5thE D&D playtest


4th Edition

1 to 50 of 139 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Hello forum

I know this is a paizo forum, but hear me out and lets see if we cannot get something usefull out of this topic

Earlier this week WotC released their playtest for the new edition of D&D, according to early reports this system is supposed to be universal but as of this playtest it looks a lot like a standard fantasy game, but that will of cause change.

My questions are simple. Have you read and/or played the playtest and what did you think about it?

I noticed that it looked a bit like a merge between 3.x and 4E. What did you think about that and is there anything you liked about any of the editions that you noticed lacked or was included. More importantly did you see any inspiration from what Paizo did to 3.x in there?

I know this is a VERY early playtest, but so far I liked it even though they haven't taken any bold steps yet. Not like 3.X to 4E at least

Look forward to hear your response


I forget, are we allowed to talk about specific parts of it?


I read a blog on it by one of the designers. I did not agree with their goals/concerns. I have not read the actual rules. I don't even know where to go to get a copy of the rules. I stole 4E's idea of giving first level characters more hp, well not a lot more, but still more.

I would probably do the same for 5E, but if they are doing what I think they are doing I won't be playing it.


Without going into detail because hell, I don't know what I can or cannot say, there are some things I genuinely like and will mine for use in Pathfinder. There are other things, however, that I think aren't good because I dislike the concept or I think it makes the game too easy and hold-your-hand.


@Odraude I was wondering the same, the second i posted this topic, but since the playtest should/will go out to the public i figured we would be allowed.

@WS Could you elaborate on which ideas it is you do not like?


11 people marked this as a favorite.

I have edition fatigue. I have settled on the game I enjoy, and I am playing it: Pathfinder. I do not have the time, energy or money to devote to another new game I may not enjoy and may not find players for - especially when I know the main reason for it's release is that WotC need to make another round of cash out of the D&D name.


Indeed. I feel like it was just yesterday I was trying 4th out for the first time in an evil campaign.


Impuritygaming wrote:

@Odraude I was wondering the same, the second i posted this topic, but since the playtest should/will go out to the public i figured we would be allowed.

@WS Could you elaborate on which ideas it is you do not like?

This is a prime example:

Quote:
Keep Spells Under Control: This is an obvious first step, but we need to make sure that spells are of the appropriate power level and that they don't abuse the system in some way. For instance, the 3E grease spell required a DC 10 Balance check to avoid some of its effects. That seems reasonable, until you realize that grease was a 1st-level spell and that a 15th-level NPC cleric might have a total Balance check modifier of –8. We need to make sure that spells don't create an effect that is too powerful or include loopholes that make them overwhelmingly powerful for their level.

That spell is not too good to be a first level spell. It was just the right tool for the right time. If the cleric doesn't want to tumble down the side of mountains he should make sure he has a way to make sure it does not happen. Trying to find a way to stifle creativity is not the way to go.

Actually most of this article gets is against how I would play the game. article in question.

A wizard(insert other caster as needed) should not have to give up anything to buff the party other than the spell itself.

Quote:
Spells such as stoneskin, shield, and blur are great for wizards because they make casting less hazardous and help counter the class's low AC and hit points. A wizard might throw such spells on the rest of the party, giving up some of his or her own defensive options to help the rest of the party thrive.


I have not read a lot of these articles. I am sure that if I read more of them I will find more things I don't like.


12 people marked this as a favorite.

I will not be buying 5E. The developers at Pathfinder have more than earned my loyalty.


@WS It is funny you mention this be cause I just like you think that intelligent playing should be rewarded, but "flaws" in the game that make for way to powerful spells shouldn't be. But then again I am also against a system where you end up forgetting lvl 1 spells when you reach a certain power level. IT should be a balance between both if you ask me.

@Weslocke This is not about if you want to buy the game or not, the playtest is free, and eventhough Paizo is doing a good job with the material there is, there is no harm in looking forward and learning from others or get inspired. That is the focus i wished for in this topic


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Starfinder Superscriber

I quite like it, although haven't actually played it.

In terms of differences from pathfinder, I like the focus on DM judgement rather than a-rule-for-everything (although I try and play PF like that anyhow). It also seems to me it will play quicker than 4E/PF (although it's obviously early days yet).

In terms of positive things I think they've taken from PF's approach - the main one is the respect for past traditions within the game.


I readed the last articles on wizard's website and depiste I found most of their content quite interesting, (it seemed to be similar with 3.x/Pathfinder, i.e. class hit dice were the same, fighter d10, cleric and rogue d8, and wizard d6), right now I really don't see the need of try another system when I feel really comfortable with the on I'm playing right now for high fantasy, of course Pathfinder.

Wizards need to make a really really great game if they want the people playing Pathfinder back.

Silver Crusade

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Wizards aren't aiming for getting Pathfinder people back.

