Why didn't we switch to 4e/5e?

[Knaight]

That's explicitly now how the CR system works. A CR = APL encounter is suppose to deplete 25% of the daily resources of a 4 person party.

4 level 10 fighters vs. 1 level 10 fighter is a CR = APL encounter.

Unless the tactic used by the 4 level 10 fighters is to engage in a series of duels the expected resource loss to 1 level 10 fighter is a lot less than 25%.

[Eldariel]

That's explicitly now how the CR system works. A CR = APL encounter is suppose to deplete 25% of the daily resources of a 4 person party.

4 level 10 fighters vs. 1 level 10 fighter is a CR = APL encounter.

For expected risk of death you have to go to higher CRs.

By direct extrapolation of which under the "2 of X is CR 2 higher" we get 4 level 10 Fighters as a CR+4 fight for 4 level 10 Fighters, which is obviously even odds.

[Chaosticket]

I suspect that one of the main development goals was an attempt to downplay the importance of the character creation minigame-- both to reduce imbalance, which has been a persistent complaint, and to make the game more approachable to new players. The binary choice is quick, easy, gets you back to the game faster, and... honestly, it roughly parallels a lot of what I've seen in 3.x: most characters pick a few skills and keep them roughly max'd out, with the exception of dropping dribs and drabs here on things like prerequisites. BassoonHero's point about "individually inconsequential decisions" is well-taken too, methinks; there's something inherently unfriendly about a game that repeatedly asks you to make character-creation choices that are both irreversible and which only matter when pooled across months of play.

(And to say that "Int does nothing" is something of a misnomer, I think. Like most of the other ability scores, it's not involved in anything other than its associated skills. Being able to dump just about any ability score without significant penalty is a nice feature of 5e)

I dont think 5th went far enough if its goals were to "fix" 3.5s problems.

For character creation its more like mass producing characters off an assembly like rather than custom designing your own. I can make every class now with just Dexterity, Constitution, and one other statistic of choice because Proficiencies have replaced BAB, skill points, and Defense saves. Humans still have the most practical benefits.

They didnt remove the need to pass checks. It actually feels worse now, it's still basically impossible to break certain stereotypical roles.

For just skills best I can think of is every character taking levels as Rogue or Bard for Expertise in for double proficiency.

[Theomniadept]

Objectively speaking 5th Edition takes everything bad about 3.5 and cranks it up way past 11. This is because the idea pool at Wizards is still poisoned from the same time when they made 3.5 where they playtested the game and thought fighter was too powerful but wizard was too weak. If for whatever reason you actually believe this then read up on the 3.5 class tier list. If that doesn't change your mind, objective denial of reality is just something you suffer from and will continue to suffer from.

For starters: Anyone who has ever, EVER been in a game where the DM has a stick up his rectum about giving the players loot of any kind at all knows firsthand that the Magic Supremacy of 3.5 turns into Magic Is Mandatory. Anyone who has been in such a game (I've been in more than 5 long-running games exactly like this and they all did the same idiotic mistake) knows for a fact that leveling up becomes absolutely worthless. About once a month out-of-game you get a feat that doesn't matter. The DM might level you up but he will screw up and trip over his own feet because he will throw enemies at you out of the books (which were for the most part written with the idea of wealth-by-level in mind and anyone with any experience in the system will tell you WBL is on the low side of what it should be) and one of these monsters will go from almost killing one guy in one round to hitting you with a styrofoam paddle the next because the DM forgot to allow the players to do anything. Players will swing the same damn sword over and over and over and over. Flying creatures are borderline illegal and anything that flies is not allowed to cast Wind Wall or they become completely invincible.

Oh, but if there is a spellcaster in this game you will see firsthand how he gets something new every single level and becomes the only character capable of doing anything. You as a Barbarian or Rogue? Yeah good luck trying to do anything when you're operating at the same potential you were at 1st level but with more hitpoints preventing you from dying and having the mercy of swapping to a spellcaster. The game will see all martial characters abandon their characters, regardless of their attachment to the story, because at the end of the day the player is going to realize if they don't change characters to a spellcaster they're effectively spending hours at a friend's house to browse on their phone.

