Has anyone tried it yet? Is it any good vs Pathfinder? I really don't see the point in handing over yet MORE money to Hasbro who is treating D&D like a Wargame and churning out a new edition every few years. I'm sort of sickened by the same people who were so angry about 3.5 and 4th ed so close together who went to Pathfinder who are now turning around and giving money back to this new D&D. Unless its insanely good I don't see why you'd quit Pathfinder and go back to D&D.
I didn't mean to post 2 threads. No idea how this happened actually.I tried flagging it for double post. Maybe that will get rid of it.
I want to give it a go, but from what I am seeing it isn't very revolutionary or different so far.
So far I really like 5th edition. In pretty invested in Pathfinder with a lot of third party material but I can see 5th edition being my go-to for something similar to Pathfinder but with a much lower power/complexity level. As far as I can tell the math is at lower and simpler numbers which may obsolete E8 for me. One thing that Pathfinder does not do well is generic and simple adventures. Things get over the top quickly.
That said I may be wasting my money. Depending on what's in Pathfinder Unchained my D&D stuff may be ignored if Unchained covers lower powered fantasy campaigns.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the unchaining my up the power level. Not lower
If PF go high magic and DND goes low, then that's a nice split
D&d 5e has some really good design ideas, some poor design ideas and some things that are kind of meh.
The real issue for me is that wotc still has not figured out that in the internet age content is king. There model is still clearly based around selling hardcovers and neglecting adventure paths. Until they show that they will have an adventure path equivalent and show that the stories are worth participating in it will be a non starter with my gaming groups.
Anyway if you want a rundown of interesting/good ideas
Advantage/disadvantage is really smart, simplifies book keeping and is an improvement to giving small fixed bonuses for good conditions.
The changes to vancian casting are interesting. Some parts, like memorization and casting methods already have a similar rule in pathfinder with the arcanist. Others like having a single save dc for all spell levels is something that could help make it easeier to play but also has issues.
In many ways I think that if this game had been released in 08 AND wotc had not kicked all the 3rd party publishers out of the d&d sandbox there probably wouldn't have been an edition war
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm sort of sickened by the same people who were so angry about 3.5 and 4th ed so close together who went to Pathfinder who are now turning around and giving money back to this new D&D.
Yes, that must truly be awful for you.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hopefully more 'adventure' and less 'path'.
I've participated in the play tests and played with it for a bit during the weekend, but frankly its not for me.
It's slightly better than the 4ed, but still a little too bland for my own preferences.
It looked kinda neat. I've only looked over the free download but thought it was interesting. Never played 4th ed and probably won't play 5th either (I'm too old to learn a new system and too poor to buy one!) but from quick glances at both, I like 5th better.
I'm sort of sickened by the same people who were so angry about 3.5 and 4th ed so close together who went to Pathfinder who are now turning around and giving money back to this new D&D. Unless its insanely good I don't see why you'd quit Pathfinder and go back to D&D.
Wow. I wonder how you'll feel when the inevitable (and imo badly needed) second edition of Pathfinder rolls around...
I'm sort of sickened by the same people who were so angry about 3.5 and 4th ed so close together who went to Pathfinder who are now turning around and giving money back to this new D&D. Unless its insanely good I don't see why you'd quit Pathfinder and go back to D&D.Wow. I wonder how you'll feel when the inevitable (and imo badly needed) second edition of Pathfinder rolls around...
Nothing at all considering those people didn't cry tears of rage about 3.5 and 4th ed being so quickly released after each other? And I don't think Pathfinder 2E is going to be churned out as quickly as Hasbro is putting out new editions of D&D. lets hope 5th ed does a decent job.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Has anyone tried it yet? Is it any good vs Pathfinder? I really don't see the point in handing over yet MORE money to Hasbro who is treating D&D like a Wargame and churning out a new edition every few years. I'm sort of sickened by the same people who were so angry about 3.5 and 4th ed so close together who went to Pathfinder who are now turning around and giving money back to this new D&D. Unless its insanely good I don't see why you'd quit Pathfinder and go back to D&D.
Im going to answer your question honestly: because it's different, it scratches an itch neither Pathfinder (and by that extention 3.5) nor 4E can do. It's lighter, less complex, less bloated (numbers wise), less arbitrary, and more open to free-form. Further, I think it has the possibility of being easily portable to other supplements without a lot of work as well as being modular.
Additionally, 4e is no longer supported and I won't spend money on Pathfinder so what's left?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think Pathfinder 2E is going to be churned out as quickly as Hasbro is putting out new editions of D&D. lets hope 5th ed does a decent job.
And in my opinion, a new edition of Pathfinder can't come soon enough. Then again, I'm much less bothered by "edition-churn" than I am bloat. YMMV.
You seem to be taking a lot of this personally...it might help you to take a step back. RPGs aren't religions.
