Found a DnD group after years of no TTRPG....they play 5e....

[cmastah]

Oh God.

Not looking to start a thread for flaming and all...even if it ultimately comes to it.

It's just....I mean....

Advantage? Disadvantage? Excuse me?

I don't want to start an editions war in this thread or anything but....

I mean look, I can see the benefits of 5e, heck, sometimes it just springs out at you, right? I mean it simplifies everything so that if you're in an advantageous position, you don't need to worry about knowing rules like +AC or -attack roll by a specific amount, +attack roll to those guys and such, you can just simplify it to 'you have advantage, he has disadvantage'.

But....I mean....are you saying maximizing my potential to hit the target is impossible....? So if I follow the target in the dead of night, while there's a parade, with maximized stealth, hiding behind the things sticking out of people's roofs....I'm looking at advantage and ultimately a very low stealth bonus due to no feats able to raise specific skills up even higher, and an enemy whose ability to perceive my character is at worst hindered by disadvantage, no reduction in perception due to a dark night, distance, objects and the massive distraction of a parade going full party mode all around him. 5e is heavily reliant on the luck of the dice as well, pathfinder also relies on the luck of the dice but you can actually build your character, actually work on making him less reliant on lucky rolls, actually working on minimizing away the need for good rolls.

All the possible DMs in the group only want to DM 5e, citing how complex pathfinder is. Pathfinder eases you into the complexity as you level up, it doesn't drop it all on you at once. Heck, it's not even complex, it's a robust system that's not reliant on little things that if they go wrong, junks the entire system. THAT'S why you can have so many archetypes for the classes, the classes in 5e have to be finely tailored because the base system is so fragile.

For a one-shot 5e is great, but spend just a little more time on it and you start finding yourself frustrated with how empty the whole system is. This bounded accuracy thing they've created, along with the advantage/disadvantage system are the primary weaknesses of the system. The other problem they created, that originated back in 4e, was the lack of number of attacks and enemies that have either more health than they need or a normal amount of health but last longer because you can only make one attack (for most classes).

3e started out with a great system that got solidified in 3.5 and made powerful in pathfinder.

I'm really tempted to run these guys through a pathfinder one shot, I'm sure they'd be open to it as long as they don't have to DM it. I don't suppose you guys have any free 1st level adventures you can recommend?

Reading through the 5e spell list was so depressing....I've never seen a system ruin itself so badly.

[cmastah]

Oh, by the way, did I mention ability score increases (or taking a feat) is based on CLASS level, not character level? So if you multiclass, you better decide whether you'll invest four levels to get your ability score/feat's worth, or if you take less, you'll be accepting a loss of ability increase/feat selection.

I mean seriously?

[Elegos]

Honestly I think 5e has a lot of advantages, and it appeals to a lot of people cause it doesn't try and focus on minutiae of positioning and a million class abilities. It's focus is relatively simple, fun gameplay that leaves a lot of room for more creative tactics rather then the somewhat straightjacketed war game that Pathfinder and 3.5 represent. Now if you prefer your games crunchier, with a lot of minmax potential and stuff, more power to you, that's the sort of thing you like and you probably won't have much fun with 5th edition. But other people aren't having badwrongfun for liking it or wanting to tun it.

[Elegos]

As for free 1 shot modules you could run, Master of the Fallen Fortress or Risen from the Sands are both level 1 adventures that are available free on Paizos website.

I've played Master and run Risen and both were enjoyable adventures that a 1st or 3rd level party (respectively) could enjoy, especially for new players

[savokk]

I play both Pathfinder and D&D 5th edition. I enjoy both but each has their strengths and weaknesses.

Sounds like D&D isn't for you, but that doesn't mean anyone else is wrong for enjoying their brand of fun.

[Pun-Pun]

Might makes right. I have all the might. So I'm right. there for only I can determine what is truly fun!

[Hawkmoon269]

Your thread should probably be in the D&D 5e forum. You'd probably get more feedback there.

[Cyrad]

It's an okay system, but not everyone's cup of tea.

My group doesn't care for it because the game doesn't offer any character concepts that couldn't be done with Pathfinder. But that's not something other people would care about.

[Daniel Yeatman]

What you see as fragility, I see as room for the DM and players to fill in the blanks. From what I've experienced of 5E, it's a very rules light system on purpose, made less for the slog and grind of Pathfinder combat and more for interpretative moments and roleplaying. Then again, any system can be set aside in favour of roleplaying, so what do I know?

[Planpanther]

Try playing online instead.

[John Mechalas]

Given the choice, I would rather play 5E than not play anything at all.

I prefer the complexity of the 3.5/OGL/PF family, but 5E is a fine RPG. It's just different approach to playing the game.

[cmastah]

Elegos wrote:

As for free 1 shot modules you could run, Master of the Fallen Fortress or Risen from the Sands are both level 1 adventures that are available free on Paizos website.

