I'm glad Paizo tells the truth and is honest, it appears WotC may have taken us for a ride...


4th Edition


I'm particularly peeved right now. I hate being taken in by someone, and when it appears they've lied to you for their profit...you feel ripped off, deceived, whatever you want to call it.

Everyone from Hasbro that I've read on the internets, heard from, or talked to me basically implied how great 5e was going to be...okay...that's great. They NEVER countered what had been stated by the WotC guys in modularity being an aspect of 5e.

As one who has been meh about 5e overall, I WAS looking forward to the DMG. In it they had said there would be options to play the game like other playstyles.

I was particularly interested in a 4e style, and an AD&D style (sorry, bounded accuracy kills any AD&D style for me, when your wizard has the same default bonus to hit with their sword as my fighter...that's just not an older playstyle of D&D to me [well 3e and before]).

I actually was more interested in the 4e options, even particularly excited. If they had a 4e style of playing 5e, that could pretty much win me over to 5e.

I must admit, I was excited about the 5e DMG and the possibilities. I was holding on to see the promised modularity. They released the DMG TOC preview...and it was discouraging. However, who knows...I thought...maybe...just maybe it can be in there.

So...a guy in Italy just got his DMG. Thus far there is NOTHING to indicate this modularity from what he's stated. He's covered other things, but nothing to indicate 4e type gameplay. I'm...upset (I'd say other words, but...rules here...).

I just want to call the one relative I have connected to some of it who I feel has fed me this junk about being patient and wait and see, and cuss the living daylights out of him. I want to scream at him and basically tell him he's @#$%%^#$&@ liar along with that entire friggen company.

I don't know, maybe I should hold off, because right now I'm friggen peeved. I feel like they have had their marketing telling us one thing, to pull the blanket over our eyes...whilst never even intending on fulfilling their promises.

Am I upset...Heck yeah...I am.

I'm raging upset. It's not really about 5e itself...if they had portrayed it as it really was...I'd be okay. It's the thing that they stated to have modularity (at first it was going to have all the playstyles being together with an AD&D player sitting next to a 3e player sitting next to a 4e player, then it was modularity and options...and now...friggen nothing) and now...it appears they lied their arses off to us about that.

Which actually makes me reflect that I'm happy I switched to Paizo. I started with the BB when it came out, and got caught with that. It was awesome. Furthermore, everything ever stated about Paizo's support is true, at least that I've seen. They come to the boards, they talk to people, and what's recently becoming the biggest thing for me in light of this 5e stuff from WotC...

I've never felt that they have purposely BS'd me, lied to me, or went out of their way to deceive me (aka, deceive a group of people that they will get something that isn't going to be there). I may not agree with everything they do in some areas...but I've always felt that Paizo has been honest and straight forward with their products and what the products are and their intent with those products.

On the otherhand, I'm so upset at WotC right now...as I said, I want to do something foolish, call up the one person I know (and they aren't even WotC, they have connections to the parent company) and friggen cuss them out till they want to bury themselves in the ground so deep they'll never see the sun.

I figure I shouldn't...but I don't think I've felt backstabbed like this in marketing to this degree before. I'm probably taking it too personally...but there has to be other 4e players that feel similarly disgusted or upset.

I'm probably way over reacting right now...I should see if that guy who has the DMG has more to say on the modularity...but it sure doesn't sound like it's in there.

I just feel like they said one thing...and did another and totally led on a group of people and gamers without any intent to actually do what they said they would. That's NO WAY to get loyalty, in fact that's a good way to burn your customers.

If there isn't the modularity there...where before I was more meh...I think I'll be solidly anti 5e...at least for a while. Combat options is so friggen few pages...I was doubtful they could have enough in there for a 4e playstyle before...Now, with what's been said thus far...I'm practically livid (if you couldn't tell).