Why do I bring all this up? Because 5th Edition literally tells the DMs to not give out magic items. It tells DMs that a basic part of every single Fantasy RPG ever has been completely excised. It urges DMs to only give out items sparingly, if at all. Oh gee, so instead of measuring items in prices and allowing players the ability to customize their character through equipment, they just cut out an entire feature. The player who gets a magic item, if any, will be the player who kisses the DM's puckered butthole the most. And don't act like that isn't the case, if there isn't a mathematical measurement to player wealth then it becomes 100% subjective. And as I explained before, Wizard and Cleric will be getting more stuff to do every level. Fighter? Have fun checking Facebook because if you get a magic sword it's gonna be some generic +1 crap and you're still going to play the same "I move up to the enemy and attack" crap forever. No Wings of Flying, no Anklet of Translocation, they don't even want the characters buying a Bag of Holding because that might break the game in the minds of the lunatics who wrote it.

Oh wait, buy? I forgot, I can't use that word. Buying magic items is almost completely forbidden. Hence why they only classify magic items into 5 'rarity' categories with fluid prices listed. Because all magic items are apparently equal now even if they're useless.

And let's not forget the fact that the writers of 5th edition do not speak English. I remain unconvinced they can hold a conversation in English. They use the word Proficiency everywhere. Even in places where it does not make sense. Every class is 'proficient' in two ability scores??? When in the hell has anyone ever gone to the gym and said "Bro you look quite proficient in your Strength." Nobody talks like that. They eschewed the Fortitude-Reflex-Will saves to say "Any score can be a save". How in the hell do you use Strength as a save? Charisma? No, seriously, they simply state that all 6 scores are fair game for saves but fail to ever explain a scenario in which Strength, Intelligence, or Charisma are used as a 'save'.

And on top of all that, basic parts of classes have been removed. Rangers are not allowed to make extra attacks. Remember how everyone in 3.5 got extra attacks based on their Base Attack Bonus, representing martial training and how your character's type of training influenced that? Yeah, now Extra Attacks is some idiotic class feature. So Rangers lost everything in this edition. Rogues too, since buying items is outlawed.

The biggest reason you an tell Wizards had no clue what they are doing is simple: There is a large section devoted to explaining what Traits are. What, those mechanical tradeoffs from 3.5? No, no, no. I mean regular character traits possessed by human being. There is, unironically, a list of traits of how characters might act. This book is written as if its intended audience is people who have never interacted with other people in their lives and who have never seen people on television or video games. It's Baby's First RPG. If you played 3.5 you have no reason or desire to play 5th, if you played 5th but not 3.5 you have no reason to stick with 5th.

I didn't like 4th Edition because of how limiting it was. I thought that was the epitome of streamlining, with every class having like 6 options for your leveling path and from level 1 having your role and what you can do signed, dated, and notarized in blood, with no room for customization. And that streamlining was also extremely evident in the fact that the 'alignment' system was changed to a line, where Lawful is a supreme form of Good and Chaotic is a supreme form of Evil, and you were basically measured as a character with all the in-depth analysis of the KOTOR light side/dark side scale. I especially hated how everything ever was a Power, there wasn't even such a basic thing as "I draw my knife and stab at him", you had to declare a power (which means your class is your character, rather than your character having a class or set of classes to accomplish a goal). 4th Edition's biggest problem was limiting what you were allowed to do. 5th Edition decides that you're just not allowed to do anything.

3.5 was like an all-you-can-eat buffet with your character. You could do whatever you wanted with only the limitation of your stomach capacity. You could just eat two or three things but if you were clever about if you could make a phenomenal dining experience. 4th Edition was like going to a small restaurant that had like 4 menu items of burger, hotdog, chicken sandwich, or pizza, with 6 options for a side. Sure you might get some enjoyment out of it, but the amount you can do is very limited and it will grow old quickly. 5th Edition is like a sewage treatment plant.

[Bohandas]

1.) I'm not shelling out any more money than I already have, especially when none of the games I;ve been in has lasted more than a few sessions

2.) The alignment system in 4e was extremely half-assed

3.) 4e in general was extremely half assed and shallow

[Troacctid]

Why do I bring all this up? Because 5th Edition literally tells the DMs to not give out magic items. It tells DMs that a basic part of every single Fantasy RPG ever has been completely excised. It urges DMs to only give out items sparingly, if at all.

