Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="PMárk" data-source="post: 7701416" data-attributes="member: 6804619">Same here. I might have some problems with 5e's system and design choices (like how abilities are more important than proficiency, or the scarcity of skills and how everyone could use everything), but overall, it's a good one. Not necessarily a better one than PF, but definitely a quicker-to-learn and easier to play and GMing, I'd never argue those are big selling points.However:1. Ending the novel line is a big, prime black spot on them to me.2. The beginning of 5e was very promising, as it took the whole D&D multiverse as a core setting and incorporated it into the core books (with a disclaimer, see below). Then nothing. Not even a real CG for FR. Nothing for any other settings. Yes-yes, I could use old material, converting to 5e is easy, etc., the usual answers. Still it won't change the fact that we didn't see any new material to the other settings, advancing of timeline, novels, official stats (because, I don't have the time to convert everything). Nothing, and that doesn't seem to change in the foreseeable future.D&D's big selling point is (for me at least) the multiverse, because one-by-one the campaign settings are somewhat restricted to certain themes and styles, even FR. With one setting, you could do certain things, with the multiverse, anything. I could understand why the old way of maintaining all of them on the same level isn't viable, but come on! There has to be some middle ground between everything and nothing! In the meantime, we get a new, shiny 250+ page mega-adventure every half a year, so it doesn't like they couldn't do books, they just don't want. So sorry, pointing to older material is just not a proof to me as the greatness of 5e. It's accentuating of how great times were then, from a creative and fan standpoint and how sparse and anemic is the present. They could even source out their settings, like with the 3e RL, but no. Instead we got the DM'sG with it's uncontrolled and unnoficial materials (and I don't say there isn't good things out there, there is and a plenty of capable writers, but still, the point stands).3. The disclaimer. I actually dislike what they did with Ravenloft. CoS may be a great adventure, but the whole 4e paradigm of the individual Domains of Dread and the representation of Barovia in CoS and Strahd himself are just killed one of my favorite settings. Again, they just wanted to milk the cash-cow, redoing the original module, then throwing out the window everything that came later and made it to a fan-favorite setting. I can't really understand what made them do it this way, the Hickmans, or Perkins just doesn't like the RL setting. I just really-really bugged by the results. I thought they had enough with burning bridges in 4e.So in the end, the handling of 5e (and i don't blame the D&D staff here, I think they would do more if they could) might be viable from a purely financial standpoint, but McDonald's also makes money and a lot of people eating there, sometimes including myself. That doesn't make it a great restaurant as the quality and variation of their foods goes. Also, the succes of 5e is IMO more due to how well the corebooks were written and not to the current state of things.I was highly enthusiastic for 5e. But as time went on, i realized, if I want a really supported game, If i want to read novels, If i want a supported campaign setting (PF might have only one world, but it has basically everything that D&D did with a whole multiverse and a lot more - however i still miss RL, or Speljammer, or Planescape, even with their incorporated elements and themes in Golarion), adventures with much larger variety as themes goes, or more player options, with fresh and excting classes, i just better go back to Pathfinder than waiting for something that won't happen from WotC.  As a sidenote: it's somewhat strange to me that the discussions almost always boiling down to the system differences between 5e and PF and how 5e is more friendly to beginners and easier to run, but the above case of settings rarely comes up. Might be that the main audience here is more homebrew-centric. Might be that Paizo still has it's own messageboards, unlike WotC, so people who like the setting and the game convergate there. For me, that was much more important, than any system difference, because if i absolutely want, I could run Golarion with 5e, but it's still ending in buying much more products from Paizo than from WotC, after the corebooks. So for me, 5e started with great promises, then left me hanging out to dry, while Paizo still has stories i could read, a richly detailed and ongoing, living setting, with existing and new material which is compatible with the current system and a lot of options. That is infinitely more important to me than a somewhat more complex system.</blockquote>

Verification