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

[BookBarbarian]

a now, more-or-less, "ex-5e DM" at this point

i'm sorry to see this. While I personally have no problem playing a Featless PHB game, heck I'd even play a Basic rules game and I don't even mean all the stuff that's in the SRD literally the original 5e basic rules where the only classes are Champion, Thief, Life Cleric, and Evocation Wizard.

But in the 5e game I run I allow anything from WotC, UA, and 3rd party. as long as I review it before, and am open to tweak it as we go. I've found it works fine to just let try and play what they want, and adjust as we go.

That said, I have recently switched from 5e to Adventures in Middle Earth. Only six classes and no 5e spellcasting system was a pretty drastic change. It's been really fun as a simple "5e" game.

 

[DEFCON 1]

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.

Their design philosophy is not PHB+1. That is only the rule for their Organized Play.

Their design philosophy is to produce mechanical content at a slow and steady pace in order to ensure it is playtested effectively... so that they can be confident it is fairly well-balanced and does not cause undo issues when mixed and interspersed with other mechanical options currently available.

But you are correct that they do spread their player options over several books... some of that in part so players and DMs will all have reason to buy the books they release. But that in no way should be a detriment to any player, seeing as how it is a single mechanical book every 12 months. Because if this was the 3E / 4E era, we'd be receiving player-option books every or every-other month of which most players would be buying. So there's no reason why any of us should complain about buying one book a year if we want mechanical options that badly. If you would have been willing to buy 6 players books in a single year during 3E / 4E, but buying one such book during 5E is a hardship to you... I don't know what to tell you.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Even if WotC increased their player offerings (subclasses, races, feats, etc.) five times over, 5E would still not be Pathfinder 2.0. The core mechanical assumptions and systems are different. 5E is simpler, PF is more comprehensive and detailed. Some people will prefer one, some the other, but you would have to literally rewrite the game to turn one into the other.

I'm sorry, but the original assertion is just silly.

 

[Azurewraith]

I think where doing OK on releases atm. I think the biggest issue with your game is no feats, after you have a 20in your primary stat it's a bit meh getting another +2.

 

[tglassy]

So first, a new Sage Advice or UA a month isn't the same as a book a month. Having someone say "This is a cool concept for a class, try it out," isn't the same as having a new 200 page "Player's Guide to Rangers: Making the Most of Your Animal Companion" every month. So the comparison is rather silly.

If by "Same Path" you mean in ten years time we'll be at the point 3.5e was when they were at the one year mark, sure. They'll keep releasing new stuff, and new players that show up in ten years will likely have ten different books to draw from. But of COURSE they're going to keep releasing new stuff. They're a company. They have to make moneys. Right now, they're just going the "Less with more quality is better" approach, and it's been working. And unless you get on the bandwagon, you're going to be a lonely DM with no one to play with because you thought the original book was perfect and get pissed every time they release something new.

So yeah, same path, but walking real slowly and taking frequent breaks rather than riding down it in a rocket sled.

As for the next complaint, you're upset because...people like options? Then you need to find a new game. People are going to play the game they want. That's what the sign said. "Jump in and play the game you want." That means if you come across a DM who is hard headed and really just wants his players to play out his fan fiction that he's been writing since he was twelve, then they have the right not to play that. As a DM, the game is about the players. I like having concepts in my fantasy settings, but I work with my players to make sure they are interested in those concepts. If no one is interested, I don't go on forums and complain that people suck and nobody is interested in my totally cool, retro DMing style.




Sent from my iPad using EN World

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Basically, you're only allowing vanilla ice cream. Nothing wrong with that per se, but lots of people like things like chocolate-vanilla swirl and rocky road. You can't attract those people offering just vanilla.

It's more like offering twelve flavors - one of which is already rocky road - but not letting you combine flavors or mix in candy bars and gummy bears or anything.

There's more than enough variety to tell any number of fantasy stories, but the players have become jaded so they insist on mixing and matching.

 

[Satyrn]

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".

I highly doubt that.

 

[Xaelvaen]

Since I love reading the material so much anyway, I try to be on top of every 3rd party release and unearthed arcana as soon as it 'drops' for the purposes of checking its balance, and tweaking it in a way where it -can- be allowed at my table, so players with desire to try something out, can do so without upsetting our personal ideas of balance. Thus, the Unearthed Arcanas are pretty popular around here, but never considered official - hell, even the stuff in the books isn't considered official - until everyone gets a chance to have their opinion heard at our table.

 

[Fanaelialae]

It's more like offering twelve flavors - one of which is already rocky road - but not letting you combine flavors or mix in candy bars and gummy bears or anything.

There's more than enough variety to tell any number of fantasy stories, but the players have become jaded so they insist on mixing and matching.

Splitting hairs. I'm describing it from what is likely the pov of the players being advertised to, you're describing what the OP's pov likely is.

You say the players are jaded, I say they are excited in exploring certain concepts and mechanics that are not available in the OP's game.

Just two sides of the same coin.

 

[Satyrn]

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.

That is quite the nitpick! But I have a nitpick of my own.

It's the Northwest Territories. Plural.