They eschewed the Fortitude-Reflex-Will saves to say "Any score can be a save". How in the hell do you use Strength as a save? Charisma? No, seriously, they simply state that all 6 scores are fair game for saves but fail to ever explain a scenario in which Strength, Intelligence, or Charisma are used as a 'save'.

Rangers are not allowed to make extra attacks. Remember how everyone in 3.5 got extra attacks based on their Base Attack Bonus, representing martial training and how your character's type of training influenced that? Yeah, now Extra Attacks is some idiotic class feature. So Rangers lost everything in this edition.

[Scots Dragon]

To be fair, the revised ranger did lose bonus attacks, though most of the archetypes explicitly add it back in except for those that add a sufficient feature that justifies dropping it. It was still a massive improvement over the standard D&D 5E ranger, mind.

Of course if you're going to complain about losing anything from the ranger, I'd say the heavy armour, ability to use any scrying-based device, arcane spells, and ability to gain something like a dozen followers simply for hitting name level are just as pressing as extra attacks.

[Calthropstu]

I dont think 5th went far enough if its goals were to "fix" 3.5s problems.

For character creation its more like mass producing characters off an assembly like rather than custom designing your own. I can make every class now with just Dexterity, Constitution, and one other statistic of choice because Proficiencies have replaced BAB, skill points, and Defense saves. Humans still have the most practical benefits.

They didnt remove the need to pass checks. It actually feels worse now, it's still basically impossible to break certain stereotypical roles.

For just skills best I can think of is every character taking levels as Rogue or Bard for Expertise in for double proficiency.

Pathfinder went far in fixing most glaring issues 3.5 had. The few issues that pf has can easily be houseruled away or overlooked.
All in all, I see literally no reason to switch. It's popular enough that finding tables is easy, it has a vast wealth of content, it is maleable enough to fit any interest both great and small, vast breadth of powers and abilities for mundane and casters alike, and no two characters will ever be exactly the same.
Can't bloody well say that for 4e, and 5e well... I'm not giving wotc another dime. After the disaster with 4e, their underhanded tricky (and admittedly clever) little mtg price increase, and what was done to RA Salvatore, I have no respect for them as a company.

[gooddragon1]

4e sacrificed too much for balance. 5e sacrificed less, but I'd rather have options. Never bothered with pf, but it's probably okay.

[Calthropstu]

4e sacrificed too much for balance. 5e sacrificed less, but I'd rather have options. Never bothered with pf, but it's probably okay.

Pf made a large number of much needed changes. It made fixes to the grapple/ combat manuever system, removed a lot of immunities (particularly sneak attack), and made a lot of changes to spells to remove pure brokenness (particularly wish, shapechange, polymorph and numerous other highly abused spells).
They also have highly active 3rd party support and have easily surpassed 3.5e in pure content.
Xp costs are gone as well, and the power ceiling doesn't ever reach pun-pun level stupidity.

[lbuttitta]

For the people here who largely play 3e/3.5e/PF, why didn't you switch over to 4e/5e when they came out?

My reason was the OGL. The wealth of content is my favorite thing about this game.

I actually originally started in 5E, and switched to 3.5E to try it out and, as atemu apparently was, got hooked on the sheer number of choices and customization the game permits, far more than any other RPG I've ever seen.

Edit: As to Pathfinder, our table does allow Pathfinder content, but I've never really played it, so I can't judge.

[Eldariel]

Pf made a large number of much needed changes. It made fixes to the grapple/ combat manuever system, removed a lot of immunities (particularly sneak attack), and made a lot of changes to spells to remove pure brokenness (particularly wish, shapechange, polymorph and numerous other highly abused spells).

Xp costs are gone as well, and the power ceiling doesn't ever reach pun-pun level stupidity.

Eh, saying those things are fixes is a bit of an exaggeration. It didn't really fix the combat maneuver system, just streamlined it. It actually made the issues related to using them untrained (and thus making combat more varied) worse by introducing extra feats needed for each maneuver to be reasonable, and pumping the defense numbers while keeping the AoOs. As it stands, it's basically a suicide to use them without a feat outside exceptional circumstances, much more so than it is in 3.5. It also failed to make Feinting a default part of combat, which it definitely should be if we wanted any precision to melee combat.

