Sell me on 5th edition

[CantigThimble]

That was their knee jerk reaction to splat-glut though, wasn't it?

I mean, I know WotC has a pretty bad track record for quality control, but if they actually put time and a vetting process into it, splat books aren't a bad thing.

Take it however you will but that's the reason it makes economic sense to release the entire pathfinder core rules for free but not the entire 5e core rules for free. Although much like the core rules of pathfinder with no splat the srd for 5e is completely playable on its own.

[Tanuki Tales]

Take it however you will but that's the reason it makes economic sense to release the entire pathfinder core rules for free but not the entire 5e core rules for free. Although much like the core rules of pathfinder with no splat the srd for 5e is completely playable on its own.

Except Pathfinder put out their core rules, while 5th edition didn't, but that's been covered.

[CantigThimble]

Except Pathfinder put out their core rules, while 5th edition didn't, but that's been covered.

Does that disagree with my post in any way?

[Tanuki Tales]

Does that disagree with my post in any way?

You were disingenuously relating Paizo's launch SRD to Next's, so yes.

[CantigThimble]

You were disingenuously relating Paizo's launch SRD to Next's, so yes.

I said each of the srds are completely playable on their own, which is a factually correct statement.

[AmayaElls]

To answer your question first 5e is the first edition I ever played. I find it easy to start playing and I love the freedom I seem to have to create characters that are unique and interesting without being useless. I then later played a game of pathfinder and attempted to approach it the same way, deciding that I wanted to try a conjuration wizard. I was shocked to find it took me hours to just find the information I needed and I needed a lot of help to figure out feats and skills. Even so, me and the others who focussed less on optimisation were basically useless in every fight we entered because our fighter was an experienced player who optimised and thus took out most encounters without our input.

I work long hours, try to support a hobby writing and read regularly for fun and work. As such I have found it hard to spend the time that seems to be required for setting up a pathfinder character and I am glad the people in that game are happy with just messing around really. However in my 5e games we've been able to focus well on roleplaying, I've enjoyed character development and as a result I think about it almost constantly. When I think about pathfinder I just get a vague feeling of guilt that I need to put more effort into it.

That is my opinion, someone who started with it early and thus got to see the new content as it was released, or someone with more time/is pursuing D&D as their main hobby, might feel differently of course.



At risk of getting caught up in this debate I would like to address some other comments.

I was legitimately curious to see what had happened with 5th edition since launch, as I had not kept tabs on it. It just continues to not be a game for me, nor is the general community the kind of people I'd generally associate with.

Just because I found the mindset of said community abrasive, doesn't mean my intent was edition warring, but you can justify as you will.

From what I have seen on this board there are trolls who have set up threads for edition warring, which I never think is conductive because each is different. Like here I see most members of the board refuse to jump to this conclusion early and try to give informed reasons of the pros and cons. They tried to respond politely to your first response which seemed condescending (but with text it is hard to tell) and continued the discussion.

It wasn't until you made the below comment that you were accused of trolling.

Well, it's always good to find someone who's supportive of painting by the numbers.

I don't see this positively going elsewhere, so I'll go back to "Pathfinderland" now and leave you all to "Putt Putt plays Mazes and Monsters".

Perhaps you meant this as a joke, text doesn't convey that well. To me this sounds like you are insulting the intelligence of those who seek to play 5e instead. The responses so far however had been focussed on the different gaming styles evidence and how this is about personal taste. As I said this may have been a joke but that was not immensely clear and perhaps not in best taste considering the serious responses you were getting.

I'm sorry you feel that way, although I've already said that was not my intention at all. But justify as you will.

If that wasn't your intention you really need to be more careful with how you phrase things.

Here was your opportunity to apologize and explain the above comment was a joke. When you say something was not your intention it is best to explain what your intention is. Because regardless of your intention you are responsible for the effect your words have on others and many people use the excuse of "that was not my intention" to say outright hurtful things and I do not believe you are that sort of person. To give an analogy, it was not my intention to knock into someone while I was running to catch the bus, but I still apologise, explain myself and check they are alright.


Overall you may have found us abrasive, I can't see it so maybe you could explain why? Maybe just like us you are reading condescension where there is none. Tell us so we can explain and clarify. Perhaps this post you might consider condescending too, I don't think it is but perhaps the act of trying to give advice to someone who does not desire it would be.

My final advice is to join in the debate here, the key thing I noticed about this forum (the reason I joined it) is everyone is always open to others opinion and is willing to enter an in depth discussion about peoples concerns about the game. I have rarely seen people get into heated arguments, even when they have vastly different views. Tell us exactly what you don't like about 5e, even the community, and we will put forward reasoned counter arguments. We may never change each other's ideas, but I don't think that is ever the aim of these discussions in this forum instead they are powerful tools for understanding each others viewpoints and informing third parties of the options.


EDIT: added "not immensely clear and perhaps not in best taste considering the serious responses you were getting." since I seem to have accidentally deleted it at some point.