Anyways, what is coming out of all this, is I'm finding I am overwhelmingly thankful that Paizo is there. I'm an avid PF player now, and maybe even more devoted to PF than I was before 5e came out even. I don't know, but perhaps this is what many 3.5 players felt when 4e was announced and came out...and why many jumped onto the PF wagon at that time? I know I have a friend who has everything from Paizo from the beginning, with all the original APs stuff (they have every AP from #1 to the current one) and other things.

If so, perhaps this is a learning experience and lesson for me, teaching me to better understand how many 3.5 players felt with the rug being tugged from out beneath them...and how glad they were that Paizo was there.

I know right now (at least) I am really really really really really really really happy about Paizo. I am happy PF exists, seriously happy, and even if there are times I might not agree with everything Paizo does....I'm at least happy that they don't seem to purposefully and aggressively lie to me. Right now, that's HUGE in my book.

Yes, I'm emotional, and yes, I'm venting. I really am feeling like I got backstabbed...so...hopefully I haven't gone over the top in my rant.

It's just funny that at the same time I'm feeling such rage, I'm actually also feeling so happy that Paizo exists right now and that PF is a thing that can be relied on to at least be what we expect, and what we know.

Hopefully I'll cool off after some sleep.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.

If its true and there is no modularity at all in 5E DMG I'll be bummed. Though you are going a bit far with this anger and rage.

Grand Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

If it's not in there I'm assuming they either couldn't make it work or couldn't make it fit. Of course the levels of said modularity and how people perceive it will be argued endlessly after this. Either way I envy the type of life wherein this is apocalyptic news.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I read only two pages of the guy's recaps. Lots of modules listed so far and he's barely cracked the book open:
-spell points!
-lots of new combat options (disarm etc.)
-faster healing option
-grid based combat (square and hex) option
-magic item creation option.

Not sure what you're looking for in optional rules, but it sounds like the DMG will be full of options. Plus creation rules for monsters, magic items, races, etc. Along with the magic items, treasure guides, and monster lists.

Shadow Lodge

5 people marked this as a favorite.

I think you misunderstood what modularity means. It doesn't mean that you will be able to make 5E look like 4E, 3E, or 2E (that would be impossible). It does mean that you will be able to add or ignore elements in the game without breaking it. From what I can tell the PHB is pretty much the basic bare bones game with a few options for gridded play and the DMG is adding a whole bunch of combat and grid options. You can basically take a simple game and add things onto it to make it more tactical and complicated. Additionally, it is really easy to add reasonable house rules without breaking the game - or so it has been in my experience.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm not a WOTC supporter by any means and have no intention of playing or supporting 5E but maybe you should wait until you actually get the book in your hands before you kinda write it off?

I know it sucks and your feelings are valid but just wait and see for yourself I think is probably your best bet. And then after persuing the book if it lacks what you wanted / expected? By all means act accordingly.

There are going to be a bunch of people who are going to come in here and lay into you by saying that your expectations were off base and or crazy and it's not WOTC's fault that youre upset and that youre a bad person for feeling the way that you do.

IGNORE THOSE PEOPLE.

Just hold off until you get the book IN YOUR HANDS. Then make up your own mind. It might not actually be that bad.

Shadow Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
ShinHakkaider wrote:


There are going to be a bunch of people who are going to come in here and lay into you by saying that your expectations were off base and or crazy and it's not WOTC's fault that youre upset and that youre a bad person for feeling the way that you do.

IGNORE THOSE PEOPLE.

I will never understand this mentality. The OP is stating an opinion in a public forum. He clearly wants feedback on his opinions - that includes criticism. If he didn't want it, he might as well stand in front of a mirror and yell at himself.

I would not support any personal attacks, but I do believe that his expectations were off and it isn't out of line to point that out.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The DMG will make or break 5E for me as well, so I'm interested in receiving it both on the promise of options as well as explaining some of the "under the hood" aspects.

Right now, I'm leaning toward not playing/running 5E, but we'll see.


GreyWolfLord wrote:
I'm probably way over reacting right now...

haha. Take a deep breath!