Yeah, it "fixed" sneak attack but it left the numbers down in the drain, some things are still immune, now there's no way to bypass the immunities in PF, PF Rogues have basically no way to fight Blindsight, All-around Vision & al. and Sneak Attacking lost Craven's worth of damage making it far less desirable.

It removed immunities from things that should have those as well. In PF, with the absence of actual mind affecting immunity from Mind Blank and true shapeshifting for immunities, it's very, very difficult to actually be immune to mind affecting (Magic Jar chain still works but that's a bit high the cheese ladder for many players). Thus e.g. Irresistible Dance is more or less "oops, I win" if combined with any adjacent ally/summon/etc. to Coup de Grace. You literally just cast the spell and your enemy dies, no save or such.

It failed to fix the truly superabusable spells in Planar Bindings, Gate, etc. even though those were actually broken and fixing them is quite simple. Same with Simulacrum & all minionmancy (it actually buffed Animate Dead & al. because they were sooooo weak!). It also buffed Summoning skyhigh so non-casters are even more redundant than before - well, Summon Monster. For some reason it made Summon Nature's Ally much weaker and Summon Monster much stronger to the point that Wizards are now top tier healers because Summon Monster is so ridiculous. Meanwhile Summon Nature's Ally lost all utility and the biggest beaters (except for Zuishin, which is really hard to get but absolutely bonkers if you have access to it). It also fixed some stuff that didn't require fixing (Ray of Enfeeblement is now pretty much not worth casting, you generally just Pyrotechnics instead of Glitterdust, etc.).

Power ceiling is indeed lower but whether that's a good thing or not is entirely up to the DM. Some DMs enjoy superhigh optimization and it's not like anyone is bringing Punpun to a normal table. The system still isn't at the point where all classes actually contribute so you still need to build equally powered characters cooperatively and have everyone involved and on the same page to make it work, just the same as in 3.5.

And the skill system changes do a lot of good things but it also incidentally makes Rogue (and skill monkeys in general) completely useless, removes customization, makes skill prerequisites for PRCs impossible to implement, makes class skills matter too little beyond one level dips, etc. It also doesn't fix many of the more glaring issues (Int being the way to get skill points for physical skills thus meaning e.g. animals have none, social encounters coming down to a single d20 essentially with little player agency in terms of how to approach the situation, Diplomacy, etc.).

Oh yeah, and standard attacks are still useless and little and less has been done to address this. This should've been removed entirely in the system transition; at best something like -2 to attacks after movement instead of just losing all but 1 attack.

XP costs were actually flavourful, interesting and made sense in the system. Losing those just made the system lose a dimension of risk/reward entirely. Now it's all about gold instead of gold/xp.


In other words, it's not an improvement but a sidegrade. Both have their good and their bad points but sadly the opportunity to fix the system with the decades of accumulated knowledge and start off a clean table was missed.

[TerrickTerran]

More than any reason, I have lots invested in PF (and 3.5) and I don't think I could commit to investing a lot in another system. (Plus never cared for 4th.....would play 5th but haven't yet)

[Grod_The_Giant]

Objectively speaking 5th Edition takes everything bad about 3.5 and cranks it up way past 11.

Many of your criticisms here are objectively wrong.

About once a month out-of-game you get a feat that doesn't matter.

The feats are comparable to multiple 3.x feats, and can have major impacts on how your character plays. Some of them enable martial characters to surpass even the expected amounts of damage.

The DM might level you up but he will screw up and trip over his own feet because he will throw enemies at you out of the books (which were for the most part written with the idea of wealth-by-level in mind and anyone with any experience in the system will tell you WBL is on the low side of what it should be) and one of these monsters will go from almost killing one guy in one round to hitting you with a styrofoam paddle the next because the DM forgot to allow the players to do anything. Players will swing the same damn sword over and over and over and over. Flying creatures are borderline illegal and anything that flies is not allowed to cast Wind Wall or they become completely invincible.

Martial characters deal substantially more damage than spellcasters. You're also quite proficient if you need to switch to a ranged weapon, since Dex can be used for both and even Str-based characters have a fairly effective range with thrown weapons. Also, there are two flying races.