[2D8HP]

I was legitimately curious to see what had happened with 5th edition since launch, as I had not kept tabs on it. It just continues to not be a game for me, nor is the general community the kind of people I'd generally associate with. Just because I found the mindset of said community abrasive, doesn't mean my intent was edition warring, but you can justify as you will.

As someone who regular posts on both this forum and Paizo's messageboards, I have to say that this forum has some pretty good people. There are a couple of abrasive people, and not a single one of them are posting in this thread right now. .

Well I may very well be one of the "abrasive" poster's, when you express some strong opinions (i.e. "Cyberpunk is lame", "Swords and Sorcery rocks") than that is hard to avoid (also "abrasive" is just plain funnier) so sorry about that. While I bought 3e (and then was irked by first 3.5 & then 4e were released so soon afterward), I never found a chance to play it, and I've been curious to try since the "Inner Sea" setting looks interesting and while previously I felt that:

You may change it around a a little bit , but for me as long as the game features a Dragon sitting on a pile of treasure, in a Dungeon and you play a Wizard with a magic wand, or a Warrior in armor, wielding a longbow, just like the picture on the box I picked up in 1978, whatever the edition, I want to play that game!

after reading in this thread what some say 3.P does "better", I'm reconsidering trying it since those aspects are what I don't like about 5e!
That is I prefer something closer to the "Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser" stories I read, rather than the "Naruto" cartoons my son watches, plus I now quickly suffer from "options fatigue".
While I've had "hella" fun playing 5e, it is not the perfect edition of D&D for me, because that edition doesn't exist.
My ideal form of D&D would:
1) Be as easy to learn and to create PC's as the 1977 "Basic" D&D rules were.
2) Have as quick flowing combat as 5e has.
3) The ability to make special "snowflake" PC's like 3.x D&D.
4) Feel as intuitive to GM as early 1980's "Call of Cthullu".
5) Have a "Ranger" class as awesome as the1e AD&D Ranger was.
Since "perfect" D&D doesn't exist, the free 5e Basic Rules plus some of the extra rules in the PHB is "close enough for government work", and plenty fun for me.

[Tanuki Tales]

I said each of the srds are completely playable on their own, which is a factually correct statement.

In a separate, but not equal sense, yes.

Edit:

@ 2D8HP: Then you definitely want 5th edition or E6 3.P. That simulates the level of sword and sorcery you're looking for, while full blown 3.P quickly escalates into high end mythology where you're fighting unborn moons while throwing mountains and channeling a spell capable of nuking cities from your private demi-plane, while controlling your army of custom made supersoldiers.

[CantigThimble]

In a separate, but not equal sense, yes.

You're implying that one is more playable than the other. That is entirely a matter of preference.

The amount of content in the phb is really irrelevant here. They could have made the phb with no content that was not in the SRD then released a 'phb 2' at the same time containing all the other non-essential options that aren't in the srd and then, by the way you choose to define srd, it would be equal even though it contained exactly the same content.

The 5e srd contains a complete and playable game regardless of whatever arbitrary standards you choose to measure it by.

[Tanuki Tales]

You're implying that one is more playable than the other. That is entirely a matter of preference.

In a quantitative sense, yes and it'd be disingenuous to call the two launch SRDs as equal in a sense of measuring complete fielding of the fresh rule set.

I'd go as far to say that WotC's srd is a shell game. Either:

• They've put all the best stuff on there and when they successfully lure you into blowing the money for the full rules, you discover the less attractive stuff is on the pay to play version.
• They put the less attractive stuff, but attractive enough stuff, and when you hear the good option are in the actual book, you're lured to buy it.
• They do, what they believe, is an equal mix, which could lead to some classes and options being viable and fun for some players but not for others, meaning you're again lured in to equal it out.

After Paizo put up the goods for free, I see anyone else seriously coming to the same table as them and not doing that as at least being greedy.

[R.Shackleford]

After Paizo put up the goods for free, I see anyone else seriously coming to the same table as them and not doing that as at least being greedy.

... you do know that in exchange for goods and services people expect to be paid, right?

You should fee lucky that you get a free version at all.

Edit

To expect all companies to work the same way is crazy. WotC is owned by Hasbro and are very much about money.

Besides, Paizo couldn't overtake 4e sales ... So I'm not sure they are the company you want to model yourself after if you are marketing toward the same group.

[CantigThimble]

You did see my post earlier about how pathfinder has more than 4 books to sell meaning that that could do that and improve sales rather than decrease them right? They're companies, of corse they're trying to make money. The difference is pathfinder's business model means they increase profits by giving away the core rules where 5e's business model means they lose profits by giving away the core rules.

And you could make the same shell game claim about the core rules and the other pathfinder books as you're making about the srd and phb.

[Tanuki Tales]

... you do know that in exchange for goodsale and services people expect to be paid, right?