They want the 1E/2E people back. Observe:

Monster statblocks fit into three lines of text? Check
PC charsheets fit on one page... Check
...and there are no skills there to speak of? Check
Playtest adventure by Gary Gygax? Check
No dragonborn warlocks in sight? Check
"GM is the law" stated explicitly? Check
Minis? Grid? What are those? Check

5E is a love letter to Old School crowd with some 3E/4E innovations thrown in. WotC is going after all those folks who play OSRIC/C&C/S&W/T&T/X&Y and have no strong brand holding them. Smart move, but is it enough to satisfy the Corporate Overbeast?


Sorry, ImpurityGamer. It was not my intent to draw you off-topic.

Keep this in mind while checking out that new system though.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.


Gorbacz wrote:
5E is a love letter to Old School crowd with some 3E/4E innovations thrown in. WotC is going after all those folks who play OSRIC/C&C/S&W/T&T/X&Y and have no strong brand holding them. Smart move, but is it enough to satisfy the Corporate Overbeast?

That's why they need to go after Pathfinder folk as well, here is were most of the people are.


Gorbacz wrote:

Wizards aren't aiming for getting Pathfinder people back.

They want the 1E/2E people back. Observe:

Monster statblocks fit into three lines of text? Check
PC charsheets fit on one page... Check
...and there are no skills there to speak of? Check
Playtest adventure by Gary Gygax? Check
No dragonborn warlocks in sight? Check
"GM is the law" stated explicitly? Check

5E is a love letter to Old School crowd with some 3E/4E innovations thrown in. WotC is going after all those folks who play OSRIC/C&C/S&W/T&T/X&Y and have no strong brand holding them. Smart move, but is it enough to satisfy the Corporate Overbeast?

What Gorbacz said.

They seem open-minded to taking good things from 3E (like the d20 mechanic) and 4E (like cantrip/orisons being at-will) but it seems more like early editions. I think they are not 'competing' against Pathfinder.

I think Paizo will benefit since Hasbro's D&D Next will be the intro to RPG gaming (assuming they mass-market). Pathfinder will, over time, get fresh blood from D&D Next if people want something 'more'.


I actually got a chance to play the game recently. My general feeling was that, if this had been 3rd edition, I would have been ecstatic. It feels like an elegant, streamlined version of pre-3rd D&D, with mechanics that are incredibly easy to understand and explain. There were certainly still rough patches (I'm drunk, so I'm immune to stabbing!), but it has the basis of a fun little game going.

The thing is, that isn't really what I want from a system. Flattened progression is great, but with the degree they did it it makes everything quite swingy (and makes your base stats incredibly important). Advantage/Disadvantage is easy to learn, but can't carry the entire game system on its shoulders. Also, as a friend pointed out, it is looking like the most powerful class to play will be "DM's boy/girlfriend." While I'd certainly enjoy an evening or two of play, it doesn't feel like something I'd really get into. And I wouldn't spend a bunch of money on optional modular rules just to make it into something that I want.

Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 4

We're probably in the wrong sub forum for this.

I haven't read it yet, but I have the means, so I wont comment and definitely won't disparage. (I found some 4E concepts noteworthy in fact)

The seldom commented on x-factor in deciding whether to try, let alone adopt, a new system is the support products.

I like detailed campaign settings, not ones fleshed out in 2 or 3 slim hardbacks. More importantly, I like Adventure Paths that are as cohesive as Paizo's.

I need to see evidence of that, or even a statement of intention. You see, I see core rules as an operating system, not an end to itself. I need to know wht will be done with it.

Silver Crusade

While it does have it's bad parts, full HP gain after a one night rest, it does have some good parts.

At the end of the day though, I can't really say anything bad about it but at the same time I can't really say anything good. It's actually rather mediocre.

That could change as they release more material.


Agreed. While I like the rules of short rest, I think the long rest recovery is too much and really makes dungeon delving easytown frolics. I do like how each ability score is now tied to a save and how they do rolling for HP.


Gorbacz wrote:

Wizards aren't aiming for getting Pathfinder people back.

They want the 1E/2E people back. Observe:

Monster statblocks fit into three lines of text? Check
PC charsheets fit on one page... Check
...and there are no skills there to speak of? Check
Playtest adventure by Gary Gygax? Check
No dragonborn warlocks in sight? Check
"GM is the law" stated explicitly? Check
Minis? Grid? What are those? Check

5E is a love letter to Old School crowd with some 3E/4E innovations thrown in. WotC is going after all those folks who play OSRIC/C&C/S&W/T&T/X&Y and have no strong brand holding them. Smart move, but is it enough to satisfy the Corporate Overbeast?

Very interesting. I don't know how many of those gamers are out there, but I do know it holds no interest for me. I drifted away from AD&D because of the same flaws they are resurrecting (particularly no skills).

