D&D 2E Is 5e Basically Becoming Pathfinder 2e?
Tony Vargas
Legend
3e would expect the kinds of feats (5e 'big' feats correspond roughly to 3e late-blooming feat chains) and MCing (3.x-style, cleaned up) that 5e delievers. 4e, not s'much, 4e feats were numerous little customization options - once you paid your taxes - and MCing was completely different.
IMHO, 5e is simply aimed primarily at TSR era fans, the one's in the prime demographic to return to the fold, only secondarily and 3e fans (who have PF as an alternative). So, feats and 3e-style MCing are optional, so the returning fans don't have to deal with 'em.
Nothing like 3e/5e MCing, no. Sub-classes like the EK and the Bladesinger (which had its origin in a 2e kit) harken to the TSR era MCing - which was, to be brutally honest, simply so terribad, mechanically, that there could have been no hope of implementing anything remotely like it.
MechaPilot
Explorer
Agreed.
Have to disagree. 2e era multiclassing is worlds better than 3e-style multiclassing. The only thing 3e multiclassing did better than 2e multiclassing is represent picking up that first level of a second (or third) class later one. Actual multiclassed advancement was far better under 2e, and 2e didn't have the prestige classes to contribute to breaking the MC system.
Tony Vargas
Legend
'Better' in the sense of 'more powerful?'
2e MCing was just 1e MCing with higher level limits - utterly broken, IMHO (I stuck with 1e limits for my campaign).
neobolts
Explorer
5e is moving at exactly the right pace. The glut of books seen in previous editions, and particularly in PF, just isn't here. Released in 2014, 5e has the pacing down perfectly.
-Core books: They have the core 3 rulebooks, which remain the entry point to the game.
-Modules: They release modules regularly, which should be as fast as the market supports.
-New Game Content: They release new game content at a rate of exactly one book a year. 2015: SCAG, 2016: Guide to Monsters, 2017: Guide to Everything
One crunchy book a year is totally reasonable and sustainable.
-Core books: They have the core 3 rulebooks, which remain the entry point to the game.
-Modules: They release modules regularly, which should be as fast as the market supports.
-New Game Content: They release new game content at a rate of exactly one book a year. 2015: SCAG, 2016: Guide to Monsters, 2017: Guide to Everything
One crunchy book a year is totally reasonable and sustainable.
MechaPilot
Explorer
No. Better in the sense of providing actual advancement in both classes. With 3e style the closest you can get to parallel advancement is to ping-pong back and forth when it's time to choose a new level.
Tony Vargas
Legend
Except at 1st leve (3e had 0-level MCing for that), 'ping-pong' seems really close. It's not like old-school MCing was particularly more 'even' - the classes had quite different exp advancement, you could level in one class and not another, you could also stop advancing in one class and continue in the other when you hit the level limit.
I suppose you could advance only at even-numbered levels, or pick limited bits from each class at each odd levels, with the rest coming at the even level, if it really mattered to you that much.
But I agree that it's incongruous at 1st level.
Lanefan
Victoria Rules
Broken how?
Tony Vargas
Legend
In 1e MCing (and the non-/demi-humans who could do it) were balanced (to the standards of the day) by quite draconian level limits, in 2e those limits were pushed out too far.
Similar Threads