Oh, but if there is a spellcaster in this game you will see firsthand how he gets something new every single level and becomes the only character capable of doing anything. You as a Barbarian or Rogue? Yeah good luck trying to do anything when you're operating at the same potential you were at 1st level but with more hitpoints preventing you from dying and having the mercy of swapping to a spellcaster. The game will see all martial characters abandon their characters, regardless of their attachment to the story, because at the end of the day the player is going to realize if they don't change characters to a spellcaster they're effectively spending hours at a friend's house to browse on their phone.

Not even the littlest bit my experience. Skill checks not improving much is a valid criticism, but Rogues are one of the few classes that does alright with boosting them, and something like a Totem Barbarian certainly gains solid new abilities as they level. And... there are a lot of people out there who just want to hit things with an axe. It's not like 3.x martials changed significantly from level 1 to 20 either; the only difference is that in 5e you don't have to sweat and strain to keep contributing to fights.

Why do I bring all this up? Because 5th Edition literally tells the DMs to not give out magic items.

As Troacctid posted, the treasure tables bombard you with magic items. There are extended rules for buying and selling magic items, there are (sparse) crafting rules, the rules for starting at higher levels assume you'll have some magic items even on the low side, and the official modules toss out plenty of magic items. Adventurer's League also has rules about getting magic items pretty regularly, I believe. So... yeah. Utter lie.

And let's not forget the fact that the writers of 5th edition do not speak English. I remain unconvinced they can hold a conversation in English. They use the word Proficiency everywhere. Even in places where it does not make sense. Every class is 'proficient' in two ability scores??? When in the hell has anyone ever gone to the gym and said "Bro you look quite proficient in your Strength." Nobody talks like that. They eschewed the Fortitude-Reflex-Will saves to say "Any score can be a save". How in the hell do you use Strength as a save? Charisma? No, seriously, they simply state that all 6 scores are fair game for saves but fail to ever explain a scenario in which Strength, Intelligence, or Charisma are used as a 'save'.

Um. Are you sure they're the ones having trouble with English? Because you become proficient with Strength (or whatever) saves, not the ability scores themselves, unless you're using one of the variant rules. And there are Str/Int/Cha saves all over the place. Strength is a fairly common saves, used to shrug off things that restrain you or knock you around; Int and Cha are minor and used against illusions and charms, respectively. Player characters can force enemies to make such saves all the time.

And on top of all that, basic parts of classes have been removed. Rangers are not allowed to make extra attacks. Remember how everyone in 3.5 got extra attacks based on their Base Attack Bonus, representing martial training and how your character's type of training influenced that? Yeah, now Extra Attacks is some idiotic class feature. So Rangers lost everything in this edition. Rogues too, since buying items is outlawed.

Bzzz! Rangers get Extra Attack at 5th, just like every other major martial class. Unless you're looking at Revised Ranger, in which case every subclass except Beast Conclave get Extra Attack at 5th, and Beast basically gets Extra Attack for their pet instead. And Rogues do great; they have practically no restrictions on Sneak Attack anymore, they have good skills, and many subclasses get dedicated noncombat abilities. And, you know, you're dead-wrong about magic items, so.

The biggest reason you an tell Wizards had no clue what they are doing is simple: There is a large section devoted to explaining what Traits are. What, those mechanical tradeoffs from 3.5? No, no, no. I mean regular character traits possessed by human being. There is, unironically, a list of traits of how characters might act. This book is written as if its intended audience is people who have never interacted with other people in their lives and who have never seen people on television or video games. It's Baby's First RPG. If you played 3.5 you have no reason or desire to play 5th, if you played 5th but not 3.5 you have no reason to stick with 5th.

My goodness, they realized that for a lot of people, whatever edition of D&D is current is the first RPG they'll play! And probably the only one! And so they included some actual advice and guidance for roleplaying? My god, the horror!

I'm sorry you've had bad experiences with 5e, but your experiences are in no way typical or RAW. And are in no way "objective."