I think its best to wait until the DMG is actually released and see a wide range of feedback from different people.

The modularity thing might have been overstated and some people might have had higher expectations for it. Its easy to read something and project your own desires into it.

You often see Paizo staff on these forums reigning people back with the "from the department of expectation management" posts about their own products as some fans are quite excitable. :)

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I would actually sympathize with the OP if he actually had the book and then posted his first post. Instead he takes at face value someone else explanations of the 5E DMG as the gospel truth. Even then not even the entire book. How about actually looking through a copy of his own first. Still I love how the "lied to us for profit" comment. Last time I checked the books I bought from Paizo all have price tags printed on their covers. Does that mean Paizo made a profit of me. Of course they did. Last time I checked Paizo is not a non-profit organization.

Myself I'm going to wait and see what the 5E DMG includes. Even if their is no promised modularity or very little. I'm still happy with 5E. I enjoy PF yet wanted a easier more modern version of D&D. For me 5E fits it perfectly.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I saw that post on ENWorld, and read the first 20 posts in it (didn't feel like reading 900+ posts). Seeing the Kender and Warforged being cut, and not everything they stated being in there makes me a sad panda. But, according to a few posts on that thread as well as the WotC forums, they are supposedly going to have a new column to replace Legends & Lore, that some people believe will be called Unearthed Arcana. And according to these posts, this column will have the Kender, Warforged, and other such things that were chopped from the DMG.

Asphere: They said there was supposed to be a "module" in the DMG on how to include THAC0 into 5th edition games instead of the bounded accuracy, so those who want a more 2nd edition AD&D feel could accomplish it with 5th edition. Don't know how successful that would be implemented, but it is something that has been stated that WotC was trying to achieve in the DMG.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Asphere wrote:


I will never understand this mentality. The OP is stating an opinion in a public forum. He clearly wants feedback on his opinions - that includes criticism. If he didn't want it, he might as well stand in front of a mirror and yell at himself.

I would not support any personal attacks, but I do believe that his expectations were off and it isn't out of line to point that out.

Agreed and seconded.

It's one thing to write a clam rational post about the 5E DMG. The Op expectations were perhaps too high and instead it became a rant. Made worse by not even having the 5E DMG and going on secondhand information.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
memorax wrote:
Myself I'm going to wait and see what the 5E DMG includes. Even if their is no promised modularity or very little. I'm still happy with 5E. I enjoy PF yet wanted a easier more modern version of D&D. For me 5E fits it perfectly.

I agree with your statement. I am happy with 5th edition, though I am 90% done with Pathfinder. What is or isn't included in the DMG won't kill 5th edition for me. As stated, I will be sad that what they said would be included in the DMG isn't going to be, but it isn't enough to destroy the game.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adjule wrote:


I agree with your statement. I am happy with 5th edition, though I am 90% done with Pathfinder. What is or isn't included in the DMG won't kill 5th edition for me. As stated, I will be sad that what they said would be included in the DMG isn't going to be, but it isn't enough to destroy the game.

It's very refreshing to see a post such as this.

Too many in the hobby if they hate one thing about a rpg means that it is not destroyed. I admit I was very unhappy that PF did not fix the Fighter like the OP at first. For a few seconds then went on and played 4E. Then after playing it found it was not to my liking either and went back to Pathfinder. Still unhappy with the Fighter then the Rogue. I'm still playing and running it. Nor has it destroyed the rpg in anyway shape or form.

Grand Lodge

Asphere wrote:
I think you misunderstood what modularity means. It doesn't mean that you will be able to make 5E look like 4E, 3E, or 2E (that would be impossible).

Do not try to bend the finished editions--- that would be impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth. There are no finished editions.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
EntrerisShadow wrote:


Do not try to bend the finished editions--- that would be impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth. There are no finished editions.

