Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Is 5e Basically Becoming Pathfinder 2e?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dualazi" data-source="post: 7253041" data-attributes="member: 6855537"><p>There is a massive, titanic gulf in the difference between even early 3.5/P.F. and what we have now, both in terms of player options and rules minutia themselves. Seriously, I think you can rattle off the effects of every condition in 5e in less space than the grapple description of those systems. Sage advice is usually just rules clarifications, I can't honestly think of new material they've released there, and UA stuff is explicitly test material. Frankly, I'd consider you to be definitely in a very small minority, since the general opinion across the hobby seems to be a desire for faster material release.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>First off, guides will be here until the end of time, save on the most open-ended and free-form RPG systems. It's a side effect of our increased access and larger community reach as a result of the internet, but even if they released 2e again completely unchanged you'd still have people putting out guides recommending certain builds, spells, or similar options. As for the homebrew thing, you can thank wizards and the DM's guild for the downturn in that material showing its face, I suspect. </p><p></p><p>Art is largely subjective but I'm just not feeling you here. Some of the older editions of D&D had some amazing artwork (when I was little I saw the red dragon on one of the old starter boxes and was entranced), but there's a pretty huge amount of it that was very low quality for a variety of reasons. Especially when you have a limited amount of space to work with, like on a class description page, you're not going to get a full-page full-color spread of a group delving into a foreboding dungeon, it's simply not practical.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You've already answered your own question, the players are definitely there (and I can attest that both of my current groups have had to turn away members), they're just not willing to dumb down an already simple game. Well, perhaps that's unfair, you could just as easily characterize it as not wanting to play in a significantly house-ruled version of the game that prevents them from playing how they would enjoy playing. Some people run human only games because that's the setting they enjoy, and it might be well made and well run, but that's not what I'm looking for in D&D so I would naturally pass such a campaign without a second thought.</p><p></p><p>There's also the counterpoint that in the days of yore, getting a game at all was reasonably tough, and so players were more willing to compromise simply to play at all. With the colossal resurgence/mainstream popularity, you no longer command that kind of supply/demand advantage. Simply put, people know that if they don't want to compromise they don't have to, there are other games readily available.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't think that claim was ever made by WOTC or even early adopters or advocates of the system. What was said is that you could run a campaign without those things and the game wouldn't fall apart, as it sort of did in earlier editions due to assumed power disparities. It would be impossible and illogical for Wizards to say that they were designing a system where all of their fans would be happy with each and every table. If you do find a group of people who want to play the way you do, then the game won't come apart at the seams. That's all that was promised and for they most part they delivered.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'd try trawling various gaming forums and VTT services and try and find a group, perhaps lead with what your campaign does different/better than simply a list of all the restrictions. Ultimately though I would say that yours is definitely a tough sell, especially because even with the inclusion of those options the game isn't nearly as imbalanced as many other competitors/prior incarnations, which (from my point of view) makes your position hard to justify. Potential players may be feeling that you're being needlessly controlling or punitive, in regards to the one thing players usually have control over.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dualazi, post: 7253041, member: 6855537"] There is a massive, titanic gulf in the difference between even early 3.5/P.F. and what we have now, both in terms of player options and rules minutia themselves. Seriously, I think you can rattle off the effects of every condition in 5e in less space than the grapple description of those systems. Sage advice is usually just rules clarifications, I can't honestly think of new material they've released there, and UA stuff is explicitly test material. Frankly, I'd consider you to be definitely in a very small minority, since the general opinion across the hobby seems to be a desire for faster material release. First off, guides will be here until the end of time, save on the most open-ended and free-form RPG systems. It's a side effect of our increased access and larger community reach as a result of the internet, but even if they released 2e again completely unchanged you'd still have people putting out guides recommending certain builds, spells, or similar options. As for the homebrew thing, you can thank wizards and the DM's guild for the downturn in that material showing its face, I suspect. Art is largely subjective but I'm just not feeling you here. Some of the older editions of D&D had some amazing artwork (when I was little I saw the red dragon on one of the old starter boxes and was entranced), but there's a pretty huge amount of it that was very low quality for a variety of reasons. Especially when you have a limited amount of space to work with, like on a class description page, you're not going to get a full-page full-color spread of a group delving into a foreboding dungeon, it's simply not practical. You've already answered your own question, the players are definitely there (and I can attest that both of my current groups have had to turn away members), they're just not willing to dumb down an already simple game. Well, perhaps that's unfair, you could just as easily characterize it as not wanting to play in a significantly house-ruled version of the game that prevents them from playing how they would enjoy playing. Some people run human only games because that's the setting they enjoy, and it might be well made and well run, but that's not what I'm looking for in D&D so I would naturally pass such a campaign without a second thought. There's also the counterpoint that in the days of yore, getting a game at all was reasonably tough, and so players were more willing to compromise simply to play at all. With the colossal resurgence/mainstream popularity, you no longer command that kind of supply/demand advantage. Simply put, people know that if they don't want to compromise they don't have to, there are other games readily available. I don't think that claim was ever made by WOTC or even early adopters or advocates of the system. What was said is that you could run a campaign without those things and the game wouldn't fall apart, as it sort of did in earlier editions due to assumed power disparities. It would be impossible and illogical for Wizards to say that they were designing a system where all of their fans would be happy with each and every table. If you do find a group of people who want to play the way you do, then the game won't come apart at the seams. That's all that was promised and for they most part they delivered. I'd try trawling various gaming forums and VTT services and try and find a group, perhaps lead with what your campaign does different/better than simply a list of all the restrictions. Ultimately though I would say that yours is definitely a tough sell, especially because even with the inclusion of those options the game isn't nearly as imbalanced as many other competitors/prior incarnations, which (from my point of view) makes your position hard to justify. Potential players may be feeling that you're being needlessly controlling or punitive, in regards to the one thing players usually have control over. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Is 5e Basically Becoming Pathfinder 2e?
Top