D&D 2E Is 5e Basically Becoming Pathfinder 2e?

TwoSix · Oct 17, 2017

Ancalagon said:
While this is a very good point, it also means that the players can't afford to be as picky. The OP may be the only DM in town with a new game at the moment...

Sure, but we don't have any posts from players in the Yukon Territory saying the only DM they can find won't let them use feats or multiclassing.

chunkosauruswrex · Oct 17, 2017

Xaelvaen said:
Played 3.0 the day it released back in 2000, after having spent the last decade+ playing 2E. Switched to 3.5 (eventually) and even a bit of Pathfinder (eventually) and never, ever liked that level of crunch. Could never really get a group past level 7. So, this level of crunch from 5E is absolutely perfect. Nothing wrong with optional customization - if your limited approach to how you want to play isn't compatible with other people, that is certainly not a concept fault of the system. A system has flexibility, but it requires equal flexibility in its player base to be run in that regard. I personally wouldn't be able to stand 5E without multiclassing and Feats, nor would any of my ancient grognards at the table. I understand that's just us, and that everyone plays the way they want, but it can't be the fault of the system for having options that a great deal of people desire to use.

As an addendum to this maybe the reason that a lot of people seem to want to use them is that maybe they have more fun this way and can have more meaningful choices to create and flavor their character how thye like.

thethain · Oct 17, 2017

Honestly I am more bothered by the Player options be interspersed in bits and pieces across books. The player races from Volos should have been included in XGTE to make it a more solid PHB2. It is less than 10% of Volos but for many players, the only important part. To me it felt more like WotC making sure players have a reason to buy Volos instead of just DMs, ensuring more sales.

It kinda smacks against their design philosophy of "PHB+1" if the marketing philosophy of "Make sure players have a reason to buy the book" takes precedence.

But I can appreciate that spreading sources also gives the feeling of fresh and new options, without dumping a giant pile at once. If all the options of the few books had released with SCAG, then by today, they would all be old and boring.

Greg K · Oct 17, 2017

Aldarc said:
Or maybe it means that GMs should not be as demanding or picky about their games either.

Nah, I will be picky when it comes to running fantasy rpgs- especially, D&D*- and it begins with my player selection. If it ever came to not having any interested players, I would offer to run an entirely different game system upon which we can agree. If we could not agree on anything, it is no skin off my nose. There are many other ways that I can utilize my time.

*Which, for D&D, begins with no Dragonborn, Drow, or PC Tieflings and limiting official PC subclasses, primarily, to those in the SRD (and then adding several other from third parties).

Aldarc · Oct 17, 2017

Greg K said:
Nah, I will be picky when it comes to running fantasy rpgs- especially, D&D*- and it begins with my player selection. If it ever came to not having any interested players, I would offer to run an entirely different game system upon which we can agree. If we could not agree on anything, it is no skin off my nose. There are many other ways that I can utilize my time.

*Which, for D&D, begins with no Dragonborn, Drow, or PC Tieflings and limiting official PC subclasses, primarily, to those in the SRD (and then adding several other from third parties).

IME, groups rarely form so unilaterally from GM to some sort of drafting of players, but rather tends to be a group of potential people/friends wanting to roleplay with one most interested or motivated volunteering to GM.

Greg K · Oct 17, 2017

Aldarc said:
IME, groups rarely form so unilaterally from GM to some sort of drafting of players, but rather tends to be a group of potential people/friends wanting to roleplay with one most interested or motivated volunteering to GM.

I start by asking my friends that form my group which is never a problem unless work schedules conflict. However, half of them were brought by two players when two friends/players moved to different parts of the country and a third moved over an hour drive away. Each of those new players had to go through an initial screening and then a probationary period. At the same time, I have several friends that game and with whom I would never play D&D- a few with whom I would never play any rpg- due to playstyle conflicts.

sim-h · Oct 17, 2017

To answer the OP - no, no problems here. You must be spoilt for choice over in the States if players can afford to pick and choose their DM. My guys are lumbered with me, since no-one else can be bothered, and hence - no feats, dragonborn, aasimar, tieflings, genasi etc.

Matthan · Oct 17, 2017

I DM for a group that I pulled together near the beginning of 5E. We're all adults so we don't get to play as often as we'd like, but we still enjoy it. Of the group, only myself and my good friend had played any D&D before. The four other players were completely new to D&D and to tabletop rpgs altogether (they had played WoW for years though).

I have a wide open policy of allowing just about anything as long as you run it past me and I approve it. If it becomes an issue, we revisit it. Only one of the new players has taken me up on that. He got bit by the bug hard. He reads all the UA, follows reddit, and checks out forums. He's even itching to DM himself. The others are just fine with their core characters. I get the new option books as they are released and make them available. They just don't see the need.

I think there are different kinds of players and 5E is built to be very accommodating to many kinds of players. There are some players who will buy the PHB and be perfectly content playing with it for the life of the game. They'll never look at feats or even consider multiclassing. They're playing a Paladin (or wizard or whatever), and that's their character. There are others who engage with the game on a different level. They are reading the books and constantly dreaming up new characters or possibilities. They're the ones who want the options available (even though they may not use them).