[Chaosticket]

1 multiclassing. 3.5 has multiclassing as a way to make unique characters, a big draw for people tired of the starting classes and designated roles. Pathfinder also allows it, but changes between the systems, mainly dropping of many prestige classes, it's usually better to use class Archetypes. 5th edition allows multiclassing, but has new rules and conditions to avoid combinations that synergize.

2 items. In most games finding, using, and upgrading equipment is a goal. Often it's as important as much as character ability and player decision. A +10 equipment level system means you have less time between progressing compared to a +3 system that isnt even guaranteed to be implemented meaning you may indefinitely have the same equipment with no progression.

Attunement makes it worse as all the planning and management of magic items using slots on your characters body has been reduced to 3. Do the items give off harmful radiation now and that is the safe limit?

3 magic. Love it or hate it from other games and editions. Theres nothing quite like a player radically changing things from what the GM plans to avoid railroading.

4=5th edition changed things but didnt remove them as goals or alter the system so you don't need them. You still need high scores, big bonuses to dice rolls, but also the GM can use "rubberband" rules so no matter how much work you put in youre always in danger. So its official to use "rock falls you die" as a Gm tactic and makes the whole purpose of working hard on a character pointless.

As a veteran theres so little reason try 5th edition unless you hated the things nerfed and loved the things buffed.

I like 3.5 more than 2nd edition aside from a handful of spell nerfs. I like Pathfinder more than 3.5 unless I want to use 3.5 unique things like interesting multiclasses. 5th edition is a training Rpg and I don't want to keep starting over as a Fighter killing Goblins.

[AshfireMage]

Because 3.5 was what my first DM had several hundred dollars worth of books for. When I left that table, my new group also played 3.5. And by the time that game ended, I also had more than a hundred dollars worth of books. So there wasn't much incentive to switch.

I've played in a 5e oneshot or two before and had fun with it, but I didn't like it enough more to want to spend all the money to switch. I was also in a PF game for a bit and that was again, fun, but not enough incentive to switch.

[Rhedyn]

There are better lighter rules games out there than 5e. 5e's lack of a skill system is a huge systemic problem that only gets more glaring the more you play.

PF is still a solid game.

We tried 5e many times. It was less 3e keeping us content than 5e failing to deliver a good time.

[atemu1234]

I actually originally started in 5E, and switched to 3.5E to try it out and, as atemu apparently was, got hooked on the sheer number of choices and customization the game permits, far more than any other RPG I've ever seen.

Edit: As to Pathfinder, our table does allow Pathfinder content, but I've never really played it, so I can't judge.

Honestly I'm still finding things made for d20, years after the fact, that I'd never even encountered. Hell, I just found out about Midnight d20 yesterday, and I'm not even sure when it came out.

[Florian]

Honestly I'm still finding things made for d20, years after the fact, that I'd never even encountered. Hell, I just found out about Midnight d20 yesterday, and I'm not even sure when it came out.

*Shrugs*

Friends of mine set up what was the most important local (german) D&D site for a while and I was in charge to contact (and contract) publishers for review exemplars and getting people to write those in time for publishing (did maybe 40 myself, quite a lot of 3PP like Sword&Sorcery, Necromancer Game and Malhavoc stuff). Honestly? It stops being impressive after a while and actually starts to be depressive when you get into contract work for translation or proof reading.

[molten_dragon]

For the people here who largely play 3e/3.5e/PF, why didn't you switch over to 4e/5e when they came out?

I tried 4e and didn't like it. By the time 5th edition came out I was already pretty invested in PF and saw no reason to switch.

[Velaryon]

3.5 was like an all-you-can-eat buffet with your character. You could do whatever you wanted with only the limitation of your stomach capacity. You could just eat two or three things but if you were clever about if you could make a phenomenal dining experience. 4th Edition was like going to a small restaurant that had like 4 menu items of burger, hotdog, chicken sandwich, or pizza, with 6 options for a side. Sure you might get some enjoyment out of it, but the amount you can do is very limited and it will grow old quickly. 5th Edition is like a sewage treatment plant.

Left out the rest of the post because others have already argued that. However, I wanted to address your analogy and add in a few details I think you left out.

