could be free game to convert and publish to 5th edition. Tose are just my guesses. It looks like you can now legally make a 5th edition ACG and turn all those hybrid classes into either base classes (like fighter, rogue, etc) or turn them into archetypes (like eldritch knight, oath of devotion, etc), publish and then make money from it. Could something like Pathfinder happen when WotC inevitably abandons 5th edition for 6th edition? I am going to assume yes, just not to the full extent where Pathfinder started out as a near carbon copy of the 3.5 PHB, because not every subrace, archetype, spell, and feat was added to the SRD, so you couldn't get beastmaster rangers, light domain clerics, eldritch knight fighters, mountain dwarves, drow elves, etc. Maybe now we can hopefully get some decent player options from 3pp, instead of a slow trickle of nothing but adventures from WotC (which are "outsourced" to 3pp anyway). I just wonder how this will affect homebrew on sites like here (as sparse as it may be here), reddit, enworld, GitP, and anywhere else it might have shown up before.
I wouldn't say it is a "smart move" as they are alienating everyone who isn't a Faerun fan. Or more specifically, a Sword Coast region of Faerun fan. They are tying too much of the 5th edition tabletop into that horrid 4th edition f2p MMORPG. 5th edition book schedule is exactly an MMORPG patch cycle schedule of every 6-ish months. They are tying the books too closely to a game based on a different edition, which is why we only really get adventure books with a laughably small nonadventure material. Because adventures are easily used no matter the edition, while classes, races, items, spells and monsters require some form of work to use between editions. It is the sole thing about 5th edition I absolutely despise: the excessive influence the Neverwinter MMORPG has on the release schedule of an edition the game doesn't even use. I fear we will never get a non-Forgotten Realms book (Sword Coast region, mostly), and I doubt we will see a new Monster Manual anytime soon. WotC has released what I feel is the best version of D&D, but it feels like they just don't really give a damn about anything outside of that god awful game. It makes me sad. I absolutely love this edition. As for the topic at hand: I personally don't think there is anything else worth buying for this edition besides the 3 core books. All there is besides them are 3(4) adventures and an "adventurer's guide", which is basically worthless if you have no desire to play in WotC's beloved Sword Coast region of their beloved Forgotten Realms. Their hard-on for Baldur's Gate, Waterdeep, and Neverwinter make's Paizo's unhealthy obsession with Varisia and the Inner Sea region look tame in comparison. I have personally purchased the Princes of the Apocalypse adventure mainly because I love elementals and the Temple of Elemental Evil (which PoA is a terrible attempt at ToEE). Nothing else has interested me in the slightest. But that is just me. Sorry for the rant.
The excessive proliferation of Forgotten Realms really makes me want to vomit. It's bad enough that Paizo stays with Golarion, but at least that place is more varied compared to Faerun. Though they need to branch out and away from the Inner Sea, as it is as boring and overdone as the Sword Coast region of Faerun. Speaking of which, it makes me so irritated and sad that the only book we have gotten in 1.5 years that wasn't an adventure (set in the Sword Coast region) or Core book, is a friggin Forgotten Realms book about the damned blasted Sword Coast. And everything I have heard says that it will be rather difficult filing off the Forgotten Realms from the things within. I never really got the whole "This book is from this setting so I am not going to purchase it because that setting is yucky". Yes, I absolutely loathe the Forgotten Realms, but I still bought numerous books in that setting line. Same with Ravenloft, Dragonlance, Planescape, etc. Maybe it's because I use a homebrew setting, and I typically nick things from other settings that I think would be a good addition to my own. I just wish they would branch out from the friggin Realms. Set all the adventures there for all I care, but release options books with things from other settings.
Regarding the weapons in 5th edition: I remember they had something similar in the first iteration of 3rd edition, and changed it when they revised it. Instead of small creatures not being able to use heavy weapons, they couldn't use large weapons. Weapons were sized Tiny (dagger), Small (shortsword), Medium (longsword), Large (greatsword) and Huge (fullblade only). Where small creatures couldn't use Large weapons, and had to use Medium weapons two-handed. Curious why they decided to go back to something similar when they originally removed that after 3 years in 3rd edition.
Oh, it will be set in the Forgotten Realms, if the cartoon is ever made. I will do you even one better: Not only will it be set in the Forgotten Realms, but it will be set in the Sword Coast, with a tie-in to the Neverwinter MMORPG. That second part may be false, but I can 99% guarantee it would be set in the Sword Coast region, as EVERYTHING released has been (thanks to the Neverwinter MMORPG). |
