| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
At the D&D celebration Ray Witanger Announced redoing the core book for the 50th year of D&D. Some statements were more surveys coming out and there will be ways for customers to provide input to make it the game they want. I do not think at this time they know how extensive changes will be. Many think something like 5.5.
What this might do since new edition announced is PF 2 to close the gap some. I think Pathfinder caught and passed 4th Ed D&D around time 5th was announced.Several things are different. D&D 5th is the best selling rpg all time. D&D 4 th did not sell as well as Wizards wanted. There is not as much discontent as there was with 4th. But, what I do think sales of D&D 5th core books will slow down. Especially at local game stores where the set is 150. Selling this at local store may be hard since need to replace 3 years. You can get them on Amazon much cheaper.
I do think there is some room for PF2 to capture some players looking for more player options and even new players. With guns and gears around the corner allot of favorite classes have shown up with PF2. If you wanted swing for fenced you could even try to approach Critical Roll about PF2 streaming show. They started with PF2
Should be interesting 3 years.
I do think when D&D 5.5/6 hits it will sell a bunch. There are 3
years till then
I would agree may be a chance for PF2 to grow some. Since 5th D&D is being replaced 3 years.
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
A correction but Critical Role started with Pathfinder 1e in their home game, then switched to 5e when they started streaming. I think Matt Mercer said it was because of how simpler 5e is to run. I don’t see that changing anytime soon, as 5e is still simpler than Pathfinder 2E. I love the show but the players would have a tough time with more crunchy ruleset of Pathfinder IMO.
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
TBH I think CR wouldn't have too much trouble learning PF2e, its just there is more of an audience for 5e than PF2e. They used the system that would get the most views and at the time PF1 wouldn't have had the views IMHO.
|
Okay so, does anyone have any bets on which tack 5.5e/6e will take?
1) An refined and even more simple set of universal tweaks and changes to 5e, easier to play and learn than existing 5e.
2) A more crunchy, mechanically rewarding, and balanced version of 5e.
3) A brand new system that is incompatible with 5e, simpler RPG, and easier to play/learn.
4) A brand new system that is incompatible with 5e, more crunch, mechanically rewarding, and balanced than existing 5e.
I have no real idea but so far my intuition is option #1 as it probably has the best chance to raise their cost/profit ratio.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
5E is way too easy and too simple for my tastes. Probably won't change what I play. I have to have the illusion of a challenge and Demon Lords have to be the most fearsome things walking the planet, not a weak Demon Lord that some lvl 4 Sorlock kites in open territory using the available rules.
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
Interesting is one word for it.
They've released some tidbits.
Standouts are, a set of feats for each race including some mutually exclusive ones at first level (the word "Heritage" was actually used), and "a pool of options for each class at every level to customize your class".
Yeah. Now all they need to do is to mention a 3 action economy.
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
I’m into Pathfinder for the setting, so this doesn’t bother me much.
It’s infuriating that WotC is just sitting on Dark Sun. Thank goodness they let Keith Baker keep putting out “unofficial” Eberron material.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
They need to redo the balance of the base 5e classes. Some are just a lot stronger than others. All those with useful bonus actions - its a clear 2 tier system.
Then there is the fact that ACs can get too high and really skew some encounters.
So plenty of simple cleanup there. Which I hope they do. Because I still get dragged into 5e games.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
After waiting 5-6 years for one additional class I really don't see Wizards of the Coast doing anything crazy with 5e..... but then again I've been out of the loop for a while
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I imagine they'll continue to lean harder into de-mechanizing races. Gotta expect they'll borrow from Pathfinder on that one.
Not really sure what all to expect. It's three years from now so nothing D&D can do in one book will be able to touch the raw force of 5 years of Pathfinder though.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Interesting is one word for it.
They've released some tidbits.
Standouts are, a set of feats for each race including some mutually exclusive ones at first level (the word "Heritage" was actually used), and "a pool of options for each class at every level to customize your class".Yeah. Now all they need to do is to mention a 3 action economy.