You seem to be taking a lot of this personally...it might help you to take a step back. RPGs aren't religions.
Any hobby (or religion for that matter) is an emotional buy-in and not (necessarily) a rational one.
Just like sports teams. We gain nothing if our favorite team wins, and yet (for those who passionately like sports) we live and die by what our teams do.
It's not logical, it's emotional. And some people are more emotional than others. *shrug*
(And, for some, RPGs are much more important than religion.)
You seem to be taking a lot of this personally...it might help you to take a step back. RPGs aren't religions.Any hobby (or religion for that matter) is an emotional buy-in and not (necessarily) a rational one.
Just like sports teams. We gain nothing if our favorite team wins, and yet (for those who passionately like sports) we live and die by what our teams do.
It's not logical, it's emotional. And some people are more emotional than others. *shrug*
(And, for some, RPGs are much more important than religion.)
Roll Tide!
My gaming taste changed.
Unacceptable. You, sir, are no true gamer!
My gaming taste changed.Unacceptable. You, sir, are no true gamer!
Burn the non believer!
Has anyone tried it yet? Is it any good vs Pathfinder? I really don't see the point in handing over yet MORE money to Hasbro who is treating D&D like a Wargame and churning out a new edition every few years. I'm sort of sickened by the same people who were so angry about 3.5 and 4th ed so close together who went to Pathfinder who are now turning around and giving money back to this new D&D. Unless its insanely good I don't see why you'd quit Pathfinder and go back to D&D.Im going to answer your question honestly: because it's different, it scratches an itch neither Pathfinder (and by that extention 3.5) nor 4E can do. It's lighter, less complex, less bloated (numbers wise), less arbitrary, and more open to free-form. Further, I think it has the possibility of being easily portable to other supplements without a lot of work as well as being modular.
Additionally, 4e is no longer supported and I won't spend money on Pathfinder so what's left?
Somehow I doubt it will stay lighter or less bloated at all. At least with bloat you can choose to take something and leave other parts as a DM. *shrug* But I still want to see how 5th ed plays. I notice they are keeping the "only plusses to stats and no negatives" from 4th ed, which I liked because those negatives could really hurt some concepts. But on the other hand changing it means things like pretty half orcs which should be fairly rare. I can take it or leave it.
He was talking more about number bloat, not options. And Pathfinder already has "pretty" half-orcs, as they have a +2 they can put into any score (Charisma included).
There will almost certainly be a large number of optional things. I just hope that Wizards of the Coast will continue to support those options, similar to Pathfinder, and not create an optional system and let it rot in that single book (magic of incarnum, book of exalted deeds/vile darkness, tome of magic, etc). That's what I enjoy about Paizo. They put out the Advanced Player's Guide, giving us new classes. And they didn't languish in just that book, but have been supported and given new things in their other releases. And they will do the same with those given in the Advanced Class Guide, I am sure.
I was a little annoyed about 4th edition coming out about 8 years after 3rd edition (I don't count 3.0 and 3.5 as different editions), but I didn't cry foul about it because I hadn't played anything for 2 years before its end. And because I had no interest in playing or running 4th edition, 5th edition coming 6 years later doesn't bother me. Though really, 4th edition only lasted about 4 years. There were times when I would say "I kinda want to play 4th edition", so I go to the store and open up a book, and then close it and say "Nope", because I just couldn't get into how it was made. Some of the classes sounded interesting, though.
I welcome 5th edition, and despite writing off the playtest because of the monsters (looking at you, "monstrosity"), I gave the Basic rules pdf a read through and actually liked what I saw. I may feel a little dirty giving money to Wizards of the Coast after what they have done with Magic the Gathering (the vast vast majority of my cards from 1995-2003 are useless as they can't be in a deck...), but I can get over it. They just won't get any money from me concerning the cards.
I just hope the Monster Manual expands on what makes a creature a monstrosity or any of the other types. What's the difference between an owlbear and a griffon? Both are the fusion of 2 different animals, yet one is a monstrosity and one is a beast...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wasn't the owlbear created in a wizard's lab and the griffon considered a natural animal from the wild? I think that the base difference is that, in the world of D&D the griffon wasn't the result of someone playing "mad scientist".
My gaming taste changed.Unacceptable. You, sir, are no true gamer!
Hello traveller, I am looking for a true Scotsman.
|
My advice to you, Scott: since you seem to like PF and dislike 5e....keep playing PF. This really only becomes a problem if your gaming group splits because team 5e and team PF each refuse to play the other game, but neither is big enough to form a full group by themselves.
Some people like you will read it, and see no need for it. Others will read it, and see no further need for Pathfinder. Some will play BOTH systems.
Hello traveller, I am looking for a true Scotsman.My gaming taste changed.Unacceptable. You, sir, are no true gamer!
Precisely