In your case, I think when you advertise for players that you are most likely to get responses from the crowd that is very deeply engaged with the game. Now that probably depends on where you're advertising. I'm assuming that you were advertising at a local game store. Most of my players will never go to a local game store. They have the book they need and don't feel like they need anything else. It's the ones who are engaged and want to look at new material that go to the game store.

I don't think 5E has the level of complexity of PF. I don't think we'll ever see official 5E have the level of complexity that PF has. That doesn't mean that players and DMs won't have differing preferences for the game. I know I would be fine with the restrictions that you lay out if I was able to play as long as the game was fun. When it was my turn to DM for the group, I'd probably open up the options a bit more and then be fine going back to your rules when my turn ended. I think you just need to find the right players for your table, and the right players for your table may not be where you expect them.

Lord_Blacksteel · Oct 17, 2017

pming said:
Hiya! I also remember some promise about not having a "book of the month" club that 3.x/4/PF had/have. Technically, that's probably true...but to me they were being a bit shady to me.

We don't have a book every month. Were you here for 3E? For 4E in particular where it literally was a new hardcover book every month for quite a while? Try explaining up with that adjustment to the gaming budget. Do you play Pathfinder where it's literally 2+ books per month, though smaller ones than the 4E hardcover rush?

So no. Fifth is not even in the same universe as those editions/games.

pming said:
We may not get a new book every month...but we get new "Sage Advice" and "Unearthed Arcana" every month; and that stuff seems to be regarded by the masses as more or less "official".

With every "Somebody's Guide to..." or Sage Advice column, it seems we are heading down the exact same path that 3e took (and PF...we avoided 4e like the plague, so no comment on that system).

OK, you may not like those things, but they have always been a part of D&D. In the 0E/1E/2E days we had Dragon magazine every month and it contained this same kind of stuff - rules interpretations, essays on how certain subsystems could be interpreted or improved, new classes (barbarian! cavalier! thief-acrobat!), new magic items, new spells, new monsters - it was all there, even if it was on paper and not electronic. I wouldn't think that disallowing them would be a deal breaker, but maybe instead of a flat-out "no" you might consider "not until we've looked them over as a group and come to an agreement about them".

pming said:
Why is this a problem? From where we sit (me and my group), it's made recruiting people for 5e virtually IMPOSSIBLE. An advert for "two or three 5e players for a weekly, Sunday game, 3pm to 7pm, give or take a half hour"...may get calls and emails, but the moment I say "Er, no, we don't use Feats, or Multiclassing, or stuff from SA or UA unless we all agree before hand and I don't see a problem with it, campaign wise"...POOF! No more interest. At all.

So much for "Now anyone can jump into a 5e game and play the way they want!"....should be "Now anyone can jump into a 5e* game and play the way they want! (*Feats, Multiclassing, SA, UA and all other WotC produced content is assumed)".

Alright I think this is a combination of several things.

- Some players think multiclassing is essential to the character concepts they like. I don't feel that way bit for some players it is a dealbreaker. It's also an element of the game that's been around since at least AD&D - why are you against it?

- Some players see feats as a critical part of the game for trying different concepts or approaches. I get this more as when I'm a player, particularly if it's a class with a lot of opportunities to take them, stat boosts can start to look a little boring after a while. Feats help give a character a little more mechanical flavor.

- Sage Advice is generally rules clarifications. I'm not sure why you would be looking to lock those out as a general policy. Assuming you have some reasons it might be helpful to explain them.

- Unearthed Arcana - I get this. I go back and forth myself but I tend to allow it if a player is really fired up about something.

pming said:
This was what I was afraid of. And probably why I won't be DM'ing a 5e campaign anytime in the next decade.

Is anyone else out there in the same boat that we are? If you don't use the "so-called OPTIONAL" stuff mentioned, your chance of finding a game or players is virtually zilch?

^_^

Paul L. Ming (a now, more-or-less, "ex-5e DM" at this point).

I think it might help if you shared some of your reasoning on these decisions. For example - Feats: are you trying to protect against powergaming here? They're really not that mechanically complicated so I'm not sure what the issue is. Same with multiclassing - why don't you want players to do it? Some of the other stuff I get but MC and feats are right there in the PHB so it's not even really a "needing another book" type of issue that some people are bothered by. If you can explain it with some sound reasoning then it might be easier to sell them on why they want to join the rest of your game.

Aside from that, yes, some players see any kind of restriction as limiting their fun. It may not make much sense but I've seen it quite a bit over the years. They don't understand why they shouldn't be able to mix and match elements from 14 different sourcebooks and if you don't allow it nothing you can say is going to help them get past it. They'll join or they won't and even if they do it may or may not work out over time because of the constant sore spot thinking about what they can't do rather than enjoying what they have.

Regardless, good luck in your efforts. Finding and keeping a stable dependable group of players is one of the great challenges in RPG-ing. I've had a stable group for a long time but even there bringing in new people is always a delicate operation, regardless of system.