Any chance you can post some links to where they’ve mentioned those details (for those of us out of the loop)?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I highly doubt that Pathfinder is likely to overtake D&D again, though I'm hopeful that the success of D&D is giving both Pathfinder and Starfinder a boost. Then again, trends change and D&D's superb fortune will eventually wane (hopefully not harming the industry as a whole when it does).
I'm interested in the next iteration of D&D. I'd like to see if any Pathfinder 2e ideas get incorporated, partly because I think there are several things that Pathfinder just does better than D&D right now.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah that was because D&D shot themselves in the foot with a terrible edition.
But honestly PF is pushing D&D to improve. Competition can be a good thing for everyone.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
I imagine they'll continue to lean harder into de-mechanizing races. Gotta expect they'll borrow from Pathfinder on that one.
Not really sure what all to expect. It's three years from now so nothing D&D can do in one book will be able to touch the raw force of 5 years of Pathfinder though.
I hope so. A handful of detractors complain that PF2 took away all the racial abilities and made them into feats, but I like that change. It was so tiresome that every dwarf, elf, halfing, and the like were exactly the same. Now you feel like a more unique member of your ancestry. That is more "realistic" to me. Humans aren't cookie cutter, no reason any of the other races should be.
Versatile heritages was a very cool idea. Now you can have that planar blood as any ancestry.
Being able to customize your ancestry is a big plus in PF2. You can make an entire group of gnomes or elves now and they would all be unique.
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think it will be streamlined with poaching from PF2 where the underlying engine makes it simple. And backward-compatible of course, not to mention more inclusive, respectful and diversity-friendly.
I’d like to believe this, but 5e has prominently treated two Black creatives impressively poorly, and in the latter case made their work /more offensive/.
This is to say nothing of the continued employment of known rapist defender Mike Mearls.
|
|
I think it will be streamlined with poaching from PF2 where the underlying engine makes it simple. And backward-compatible of course, not to mention more inclusive, respectful and diversity-friendly.I’d like to believe this, but 5e has prominently treated two Black creatives impressively poorly, and in the latter case made their work /more offensive/.
This is to say nothing of the continued employment of known rapist defender Mike Mearls.
They have 3 years to get back on tracks and do the moves necessary to undo the PR fiascos and even turn it into a win. I think WOTC has enough business acumen to do this. In fact I think they likely looked into ways to do this once the uproar became too noticeable.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
WotC did a playtest a while back that introduced subclasses that worked with multiple classes. It was pretty poorly received for balance reasons, but I thought it seemed like an idea that would belong to a new edition. So, maybe they're looking to make character building more modular in general. That would make it a little bit more like pathfinder, but I highly doubt they'll go so far as to satisfy people who want complex character building with crunch. I'd also expect more dm facing mechanics for running exploration, which has been one of 5e's weakest areas.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Any chance you can post some links to where they’ve mentioned those details (for those of us out of the loop)?Interesting is one word for it.
They've released some tidbits.
Standouts are, a set of feats for each race including some mutually exclusive ones at first level (the word "Heritage" was actually used), and "a pool of options for each class at every level to customize your class".Yeah. Now all they need to do is to mention a 3 action economy.
I'll try and find them again.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I predict virtually no system changes other than some streamlining. Instead, it will have wild new art including homages to the Elmore and Easley works of the early years. It will be all about capturing the atmosphere of the past ages and introduce throwback magic items, npcs, monsters, and some reworked classic quests. Nostalgia and production value will rocket Anniversary Edition to fantastic commercial success, and it will be great for the TTRPG industry as a whole.
| 26 people marked this as a favorite. |
*reading the 5e which is around for 6 years, has gotten barely any new content, will be replaced in 3 years which are probably also devoid of any notable content*
Hmmm...
*Looks at Pathfinder pdf collection and Paizos release schedule*
I think I'm good...
There appear to be some people implying that this new edition might be at least partly to stop people jumping to PF2E
Is there really any evidence that this has happened to a significant degree such that 5E would notice ? And given they don’t put out loads of books and the jumpers have likely already bought theirs - does it even matter ?
