D&D (2024) I'm a longtime player and there really is only one thing that will stop me from switching to 5.X

[Professor Murder]

As a follow up.
I am looking at the aggressive advertising I am seeing for The MC4 with the Eldraine monsters, and I can't help but feel this is just more testing the waters. MC content has been free for subscribers up until now. $5.99 for 25 creatures. Not the worst of deals, considering that it will have D&D Beyond compatibility. But yeah, it just feels like priming the pump.

 

[wizard71]

The only way I would walk away is if the game reverted to 4E. That is the reason I quit Pathfinder 2

 

[TheSword]

Syrinscape, the rpg sound effects company has an interesting model that works for me.

It’s a subscription model where you get access to the whole library’s while you subscribe. If you cancel then you get to keep anything released during your subscription.

That always seemed like a very fair win-win system to me, that I wouldn’t mind if they adopted.

I personally like books and digital. That’s not that I like one or the other - I want both. They’re both useful in different circumstances.

 

[TheSword]

The only way I would walk away is if the game reverted to 4E. That is the reason I quit Pathfinder 2

Can you elaborate? Are you saying Pathfinder 2 regressed to the previous edition (Pathfinder 1) or are you saying Pathfinder 2 is like D&D 4e?

 

[MoonSong]

Can you elaborate? Are you saying Pathfinder 2 regressed to the previous edition (Pathfinder 1) or are you saying Pathfinder 2 is like D&D 4e?

Not @wizard71, but I can say the latter because I share that opinion.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

The only way I would walk away is if the game reverted to 4E. That is the reason I quit Pathfinder 2

PF2 is a game with almost no similarities, rules-wise, to 4E, whereas it has a ton of similarities to 5E, so this seems like a rather bizarre thing to say. What is it about PF2's design you actually disliked?

Re: what would make me stop from switching, I think a lot of things could, but two key ones:

1) Pricing - if they make it expensive enough, and it kind of looks like they're going that way, even relatively well-off people like me may stop feeling like we're getting value for money. Like £70.99 for Planescape? I'd expect something amazing for that, and what we're getting is not anything amazing. If we continue with similar price/value ratios for 5E 2024, I can't see myself buying into that, even digitally (as digital costs have gone up a ton too). I'd rather see better prices and less glossy production values - it feels like WotC - or perhaps Hasbro is more relevant here - are continuing to try and sell D&D more as collector's items than an actual game people actually play. I have no objection to collector's item editions etc. also existing, but when the main product is edging that way? Not great.

2) Fundamentally consumer-hostile approaches to future content - Not sure how to describe this perfectly but, stuff like having a lot of digital-only material, or 3D VTT-only material, having any mechanical material that's locked behind subcriptions (rather than being purchasable outside those), or worse having mechanical (or setting) material that's available only through things like loot boxes or other lotteries. There's a pretty clear and bright line here, I'd say, and companies absolutely know when they're crossing it - but greed often causes them to cross it anyway. If we're lucky, they cross it experimentally, and the blowback causes them to back off, but if we're unlucky, they simply cross the rubicon and you can't have X race in your game unless you subscribe, and your players can only access Y Fighter subclass if they open enough loot boxes. Also that epic new setting and adventure that came out, it's only for people on the $20/month tier of the 3D VTT, not peasants like you.

At that point, it's like, these TT RPGs mate, not some super-hot MMO, I can go play/run something else.

 

[payn]

PF2 is a game with almost no similarities, rules-wise, to 4E, whereas it has a ton of similarities to 5E, so this seems like a rather bizarre thing to say. What is it about PF2's design you actually disliked?

What? PF2 has an ADEU structure, hybrid multiclassing, and tactical team oriented combat. It uses a level based band process to determine CR. It plays nothing like 5E at all.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

What? PF2 has an ADEU structure, hybrid multiclassing, and tactical team oriented combat. It uses a level based band process to determine CR. It plays nothing like 5E at all.

You've got to be kidding me. PF2's combat is not significantly more "tactical" than 5E, just more complicated. It certainly doesn't resemble 4E's combat, even if you think it is "tactical".

And you're going to need to explain to me how it has an AEDU structure, because whilst I've only got to play test games of it, not a proper campaign, that seems like a straight-up lie. Can you justify that claim?

4E doesn't have hybrid multiclassing, RAW. You're confusing a late optional rule from PHB3 with 4E's actual multiclassing rules, which used power swap feats. A similar optional rule existed in 3.5E, called "Gestalt" characters.

I'm not even sure what you mean by a "level based band process" or how you think that makes PF2 4E-like.

 

[payn]

You've got to be kidding me. PF2's combat is not significantly more "tactical" than 5E, just more complicated. It certainly doesn't resemble 4E's combat, even if you think it is "tactical".

You are definitely required to apply at will, encounter powers, and dailies against foes to survive severe and extreme encounters in PF2.

And you're going to need to explain to me how it has an AEDU structure, because whilst I've only got to play test games of it, not a proper campaign, that seems like a straight-up lie. Can you justify that claim?

Focus spells, instincts, etc.. are all encounter based powers for classes in PF2. Skill feats act similar to utility powers.

4E doesn't have hybrid multiclassing, RAW. You're confusing a late optional rule from PHB3 with 4E's actual multiclassing rules, which used power swap feats. A similar optional rule existed in 3.5E, called "Gestalt" characters.

PF2 is based on the feat swap, I have heard many folks refer to it as hybrid multiclassing since 4E. I didn't realize launch 4E multiclassing was called something different. I've never heard the distinction made before now. At any rate, PF2 multiclassing is like 4E and nothing like 3E or 5E.

I'm not even sure what you mean by a "level based band process" or how you think that makes PF2 4E-like.

Because of the +level to all numbers in PF2, and the <10> critical system, the game CR is limited to your level. A hundred million goblins couldn't challenge a single level 10 PC like they could in 5E with BA. Entirely different assumptions in system math. This was intentional by the PF2 designers to specifically not play like 5E.

 

[Incenjucar]

If you don't like PF2E I would hope it's because of its own merits and not because it vaguely reminds you of a different game with different mechanics that you don't know well.