3.5 is like an all-you-can-eat buffet, in which half the salad bar is spoiled, several of the dishes have been undercooked or seasoned completely wrong, and one of the roasts is actually a wax model rather than actual food. Yes, you have nigh-infinite flexibility (which is also what I love about the system), but it's also full of deliberate trap options, half-baked ideas that weren't even remotely playtested, and entire classes that don't work without significant rewriting, among other problems. So it's a buffet in which more than half of the options are completely inedible.

Out of time at the moment, so I can't comment on the 4e and 5e parts of this analogy til later.

[Morcleon]

Left out the rest of the post because others have already argued that. However, I wanted to address your analogy and add in a few details I think you left out.

3.5 is like an all-you-can-eat buffet, in which half the salad bar is spoiled, several of the dishes have been undercooked or seasoned completely wrong, and one of the roasts is actually a wax model rather than actual food. Yes, you have nigh-infinite flexibility (which is also what I love about the system), but it's also full of deliberate trap options, half-baked ideas that weren't even remotely playtested, and entire classes that don't work without significant rewriting, among other problems. So it's a buffet in which more than half of the options are completely inedible.

Out of time at the moment, so I can't comment on the 4e and 5e parts of this analogy til later.

To expand on the analogy further, while some of the food is made poorly, an experienced diner can create combinations that are far greater than the sum of their parts, making dishes out of the given items that are truly exquisite.

...though at this point, it somewhat stretches the realism of the food analogy, my point stands.

[Pex]

To expand on the analogy further, while some of the food is made poorly, an experienced diner can create combinations that are far greater than the sum of their parts, making dishes out of the given items that are truly exquisite.

...though at this point, it somewhat stretches the realism of the food analogy, my point stands.

I say the food is fine. One would be the wrong restaurant.

[Rhyltran]

Honestly? I play a mix of Pathfinder and 3.5. Having access to both and everything that's been released for both I just have far more options in Pathfinder/3.5 than I do in 5th edition. There's just so much more material out there.

[Kurald Galain]

and entire classes that don't work without significant rewriting, among other problems.

If by "entire classes" you mean precisely one of them (the infamous Truenamer), and by "significant rewriting" you mean about 30 seconds work of adjusting its DCs

3E has been over-analyzed so much that people tend to vastly exaggerate the impact of its flaws on actual gameplay. Plus it's funny that for over half of these flaws in a thread like this, Pathfinder fixes it.

[Troacctid]

Truenamer works just fine without any rewriting at all AFAICT.

[Luccan]

Truenamer works just fine without any rewriting at all AFAICT.

By works, do you mean technically functions? Because I always thought the "not working" part people bring up was that it clearly doesn't function as intended by any stretch of the imagination. Like, it's supposed to be a skill-based magic class, but using the class gets harder as time goes by.

[Kurald Galain]

By works, do you mean technically functions? Because I always thought the "not working" part people bring up was that it clearly doesn't function as intended by any stretch of the imagination. Like, it's supposed to be a skill-based magic class, but using the class gets harder as time goes by.

Sure, but that's a simple oversight with a 30 second fix.

[Troacctid]

By works, do you mean technically functions? Because I always thought the "not working" part people bring up was that it clearly doesn't function as intended by any stretch of the imagination. Like, it's supposed to be a skill-based magic class, but using the class gets harder as time goes by.

I guess that's true if you don't have access to magic items. But you're honestly fine as long as you can get a level-appropriate Amulet of the Silver Tongue and Headband of Intellect.

Honestly, I suspect a lot of people who say "The math doesn't work" haven't actually done the math.

[Scowling Dragon]

Me personally? I STARTED with 4e! But It felt so stagnant. I never felt like I was ever playing those characters. When I was level 25 despite being a demigodling I felt like a level 1 wizard with more HP.

As for 5e thats an unfinished game. I played it for a year with good friends and a GREAT GM and we all agreed it was kinda rubbish by the end.
It was too rules hard to be rules light, but the rules that it did have where crappy. There was too much crunch to feel like we could just do whatever, but not enough of it to allow for mechanical underpinnings of the world.

Also its combat was crap. Far from feeling vulnerable, instead of rocket tag it was a game of meat puppet. Send somebody to the front to keep being knocked out over and over. And as long as you heal them they are back up to absorb the hits again.

Characters felt very samey, mechanics where not thought out, and it felt like playing a weird 2e with 3e elements in it.