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Getting closer to what your fanbase, past, present and future (especially) wants is the best way to keep them. And some of what they want, PF2 provides.
Better to act proactively rather than react after losing customers.
Also I believe TTRPG devs are always very aware of each other's work, what succeeds and what fails.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
While there are lots of things I'd like them to improve in a 5.5, I don't expect them to do any of them.
The classes in 5e feel quite bare, and subclasses alone aren't enough to stop them feeling identical. Every barbarian the same, every bard the same, etc. You can roleplay very different characters, but the game rules doesn't support you in it. A 5.5 player's handbook could come with new, rebalanced versions of the core classes, that have more customisation and are still fully compatible with the 5e engine.
Races could also be improved. They could stop using the word "race", they could use heritages the way Pathfinder 2 does, and they could incorporate the flexible stat rules from Tasha's Cauldron into the core rules.
But they won't.
I expect the anniversary edition will mostly just be a shiny repackaging. It might incorporate a couple of subclasses from other books, and fix the odd little mistake, but it won't change much of anything.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
While there are lots of things I'd like them to improve in a 5.5, I don't expect them to do any of them.
The classes in 5e feel quite bare, and subclasses alone aren't enough to stop them feeling identical. Every barbarian the same, every bard the same, etc. You can roleplay very different characters, but the game rules doesn't support you in it. A 5.5 player's handbook could come with new, rebalanced versions of the core classes, that have more customisation and are still fully compatible with the 5e engine.
Races could also be improved. They could stop using the word "race", they could use heritages the way Pathfinder 2 does, and they could incorporate the flexible stat rules from Tasha's Cauldron into the core rules.
But they won't.
I expect the anniversary edition will mostly just be a shiny repackaging. It might incorporate a couple of subclasses from other books, and fix the odd little mistake, but it won't change much of anything.
As long as they have a bunch of celebrities onboard playing D&D 5E due to its simplicity, I can't see them messing it up. This is the most mainstream I've ever seen D&D in my life. It's mainly because a good number of Hollywood celebs have embraced it.
If I were a D&D product manager, I wouldn't mess up what was working. I'd secretly play other editions of D&D and sell 5E hard for its simplicity.
Designer
|
| 43 people marked this as a favorite. |
There appear to be some people implying that this new edition might be at least partly to stop people jumping to PF2E
Is there really any evidence that this has happened to a significant degree such that 5E would notice ? And given they don’t put out loads of books and the jumpers have likely already bought theirs - does it even matter ?
It's tricky to say. PF2's player base may actually have more former/current 5E players than former/current PF1 players at this point, but that would be in part because there's around 42 5E players in the world for every PF1 player that ever existed.
It's also tricky because assuming that Pathfinder ever surpassed D&D in any edition isn't really accurate. By the time Pathfinder was higher on the IcV2 charts (themselves very inaccurate and prone to bias) than D&D 4E, they'd already announced 5E and intentionally started the wind down on 4E (which was actually much more successful than people realize, just not 5E successful, which is what Hasbro and WotC were aiming for.) WotC was also in the process of adopting direct distribution models and taking other steps that actually increased their sales and audience through venues that aren't tracked via traditional TTRPG tracking metrics.
The reality is that D&D and WotC aren't really competing with Paizo, their peers are companies like Blizzard. So it's very likely that announcing a new edition of D&D will mean the migration of players to PF2 is significantly enhanced, but even if that number of new people adopting PF2 for the first time were to be twice the size of the entire PF1 audience at its height, that number might not be significant enough for WotC to care or notice. If they see anything equating to even a fraction of the market growth 5E created, they could literally lose 10× the PF1 audience in players and still come out ahead by double that amount.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would agree. I do not think PF2 will overtake 5e but may pick up some players based on a new addition of 5e being announced. Players may not want to spend the 150 or so on books that will be replaced. Granted now it is still 3 years away. True you could always use Amazon where I think the 3 books are 29 or so. I just think about 2 years out from 5.5 players may try PF2. I hope they do. It is my favorite D20 game. Then Starfinder and 5e.