Well said and good advice imo. Why do I picture this happening when told to some members of the community. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gD3uk_bDrM There are no finished editions..(Kaboom)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Do people get this angry about Monopoly? (Actually, don't answer that - I don't want to know...)

I think it bears mentioning that we're talking about a *game*, here. Calling up your friend and cussing him out because he urged you to take a "wait and see" attitude about an upcoming gamebook is pretty far over the top (and pretty lousy behavior from someone who's supposed to be their friend). Getting this enraged about what is, let's be honest, a leisure pastime is the height of Simpsons' Comic Book Guy caricature.

I understand being irritated with WotC. I just snarked at Wolfgang Baur over "Hoard of the Dragon Queen," which I thought was railroady as all get-out, filled with "Bad DM 101" decisions and far beneath his skills as a writer overall. But try to have a healthy sense of perspective.


I can certainly feel for someone who envisioned 'the perfect system' with modularity that can simulate any prior edition with ease. But I don't think that was ever going to be remotely feasible.

I am hopeful that the DMG *will* have enough new options and systems to help guide a DM in designing the game that best fits their group. Even just from the PHB, there seems a decent bit of that. (Do you include Feats / Backgrounds / Multiclassing? Do you use a grid? Do you focus on Inspiration and Ideals/Bonds/Flaws? Do you only hand out Advantage by the book, or do you use it to reward stunts and creative actions?)

You can already end up with vastly different games based on the answer to those questions alone. That said, there is no guarantee the system will live up to the perfect ideal one might hope for, and I don't think that failing to do so is a matter of 'lying' to customers. I think it is entirely fine to be disappointed it if doesn't give you what you are looking for, it is entirely fine to realize it isn't the game you want to play. But acting like that is the result of willful deception is, perhaps, not entirely fair.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Manasseh wrote:
Do people get this angry about Monopoly?

Some people get infuriated when people invite them to play Monopoly when there are so many board games with more modern designs that don't share Monopoly's design flaws. Monopoly has very little strategy - it's almost always a good idea to buy every property you land on, and once the properties are all bought, the whole game simply comes down to rolling dice and occasionally buying a little house. Monopoly has no predictable end point - games can go on for hours without any conclusion. And Hasbro has done nothing to fix the blatant class power disparity between the car and the little dog.

Manasseh wrote:
(Actually, don't answer that - I don't want to know...)

Whoops!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

There are all sorts of issues that may have come up that have made the DMG's support of 4e-style play (or any other edition's style) not reach the same result you were hoping for. That doesn't mean they lied to you or stabbed you in the back, OP.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The 5E PHB and MM did not disappoint me; I have no reason to believe the 5E DMG would, either.

On the other hand, if they truly do miss the mark as completely as you fear, I'm reminded of Hanlon's Razor (though I'd substitute "incompetence" for "stupidity.") And while I appreciate a good rant as much as the next guy (boy, do I), I think "backstabbed" is a bit much. ;-)

The Exchange

bugleyman wrote:

The 5E PHB and MM did not disappoint me; I have no reason to believe the 5E DMG would, either.

On the other hand, if they truly do miss the mark as completely as you fear, I'm reminded of Hanlon's Razor (though I'd substitute "incompetence" for "stupidity.")

I agree. I am loving the PHB and MM, I can't imagine the DMG being a sudden departure from what is already laid out. I will wait until I hold it, have read through it, and have used some of it in game before I condemn it....5e thus far has earned the benefit of the doubt to me.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Look! If the new DMG doesn't include specific rules for how I can bring Boot Hill back to my game, then it is dead to me

Dead!

wait, does it have magic items in it? okay maybe only mostly dead

Paizo Glitterati Robot

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Locking. We have zero interest in facilitating baiting threads for the purpose of defaming other publishers or are catalysts for edition warring. Please refer to our Community Guidelines before posting.

Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Gaming / D&D / 4th Edition / I'm glad Paizo tells the truth and is honest, it appears WotC may have taken us for a ride... All Messageboards
Recent threads in 4th Edition