D&D 5E Comment on the negative article by John Dodd

[Xodis]

13$ Dinner for 2 at Taco Bell
24$ Steak for 1 at Outback

Price points are important. Im also not going to judge which meal is better, because a $24 dollar steak SHOULD taste better than Taco Bell.

 

[billd91]

One sentence, whose validity is suspect (between the Box and Basic Rules there is EASILY as much expansion as you could find in the BB) does not constitute "reasonably addressed" in my opinion.

But see, you're adding to the Starter Set product in order to reach that expandability. Should we add the online stuff for Pathfinder to what we can do with the Beginner Box too?

You're worried about judging a novel by first paragraphs, but isn't your example above running the risk of comparing a review of a series books with a single one?

 

[Mistwell]

Is the ratio really what's important? A 2-liter of soda is a bit more than 2x the cost of a can from the vending machine but, since we're still talking less than $1 in difference I'm not that fussed and consider it a small change in price for a large change in value. If the absolute amount isn't a lot, why would the ratio matter that much?

Wow. This comment from you strikes me as "totally out of touch with your audience".

 

[Tony Vargas]

Lately I've been wondering what the majority of users think about the new edition. I was noticing the negative article on the Starter Set found on the home page today.
I wanted to directly comment on this news headline. I see it's possible but I don't know how. If someone knows, I'd love to hear how. Some read these articles and think that the the writer's opinion is the way most think.

Yeah, that's confirmation bias. The guy who wrote the article was clearly wanting Pathfinder to 'win' his 'impartial test,' so he made it as partial as he could, and spun the results.

(Ironically, a couple of things that popped up that his testers 'liked' about Pathfinder - the use of tokens & grid, the encapsulation of all monster abilities in their entries, rather than referencing spells or feats in other books - were things 4e did, and edition warriors, including pathfinder fans, criticized it for.)

I wonder what the majority think of 5e so far? According to Amazon's customers, most like it. Are there other sites that are unbiased where you can get a good idea of the general feeling toward 5e?

Good luck ever figuring that out. Edition warriors argued for years over which was the majority - but, the most likely truth is the vocal ones doing the warring were /both/ tiny minorities - and the situation was superficially similar. The new ed selling well on Amazon while getting the odd negative review from a 3.x partisan.

There were a lot of nasty factors that combined to make the edition war snowball, though, and not many of them are present today, so there's every reason to hope that it won't be as bad. There'll always be hold-outs from the prior edition, and the OGL has created a stronghold for 3.5 fans, specifically, that means they'll probably never go away or get any quieter, but that's the only issue left that could lead to strife this time around.

The bar for 'success' this time around is just much lower. Mearls doesn't have to worry about trying to bring in unprecedented revenue with an untried product (DDI) that hits a brick wall in development. Project Morningstar is just going to be a 'nice to have' complementary good, not a bet-the-farm bid to pull down an MMO-like revenue stream, the failure of which dooms the line. So, regardless of whether it trounces Pathfinder in the market (it /is/ still D&D, so it really should be able to), it's run won't need to be shortened to deal with sudden a withdrawal of development resources, and Mearls should be able to more or less realize whatever vision he ultimately has for the game.

 

[Boarstorm]

But see, you're adding to the Starter Set product in order to reach that expandability. Should we add the online stuff for Pathfinder to what we can do with the Beginner Box too?

You're worried about judging a novel by first paragraphs, but isn't your example above running the risk of comparing a review of a series books with a single one?

You're conflating two issues.

I'm suggesting that both products be reviewed in their entirety, as any particular slice may not be indicative of the whole and that the amount of content should be factored in.

The expandability (and its relevance to the review) was a separate issue entirely, which I've chosen to abandon because it boils down to raw opinion, and I suspect we won't reach an accord on that one.

 

[Agamon]

Personally, I find it interesting that people are analogizing the Beginner Box as the Mercedes or Cadillac of starter games.

While it's well put together and looks nice, that's not really what's happening here. It's the process that's being compared, not the actual products.

Is the ratio really what's important? A 2-liter of soda is a bit more than 2x the cost of a can from the vending machine but, since we're still talking less than $1 in difference I'm not that fussed and consider it a small change in price for a large change in value. If the absolute amount isn't a lot, why would the ratio matter that much?

Moreover, if I could spend $12 more to get a Mercedes over an Elantra - wouldn't I jump at the chance?

A bit more seriously, why would we expect it to always be the ratio? Might it not matter from buyer to buyer whether the £7 is a big deal or not?

Sure. Value can be very important. It can also be unimportant. Depends who you talk to. But the fact that it can be important means that it should be considered as important.

I don't want to condemn someone who's not a professional reviewer for putting something on his personal blog. Good on him. But putting it out there means I feel the need to point out that this isn't a good way to write a review with newbies. This is. If someone knows a similar type of post concerning the PFBB, please link. Let's see what people think about the actual products without some unnecessary comparison and some actual play with each individual product.

 

[Nebulous]

And in a later post, he does mention the price difference of £7. Is that a small amount? Depends on how you look at it. In US terms, that's a shade under $12. That might not seem a small amount but I don't know how £7 feels to a Briton.

It makes a huge difference in the final quality of the D&D game vs. the PF. If that extra $12 had been put into the final product these "newbie players" could have had a totally, totally different opinion of the starter set.

 

[ThirdWizard]

You're worried about judging a novel by first paragraphs, but isn't your example above running the risk of comparing a review of a series books with a single one?

You gotta play the game to know if you like it, right? It's like reading reviews of MMOs where the person played in the newbie zone and wants to write a review. It's nice to look at pictures and see boards and popouts and all kinds of fun stuff, but you've got to play the game. Start to finish. Otherwise, you might have an opinion but you don't have a review.

 

[GrumpyGamer]

Another way to look at this question is would I buy either of these products after a few years of playing the system to introduce new players?

While the 5e starter set has at its core 30 hours of gaming, the Pathfinder product has at its core simplified rules and not much of a module. For me I have always avoided the Pathfinder Basic set, and just started groups new to Pathfinder at the start of an adventure path.

For me a comparison between playing newbies through Souls for Smuggler's Shiv (A great sandbox module - even if the rest of the AP is kind of weak) vs the 5e Starter Set would be more meaningful as they are both going to give you about 30 hours of gaming.

 

[Joe Liker]

It makes a huge difference in the final quality of the D&D game vs. the PF. If that extra $12 had been put into the final product these "newbie players" could have had a totally, totally different opinion of the starter set.

I'm not sure the opinions of totally inexperienced newbies are all that relevant, and for that reason I think the importance of Starter Set reviews is a little overblown.

Most people who want to start D&D are going to find an experienced player to guide them. Those who don't are going to be less likely to stick with it, no matter what the starting materials look like.

In the end, 5e will be judged on the quality of its overall play experience: Does it provide a solid framework in which DMs and players can work together to create fun, memorable experiences?

So far, in my group, that answer is a resounding yes.