Just for fun. Let's have a battle royal of the big 3.
- Thread starter Evenglare
- Start date
The Human Target
Adventurer
Of those I'd be inclined to go 13th Age.
Tony Vargas
Legend
5e is the latest D&D and has benefit of the name. Since I participate in some organized play (Encounters), I expect I'll actually be playing it. I've already run three seasons of Encounters using the playtest rules. It has a couple of decent ideas, like Adv/Dis, but apart from that is just another cautious re-boot of a stodgy franchise.
Pathfinder is just the 3.5 SRD re-edited, re-printed, and spruced up a bit - then added to extensively. While I really enjoyed 3.0, and also 3.5, at fist, it quickly started to stagger under it's own weight, and Pathfinder, while fixing up a few minor annoyances (the consolidation of overly complex combat options into CMA & CMD, for instance), has the same problem. Not signing up for that again.
I've tried 13th Age, and it's a good game, technically speaking - Heinsoo and Tweet are top designers. But, I haven't cared for the core classes, they're either Vancian, unappealing to me personally in concept, or are too simplistic or choice-poor. So I doubt I'd play it (unless I really like a class from 13TWs when that comes out). But it also has some interesting tools for the DM, the monsters look like they work well & include mooks, fair take on the minion concept (really, the 'popcorn' concept first seen in the 90s), so I'd be up for running it if I found a group expressing interest. I don't really expect that to happen, since it lacks D&D's name-recognition & clout, though.
Still, of the 3 in the poll, 13A is the superior game.
Pathfinder is just the 3.5 SRD re-edited, re-printed, and spruced up a bit - then added to extensively. While I really enjoyed 3.0, and also 3.5, at fist, it quickly started to stagger under it's own weight, and Pathfinder, while fixing up a few minor annoyances (the consolidation of overly complex combat options into CMA & CMD, for instance), has the same problem. Not signing up for that again.
I've tried 13th Age, and it's a good game, technically speaking - Heinsoo and Tweet are top designers. But, I haven't cared for the core classes, they're either Vancian, unappealing to me personally in concept, or are too simplistic or choice-poor. So I doubt I'd play it (unless I really like a class from 13TWs when that comes out). But it also has some interesting tools for the DM, the monsters look like they work well & include mooks, fair take on the minion concept (really, the 'popcorn' concept first seen in the 90s), so I'd be up for running it if I found a group expressing interest. I don't really expect that to happen, since it lacks D&D's name-recognition & clout, though.
Still, of the 3 in the poll, 13A is the superior game.
sgtscott658
First Post
That I do agree with. Went to my local game store here in chicago (dice dojo) and was blown away by the amount of books put out for pathfinder. Went there to buy DnD 5E basic but they were sold out so settles on Zman games War of the Roses and Sushi Go.
Scott
Scott
Evenglare
Adventurer
Oh I agree 100%. The thing is I like to do these polls early and then later we can do the same poll to see exactly how things have changed. It's similar to that other poll I had which was about how people thought 5e will do. I'll do the same poll later and we can see how things have evolved. It'll be fun.
None of the three is my favorite fantasy game.
The best system for running fantasy is Fate Core for me. And among various editions of D&D and D&D-likes my favorite is 4e.
But choosing from the games listed, I think I'd go with 5e.
I like Pathfinder for it's extensive SRD and many fun ideas, but the complexity and balance problems kill it before it gets to double-digit levels. 5e is much simpler, looks better balanced and less focused on mechanical fiddly bits.
13th Age has several design concepts I love (eg. icon relationships, escalation die), but as a whole it's too system-heavy for a game without combat focus and not tactical enough to make combat fun by itself.
The best system for running fantasy is Fate Core for me. And among various editions of D&D and D&D-likes my favorite is 4e.
But choosing from the games listed, I think I'd go with 5e.
I like Pathfinder for it's extensive SRD and many fun ideas, but the complexity and balance problems kill it before it gets to double-digit levels. 5e is much simpler, looks better balanced and less focused on mechanical fiddly bits.
13th Age has several design concepts I love (eg. icon relationships, escalation die), but as a whole it's too system-heavy for a game without combat focus and not tactical enough to make combat fun by itself.
DaveMage
Slumbering in Tsar
Yeah, since 5E isn't fully out yet, picking 5E may be more a choice against the others than for 5E itself - unless the basic game is what you really like (not that there's anything wrong with that). However, if that's the case, you probably should have been playing Castles & Crusades because both games' rules complexity levels seem rather similar.
We still don't know for 5E:
1. How all the PHB classes play at all 20 levels
2. How it will be supported over the next 3-4 years and if WotC will pull the plug (or lay off/re-assign the staff)
3. If it's the kind of game you play for a while and the shiny wears off quickly (this seemed to happen to a LOT of 4e players)
We still don't know for 5E:
1. How all the PHB classes play at all 20 levels
2. How it will be supported over the next 3-4 years and if WotC will pull the plug (or lay off/re-assign the staff)
3. If it's the kind of game you play for a while and the shiny wears off quickly (this seemed to happen to a LOT of 4e players)
