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

[pming]

Hiya!

I know there are quite a few vocal folks on ye olde 'net that clamour for ever more "choices" in 5e. I get that. Not my cup o' brew, but to each their own. That said...

I *thought* one of the key selling points of 5e was "simplified" (yes, the CORE system is that) with a focus on individual DM and Player creativity...specifically, "to avoid the proliferation of all the minutia that plagued 3.x/4e/PF" (in a nutshell). 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 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). I see a constant increase in the noise ratio on these boards and others of "creativity" to "choice...ivity". The art is also sort of turning more and more towards the boring as hell (IMHO) "model posing for the painter" style (e.g. "Ok...now, raise the styrofoam sword a little higher...higher...great. Hmmm..stretch out a bit more. Perfect! Ok, Sal, turn on the wind machine so I can get some movement in those bright red locks while I paint this! Hey, lets use the white-sheet background too, I think. Yeah. Why not? Ok...stay still now..." ).

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)".

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).

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Ok... i think one major update after 4 years is a bit diffefent than the pathfinder schedule.

I think it is quite a good pace. As DM who is just getting to play a bit it is difficult to not play something anyone else already did... so I like to have a bit of fresh material.

 

[Ancalagon]

I was looking at the Magus just yesterday, and 5e has a loooong way to go before it's pathfinder. But... that doesn't mean your concern is invalid. I was lucky that all but one of my players were new to 5e, and they appreciated the simpler, no feats no MC approach.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I think it’s a bit premature to say they are going that route.

 

[pukunui]

I just had one new player quit because 5e wasn't enough like Pathfinder.

Personally, I make it clear to my players that they have to get my permission first before using anything from Unearthed Arcana. I'm not sure what there is to use in Sage Advice, though. That's just rules clarifications.

I haven't really had any trouble finding new players. But then I do use feats and multiclassing.

 

[Xaelvaen]

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.

 

[Mistwell]

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?

No. At least, not so far, where I am. There seems to be a high demand for 5e DMs. Of any kind of game.

Now in Whitehorse, Yukon, Canada with a total population of 23,000 (where you are from) I can imagine it might be more difficult to find players...of any kind. I live in a suburb of a suburb of Los Angeles, and my small suburb that you've likely never heard of (Van Nuys, a suburb of the San Fernando Valley, a suburb of Los Angeles) has five times the total population of your entire city, which itself is the capital and largest city of your entire province. If 0.05% of the entire population of your city plays D&D, you'd have 12 total players (rounding up) and LA would have over 5085. There is a pretty impressive difference in scale between us concerning how many players might be available for a game.

 

[Jester David]

What makes Pathfinder crazy in options is the combinations. You have a non-standard race using optional racial traits, a new class that swaps out features for archetype super focused on your speciality, a half-dozen feats carefully picked from a dozen sources, very specific magic items from a different dozen sources and top that off with an assortment of spells.
"My character? Oh, they're a serpent affinity nagaji unchained fey caller summoner."

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.

This is a fair problem, but I don't think it's fair to blame Pathfinder on this mindset. It's comparable to looking for players for a 2e game and not allowing content from a Complete Book of ____ product. Or Dragon Magazine. If people come in and really want a particular kit, or race, or optional class that's tricky to dissuade.

It's particularly fair to exclude UA which is still shaky and being playtested.

Feats are optional, but they are rather assumed. Ditto multiclassing, which is potent but not nearly as broken as in 3e. It's totally fair to exclude that content and limit the classes and races available. However...
I'd make a point of including the limitations in the advertisements. So people know in advance the type of game. Not knowing the expectations might throw people off: they hear about the game and have a character concept in mind, and the very first thing they're told is that character won't work. That's going to cause disappointment and drive them away from the game.

 

[Horwath]

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)".

I'm sorry about your recruit failure, but what did you expect.

D&D(all editions) is an evolving game. It gets bigger. It has to as majority will get bored after couple of years with same content.

and after you say; no feats, multiclassing, UA or any books after PHB, you are just saying, we play D&D but it's kind of 24,7% of the game.


It is your choice, but you need to realise that you are swimming in ever reducing pool of players.

 

[ccs]

Hiya!

I know there are quite a few vocal folks on ye olde 'net that clamour for ever more "choices" in 5e. I get that. Not my cup o' brew, but to each their own. That said...

I *thought* one of the key selling points of 5e was "simplified" (yes, the CORE system is that) with a focus on individual DM and Player creativity...specifically, "to avoid the proliferation of all the minutia that plagued 3.x/4e/PF" (in a nutshell). 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 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".

You were mistaken.
Or maybe you just failed your saving throw vs marketing cool-aid....

Seriously, you're complaining about a pattern that's as old as the game itself. D&D has ALWAYS (and always will) had new stuff being released. And unofficial/optional stuff being published for it. And people who want to use it all.

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). I see a constant increase in the noise ratio on these boards and others of "creativity" to "choice...ivity". .

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.

Yep, it's all WoTC fault that you & those prospective players are wanting to play different styles of games. That those potential players have chosen to skip your game in favor of one that includes what they're looking for....
Look, like the continual growth of content, this too is a factor of these games that's been around since the beginning. You want to play D&D? You need to work it out with all involved wich bits etc you want to use.

And probably why I won't be DM'ing a 5e campaign anytime in the next decade.

?? I thought you said you had a group of players. That as a group you'd decided to play with no feats/no UA/no etc.
You won't DM for them?

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?

No, not really.