The question is will they be close enough to 4e to draw those gamers in? Or has edition fatigue set in by now? And will the old-schoolers that they are courting be tempted to buy a new game rather than stick with what they know?

I've always had the feeling since 4e that 5e would be the last edition that WotC would produce.

Liberty's Edge

You know, in my heart of hearts, I really hope this works out. I would love for the Dungeons & Dragons legacy to live on, both in its own right and alongside Pathfinder. I would hate to see D&D die so ignoble a death after such an incredible nearly forty-year legacy, as more and more people turn away from it and it no longer becomes profitable for WoTC to continue publishing D&D books and materials.*

I hope I get a chance to play 5th Edition sometime soon and judge the game on its own merits.

*But hey, maybe that would mean they might be willing to sell the franchise to a company that actually knows what to do with it.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Considering that 5E pretty much throws 80% of 4E into the trash can, it seems like WotC has done their math and decided that 4E customer base doesn't cut it.

Liberty's Edge

Gorbacz wrote:
Considering that 5E pretty much throws 80% of 4E into the trash can, it seems like WotC has done their math and decided that 4E customer base doesn't cut it.

Eesh.

It seems they have indeed, and have more than likely noticed a rather sizable number of their original customer base turning to Paizo.

Who knows? As I said above, maybe this will work out for the best. Perhaps if it proves to be too unprofitable, WoTC will end up selling the rights to D&D to a company that both respects the legacy and knows how to handle it. But which company could possibly be up to such a challenge?

*looks longingly at Paizo Publishing*

Which company indeed? Oh, but I dream.


Weslocke wrote:
I will not be buying 5E. The developers at Pathfinder have more than earned my loyalty.

HERE HERE! Yo ACCUARDO


Odraude wrote:
Except Hasbro never sells IP Kyras. It's just going to gather up mothballs for a couple decades and then maybe taken back out.

lest there is a mineflare black blue deck planed in the future i dont see why WotC would not sell them to make a profit for the next projects

Silver Crusade

Gorbacz wrote:
Considering that 5E pretty much throws 80% of 4E into the trash can, it seems like WotC has done their math and decided that 4E customer base doesn't cut it.

I'm sure they have looked at the numbers that they had available and saw that there wasn't enough people on the 4th edition spectrum to really care if they left or not. You are less likely to try and please the fans of the shortest running edition to date. That's just the way it is.

I will tell you this and you can mark my words on it.

If D&D Next doesn't get better than what we have seen so far, the game will flop and the name will most likely be shelved or sold off. So far, I see nothing that makes this game stand out above the others. Sure it may sell but it won't be making the big bucks. Can't survive on name alone.


I think the decision for selling DnD isn't in their hands. I believe it would be in the hands of Hasbro which owns them.


lol demonizing a toy company


Gorbacz wrote:

Wizards aren't aiming for getting Pathfinder people back.

They want the 1E/2E people back. Observe:

Monster statblocks fit into three lines of text? Check
PC charsheets fit on one page... Check
...and there are no skills there to speak of? Check
Playtest adventure by Gary Gygax? Check
No dragonborn warlocks in sight? Check
"GM is the law" stated explicitly? Check
Minis? Grid? What are those? Check

5E is a love letter to Old School crowd with some 3E/4E innovations thrown in. WotC is going after all those folks who play OSRIC/C&C/S&W/T&T/X&Y and have no strong brand holding them. Smart move, but is it enough to satisfy the Corporate Overbeast?

Peasant: Please don't strawman, we need that straw for our homes!

There are skills. In fact, each character sheet shows when they get bonuses (above and beyond ability scores).

Sovereign Court

Keep in mind this playtest isn't all of it. It was meant to be very basic. There will be more parts coming. Way to early to judge at this point. I have a feeling this is just a taste for the pre-3rd folks. As the modules roll in you will see more appealing options for 3E and 4E players.

The rules are ok nothing that's convinced me I want to buy 5E at this point. They need to get my interest through adventures and flavor because to be honest Forgettable Realms is not my bag. I don't know about any of their plans at this point for flavor and fluff but I would like to know.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Starbuck_II wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:

Wizards aren't aiming for getting Pathfinder people back.

They want the 1E/2E people back. Observe:

Monster statblocks fit into three lines of text? Check
PC charsheets fit on one page... Check
...and there are no skills there to speak of? Check
Playtest adventure by Gary Gygax? Check
No dragonborn warlocks in sight? Check
"GM is the law" stated explicitly? Check
Minis? Grid? What are those? Check

5E is a love letter to Old School crowd with some 3E/4E innovations thrown in. WotC is going after all those folks who play OSRIC/C&C/S&W/T&T/X&Y and have no strong brand holding them. Smart move, but is it enough to satisfy the Corporate Overbeast?