I do think it will be a refinement and retuning if classes. Maybe some extra crunch in combat ported from DMG. The monster book will have their be stat blocks. I think the will add more feats and maybe feat trees like the attic heaven book. I think they have a frame work, but Dan response to surveys will probably dictate how much they add and tweak. If they do a full open play test then I think more changes will occur.
My thing with critical roll was people often debate that critical roll made D&D5e. Others say no it did not. I am in the camp that think they helped each other. At the time critical roll launched on geek and sundry. D&D 5e had spent time on New York Times best seller list. As critical roll grew I think it definitely helped D&D. The staff at critical roll may want to spread there wings and see. It could even be 2nd campaign. I think they played PF1 for
a bit. So maybe they give PF2 a try.
I really can't see Critical Role playing Pathfinder 2e for a long term campaign. They've tied themselves so much to the D&D brand (and DNDBeyond) at this point. And not to throw shade at the players, but I don't think a more crunchy system would suit them. Sometimes I think the crew would be happier with a more narrative system, but certainly not a more crunchy one.
And that's not me saying Pathfinder 2E is bad, as I like the system a lot (hence why I'm posting here), but I don't think its a good system for Critical Role. With that said though, I would love for them to do a one shot or side campaign to your point, Dave2, using PF2E. I'm doubtful because of their connection to D&D and WotC, but it would be cool.
On the topic of 5E "Evolution" (as WotC calls it), I don't think it will change much in terms of who's playing what game. There's a very small, but growing subset of 5E players who want a more crunchy game with more options and better rules for DMing, and some of them have jumped ship to Pathfinder 2E (like one of my groups). If 5E Evolution/5.5 borrows some ideas from PF2e and makes the core game more crunchy, I could see some people flocking back to 5E. Otherwise, if 5.5 does some minor updates but the core system foundation remains the same, then I don't think much will change. People that want a more crunchy system will flock to PF2E. Those that want something more narrative and rules lite, will flock to other systems. 5E will be the popular middle ground as it is now.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm hoping they fix the CR system so it's easier to whip up encounters.
I'm still fairly new to the rules but creating encounters seems a bit uneven and easy to make something overpowered, CR calculators across the internet help take some of the guesswork out but it doesn't feel accurate enough in general.
Also, some of the multiclassing seems broken, like the mentioned Sorlock.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
And not to throw shade at the players, but I don't think a more crunchy system would suit them.
I mean, the Critical Role cast was playing Pathfinder, the first season of the show was them converting their long running PF1 home campaign to 5e because they felt it would stream better.
I otherwise agree though that they've pretty strongly associated themselves with D&D and WotC as a brand in a way I don't especially see them going back on.
And not to throw shade at the players, but I don't think a more crunchy system would suit them.I mean, the Critical Role cast was playing Pathfinder, the first season of the show was them converting their long running PF1 home campaign to 5e because they felt it would stream better.
I otherwise agree though that they've pretty strongly associated themselves with D&D and WotC as a brand in a way I don't especially see them going back on.
The first season was entirely 5e. Only their home game before was Pathfinder and they played very infrequently back then. I think some of the cast would have a hard time adjusting at this point to a crunchier system. They still get tripped up by 5e mechanics after playing it for years. This isn’t a jab at the CR crew because I love their campaigns. I just think PF2e is more mechanically intensive then they need.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
The first season was entirely 5e. Only their home game before was Pathfinder and they played very infrequently back then. I think some of the cast would have a hard time adjusting at this point to a crunchier system. They still get tripped up by 5e mechanics after playing it for years. This isn’t a jab at the CR crew because I love their campaigns. I just think PF2e is more mechanically intensive then they need.And not to throw shade at the players, but I don't think a more crunchy system would suit them.I mean, the Critical Role cast was playing Pathfinder, the first season of the show was them converting their long running PF1 home campaign to 5e because they felt it would stream better.
I otherwise agree though that they've pretty strongly associated themselves with D&D and WotC as a brand in a way I don't especially see them going back on.