I've played Master and run Risen and both were enjoyable adventures that a 1st or 3rd level party (respectively) could enjoy, especially for new players

Thanks, I'll give them a read through and will probably try to see if the guys would be interested in a one shot.

I'm not saying 5e is badwrongfun (I'd say there's no kind of thing as the wrong kind of fun, but the internet is a terrifying place), so much so as.....I guess the rules light aspect is most likely just not my cup of tea.

One of the things I miss from PF is the customize-ability of the classes, which is a feature of there not being the bounded accuracy aspect integral to 5e (which pervades many aspects of the system, like feats and spells). Skills are easier to raise so that you can form your character to be a master of the one you're interested in, and the importance of lucky rolls can be minimized away. You can actually plan ahead and prepare, because the game doesn't work based on the advantage/disadvantage system, every last bit of effort, every extra little thing you think of, can be used to give you an ACTUAL advantage. Perhaps you have an important meeting with some noble: you can use knowledge (nobility? I haven't played PF in ages) to find out what dish he likes, knowledge history to know where his house stands on certain matters or other houses, you can use spells to make you more convincing, you can manufacture an event that might make him more amenable to your suggestions. All these raise the likelihood of getting the person to do what you want. In 5e? You can put in all the effort you want, best you'll get is advantage and maybe the other side gets disadvantage.

As I said, I don't hate 5e, or at least if I do, it's a love-hate relationship (and I don't mean I love to hate it, I mean I both love AND hate it). There are so many simple things about it that gets the matter done in moments without sitting there trying to calculate every little, last detail. The thing that does bother me the most, I would say is the bounded accuracy trait. Oh, also the way concentration works.

@Hawkmoon, thanks, I actually didn't know there was a 5e section.

@John Mechalas, it plays fine, but it fosters one of those feelings of....okay, this is to start, now on to some REAL DnD (I refer to PF as DnD as well to be honest). I will say though that given the choice between 5e and no DnD (pathfinder included), then definitely 5e; given the choice between -4e- and no DnD.....hellooooo netflix bingeing.

[Alceste008]

I see a lot of 5E games around. The 5e books have officially sold more copies than their respective counterparts from the 3.5, 3, 4x series (individually not collectively of course). The pod casters and twitch streamers are fun to watch / listen to (especially Critical Role). The twitch streamers and pod casters overwhelmingly run 5e. 5e has been very successful.

Now, I may prefer the complexity and build options of Pathfinder but I have had fun playing 5e. The most important feature of a game for myself is enjoying the social interaction with other players and DM.

[Planpanther]

Sounds like you ran into our groups problem Cmastah. Everyone wants to play PF, but everybody would rather run 5E.

[Dale McCoy Jr]

Cyrad wrote:

It's an okay system, but not everyone's cup of tea.

That's my take as well. Pathfinder is great for some. 5e is great for others. I play 5e with my daughter and my nieces and nephew. They love the game. Mind you, they don't know anything else. But it was much easier to explain it than Pathfinder.

[John Mechalas]

cmastah wrote:

it plays fine, but it fosters one of those feelings of....okay, this is to start, now on to some REAL DnD (I refer to PF as DnD as well to be honest). I will say though that given the choice between 5e and no DnD (pathfinder included), then definitely 5e

5e is what 4e should have been in many ways.

I do like the rules-lite approach. Unlike 3.5/PF the rules don't get in their own way. That makes it more accessible to newer, younger players who didn't grow up with 1st Ed. :) It's a good way to attract new people to the game.

Once they get comfortable with it, they can opt for the gritty rules...or they can move to more complex systems like PF. Or, they can just enjoy 5E for what it is.

I agree with you on a lot of the points, which is why 5E isn't for me, either. But it's very playable, and well designed. I'm not quite a grognard but I have been playing since 1st edition, and the stuff that bugs me about 5e is pretty minor in the scheme of things. I think that's saying a lot about the quality of the system.

It's OK to vent a bit about it though. It can even be healthy. It's possible to enjoy the system while still having preferences for other systems.

[thejeff]

It's not even like 5E is a particularly rules-lite system. Certainly by comparison to 3.x, but not really if you look at rules-lite games outside of the D&D/D20 world.

[Gorbacz]

I like PF for the variety of character customization and the sheer amount of ready-to-go adventure material by Paizo and 3PP.

I like 5E for doing away with many clunky elements of 3.5 ruleset.

Rules-wise, Starfinder shapes up to be the middle ground between the two that I might fall in love with.

[BigNorseWolf]

master of the fallen fortress is free and pretty straightforward http://paizo.com/products/btpy8ey4?Pathfinder-Module-Master-of-the-Fallen-F ortress

[Sara Marie]

cmastah wrote:

I don't want to start an editions war in this thread or anything but....

I've gone ahead and locked the thread. If it is your intention to not incite an edition war, you will need to reframe your post without the baiting tone.