Peasant: Please don't strawman, we need that straw for our homes!

There are skills. In fact, each character sheet shows when they get bonuses (above and beyond ability scores).

I didn't mean that there are no skills in the game. I mean that I'm looking at a charsheet and I ain't seeing a skill list. In that respect, I feel more like I'm looking at a 1E/2E charsheet, not 3E/4E one. Heck, I'm even seeing a "For a more old-school feel, don't use this and that" on said char sheet.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

They're making a 5e? When did this happen?


Paizo has stated in the past that buying the IP really wouldn't get them all that much. Sure they could the right to use some more setting and monsters, but honestly they have moved on and replaced some of the iconic monsters with Paizo versions, and they don't have the time or money to develop any other campaign settings such as Forgotten Realms.

Besides, Hasbro can still make money off the IP via fiction books and computer games, so even if the game is shelved they have that to fall back on.


Spanky, I have bad news...

Silver Crusade

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I still wish Paizo bought Planescape, mixed it with The Great Beyond and chained Todd Stewart to a desk and have him writie planar hardcovers. Oh one can dream...


still would be nice not to see all the IP to get dusty on a shelf


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Spanky the Leprechaun wrote:
They're making a 5e? When did this happen?

The day after 4th Ed came out.


Gorbacz wrote:
I still wish Paizo bought Planescape, mixed it with The Great Beyond and chained Todd Stewart to a desk and have him writie planar hardcovers. Oh one can dream...

It's kinda sad when intellectual property you kinda wished was available for further utilization is sitting in some sort of closet gathering dust.

OWW! KYRAS.......INSIDE MY......MIND......


Spanky the Leprechaun wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
I still wish Paizo bought Planescape, mixed it with The Great Beyond and chained Todd Stewart to a desk and have him writie planar hardcovers. Oh one can dream...

It's kinda sad when intellectual property you kinda wished was available for further utilization is sitting in some sort of closet gathering dust.

OWW! KYRAS.......INSIDE MY......MIND......

It's a Klingon mindmeld kid,......otherwise known as a "headbutt."

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I'm bloody curious if 5E's default cosmology will be "Elemental Chaos and Feyshadowdoomdarks with Shadarkai Shrikestar Shadowslashers" or Great Wheel with Modrons. That will speak *voulmes* about who are the creators after.


you just out nerded me with one thought ........ care to explain?


Gorbacz wrote:
I'm bloody curious if 5E's default cosmology will be "Elemental Chaos and Feyshadowdoomdarks with Shadarkai Shrikestar Shadowslashers" or Great Wheel with Modrons. That will speak *voulmes* about who are the creators after.

Don't get me started on freakin' Modrons. "ONOES! I'M BEING ATTACKED BY A PYRAMID DUDE!!!!" Great; my dnd character's on the Teletubbies.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

They got their own darned plane! Dice! Dice have their own plane!


Man I love me some modrons. I would have thought that somebody would have revived the City of Doors by now. I don't even care what system or publisher, I would buy it and run a campaign there. It's hugely ironic that the best info about it is in a freaking computer game.


I will personally be playing whichever edition has fewer problem spells and fewer magical fighter options such as grit.

I'm already against the new fighter ability they have which amounts to "tries hard twice per day" which is basically why I dislike the gunslinger.

I did just pick up Harnmaster, and while I haven't gotten to the meat of it, it looks really promising.

Liberty's Edge

Duncan & Dragons wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:

Wizards aren't aiming for getting Pathfinder people back.

They want the 1E/2E people back. Observe:

Monster statblocks fit into three lines of text? Check
PC charsheets fit on one page... Check
...and there are no skills there to speak of? Check
Playtest adventure by Gary Gygax? Check
No dragonborn warlocks in sight? Check
"GM is the law" stated explicitly? Check

5E is a love letter to Old School crowd with some 3E/4E innovations thrown in. WotC is going after all those folks who play OSRIC/C&C/S&W/T&T/X&Y and have no strong brand holding them. Smart move, but is it enough to satisfy the Corporate Overbeast?

What Gorbacz said.

They seem open-minded to taking good things from 3E (like the d20 mechanic) and 4E (like cantrip/orisons being at-will) but it seems more like early editions. I think they are not 'competing' against Pathfinder.

I think Paizo will benefit since Hasbro's D&D Next will be the intro to RPG gaming (assuming they mass-market). Pathfinder will, over time, get fresh blood from D&D Next if people want something 'more'.

It's a return to D&D Basic and AD&D, with WotC selling basic, and Paizo selling AD&D. It looks like there will be enough compatibility between the two to make transitions in either direction a trivial task.

1 to 50 of 139 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Gaming / D&D / 4th Edition / 5thE D&D playtest All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.