No, it was Pathfinder. That's why Percival was a gunslinger and the party had a bunch of PF1-converted magic items, among other things. The entire part of the campaign they streamed was 5e, but the stream started at 9th level in the middle of an ongoing adventure, not at the beginning of the campaign.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
No, it was Pathfinder. That's why Percival was a gunslinger and the party had a bunch of PF1-converted magic items, among other things. The entire part of the campaign they streamed was 5e, but the stream started at 9th level in the middle of an ongoing adventure, not at the beginning of the campaign.The first season was entirely 5e. Only their home game before was Pathfinder and they played very infrequently back then. I think some of the cast would have a hard time adjusting at this point to a crunchier system. They still get tripped up by 5e mechanics after playing it for years. This isn’t a jab at the CR crew because I love their campaigns. I just think PF2e is more mechanically intensive then they need.And not to throw shade at the players, but I don't think a more crunchy system would suit them.I mean, the Critical Role cast was playing Pathfinder, the first season of the show was them converting their long running PF1 home campaign to 5e because they felt it would stream better.
I otherwise agree though that they've pretty strongly associated themselves with D&D and WotC as a brand in a way I don't especially see them going back on.
I think we are saying the same thing. I know their home game was Pathfinder but they switched to 5e for the stream and have been only doing 5e or narrative lite systems (one shots) for the last 6 years or so. And just judging how some of the crew still stumble over 5e which is a simpler game than PF2e, I think it would be a hard adjustment to streaming PF2e.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Any chance you can post some links to where they’ve mentioned those details (for those of us out of the loop)?Interesting is one word for it.
They've released some tidbits.
Standouts are, a set of feats for each race including some mutually exclusive ones at first level (the word "Heritage" was actually used), and "a pool of options for each class at every level to customize your class".Yeah. Now all they need to do is to mention a 3 action economy.
Linkies:
A live reaction Original stream is in video description, but be warned it's 9hrs long.
Final thoughts video.
Edit: More linkies
Moar
Don't remember which of these had those details
I think anything Paizo us superior to aby 5e product.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I expect they'll steal a bunch of stuff from 2e, like they did with Tasha's, and the gaming journalists will gush about how "innovative" WOTC is.
That is what I think will happen. I keep telling my old group that if they want to play a good system they have to play PF2e.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
TBH I think CR wouldn't have too much trouble learning PF2e, its just there is more of an audience for 5e than PF2e. They used the system that would get the most views and at the time PF1 wouldn't have had the views IMHO.
CR struggles with 5e rules and plays it loose and fast. There are players who constantly forget their limited character options.
PF2e would be terrible to watch imo. They are first and foremost entertainment before a RPG, the players know it, the GM knows it and they are popular because they do it well. PF2e is suited for a different purpose.
As for the "evolution" of D&D I wager they will go the warhammer route, it will be functionally a new edition but until replacement options come out you can use old monsters and adventures will likely be technically compatible if not perfectly suited. (that is to say, I think there will be a bigger shift than 3.0 to 3.5, but not as big as 2e to 3e or 3e to 4e, or any edition to 5e)
I could be wrong, but I doubt it.
I don't think there is any point mentioning what I would like to see the system do, because I feel like they have been moving away from the design that I appreciate 5e for in every splat book they have released post release. And I don't think there is any room for it to compete with PF2e on a quality scale when it comes to high magic gonzo fantasy play.
This said, I am REALLY liking some of the 5e Symbaroum changes in the current playtest. Some of it feels so obvious I have no idea why 5e wasn't just released like that in the first place. My biggest current complaint is their insistence on using 5e spells rather than redoing the lists entirely.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
A new edition won't help if the stick with the Forgotten Realms setting.
Forgotten Realms died in 4th edition.
I'm not sure how these two statements fit together, giving that 5e almost entirely reverted the Realms to their pre-4e state.
(Also, I'm one of the rare few 4e Realms fangirls! I adore that setting, and should maybe sniff out what rules a PF2 game would need for it...)