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

[Horwath]

Though I can't speak to pming's specific and quite isolated community, I'd disagree with this assertion in a more general sense. I think the pool of players is still growing.

The pool of DMs, on the other hand...

Lanefan

I was speaking about the pool of players willing to play PHB only without any feats/multiclassing.

 

[Morrus]

I've never met players that fussy. Most are just cool with playing D&D. In fact, most payers I know are just cool to be playing anything.

 

[Wulffolk]

I find it more difficult than ever to find or gather a group. The last time it was easy was back when I was still in school, and there was a fairly good circle of friends that all played in a few different groups.

Since morphing into an adult at some point I have had terrible luck getting a good group together for long. CCGs and computer games have stolen all the people that are too lazy to exercise their own imaginations.

Damn kids! Get off my lawn!

 

[gyor]

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.

Territory, not Province, the Yukon, Northwest Territory, and Nunavut are all Territories, not Provinces.

Ontario, Quebec, Manitoba, British Columbia, Aleberta, Saskawan, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland & Labour, Prince Edward Island are Canada's provinces.

Territories don't have the same level of autonomy, power, or influence of a Province, although the Territories still have their own Premiers.

 

[Aldarc]

UA are playtest articles and are not official. I dont allow them in my games. I allow feats and multiclassing, but so far nobody has mced yet. Then again my players dont really go for the meta, but for fun for them. Im very lackluster for the most part on the upcoming book but ill let it be used if a player gets it. I dont see anything game breaking so far.

Yeah, but they have to be played in order to be playtested so that the feedback is more than whiteroom theorycrafting. I am playing a UA forge cleric now. This campaign started months ago before summer, but I got the GM's approval to playtest the forge cleric. (Admittedly after submitting the UA feedback back in winter.) The GM is fairly open to other material, but I pointed to how there were already early signs from Mearls and Crawford that it would be included in the upcoming book. I will change my cleric to the new version, which fits closer to my submitted feedback, but I first wanted to playtest the UA forge cleric as written.

 

[Shiroiken]

If this was Pathfinder 2E, the game would have been released about six months ago, not a few years. Xanthar's is the second major character option book in what, four year? Sounds like a pretty reasonable pace compared to prior editions. As for UA, it says in the document that its playtest materials, and thus not official. Even Sage Advice is only guidance, not official changes (unless marked as errata).

 

[TwoSix]

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.

To be fair, I probably would have turned down a spot in a game that said "no feats or multiclassing" back in 2014, before any of the supplemental material came out. It's a good indicator that the game runner and I aren't on the same page with what we're looking for in a game.

 

[Wiseblood]

I don't like bloat myself. That said, 5e is not bloated. WotC gave us a good skeleton to work with. I just wish my players would create classes/subclasses/feats/backgrounds that fit them instead of using just the printed material. That way if it is broken at least we have an excuse. Also since the designer is present we can hash out tweaks to get what we want.

 

[Guest 6801328]

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".

Perhaps the problem isn't that 5e is actually becoming like Pathfinder, but that enough people want it to become like Pathfinder that they are erroneously treating those columns as official.

DM's: to quote Nancy Reagan, "Just Say No".

 

[Krachek]

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).

And why no feat and mc or other official material?
You want new player, you should stay close to common core.
UA is playtest material, so it is more acceptable to refuse it.