You should fee lucky that you get a free version at all.

It's poor business sense when you choose to ignore one of the highly successful business moves by your lead competitor, instead banking on your consumers to have magically forgotten you previous faux paus and cling so tightly to brand recognition, loyalty and nostalgia that they fork over their money.

I mean, Wizards is lucky that happened with Next, but they tread on stormy seas as they've almost killed the brand and the hobby once before.

Edit: @Cantig: Erm, no you couldn't. All of Paizo's rule books are almost entirely on their SRDs for free and so is a lot of 3rd party material. It's the Adventure paths you have to pay for.

[Isidorios]

How long do people usually feed trolls like Tanuki, on average?
I mean this is a really thinly-veiled attempt to rail on 5e under the premise of "Tell me why the things you like aren't complete crap."
I find this whole thread disappointing.

[RickAllison]

In a quantitative sense, yes and it'd be disingenuous to call the two launch SRDs as equal in a sense of measuring complete fielding of the fresh rule set.

I'd go as far to say that WotC's srd is a shell game. Either:

• They've put all the best stuff on there and when they successfully lure you into blowing the money for the full rules, you discover the less attractive stuff is on the pay to play version.
• They put the less attractive stuff, but attractive enough stuff, and when you hear the good option are in the actual book, you're lured to buy it.
• They do, what they believe, is an equal mix, which could lead to some classes and options being viable and fun for some players but not for others, meaning you're again lured in to equal it out.

After Paizo put up the goods for free, I see anyone else seriously coming to the same table as them and not doing that as at least being greedy.

Ummm, you might want a history check: Paizo HAD to offer their system for free. That is part of using the d20 system that Wizards released for everyone to use for free, they would be committing a crime if they made you pay. Paizo didnt start some glorious revolution of free systems, it just capitalized on the fact that the normal method would have been a lawsuit in the making.

That's why Paizo has released so many splatbooks, it is the main way they can make any money through Pathfinder. After all, why would anyone pay for a PHB when the company is legally required to supply the game system for free?

By the way, do remember that the company you are declaring as greedy (which I am not saying they aren't) is the one who created and supplied for free the system that you love so much, and protected further consumers by ensuring others have to continue providing that free system. And then they continue doing this for each new generation despite that being a financially poor decision and also are not required to do so.

Really, Wizards is more generous than Paizo. Both give you a free playable system, but only Wizards' systems were voluntary.

[Tanuki Tales]

Ummm, you might want a history check: Paizo HAD to offer their system for free. That is part of using the d20 system that Wizards released for everyone to use for free, they would be committing a crime if they made you pay. Paizo didnt start some glorious revolution of free systems, it just capitalized on the fact that the normal method would have been a lawsuit in the making.

Being in breach of business contract =/= a crime. Usually.

[AmayaElls]

How long do people usually feed trolls like Tanuki, on average?
I mean this is a really thinly-veiled attempt to rail on 5e under the premise of "Tell me why the things you like aren't complete crap."
I find this whole thread disappointing.

I like to always assume the best of people, not assume they are trolls. Most people on this thread however just continued posting the pros and cons of 5e which is useful for any serious person coming to this forum to decide whether to take up the hobby. Also those still engaging in direct conversation tend to still give reasoned discussions that are useful for third parties with Tanuki playing a devil's advocate type role (though I wish he'd go into more depth to elicit even deeper reasoning). Whatever Tanuki's own motivations these discussions are not worthless as long as neither party is getting frustrated.

[Tanuki Tales]

I like to always assume the best of people, not assume they are trolls. Most people on this thread however just continued posting the pros and cons of 5e which is useful for any serious person coming to this forum to decide whether to take up the hobby. Also those still engaging in direct conversation tend to still give reasoned discussions that are useful for third parties with Tanuki playing a devil's advocate type role (though I wish he'd go into more depth to elicit even deeper reasoning). Whatever Tanuki's own motivations these discussions are not worthless as long as neither party is getting frustrated.

I can definitely assure you I'm not the least bit frustrated and am full heartedly enjoying the back and forth. This has been good discourse and debate to fill my day.

[Isidorios]

I agree that the thread has some value as a point of discussion for players considering 5e, but anyone who thinks that Tanuki isn't simply here to take the piss out of 5e is being incredibly naive.
His broad stabs at everyone enjoying 5e make that abundantly clear.
He needs to go back home to 3.pleasebuyallthesplatbooks.

[Tanuki Tales]

He needs to go back home to 3.pleasebuyallthesplatbooks.

No, it's 3.pleasespendhourscombingthesrdforalltheoptionssin cewedon'tactuallyrequireyoutoeverbuyasplatbooktoha veaccesstoourgamerules.

Get it right, silly billy.

[AmayaElls]

I agree that the thread has some value as a point of discussion for players considering 5e, but anyone who thinks that Tanuki isn't simply here to take the piss out of 5e is being incredibly naive.
His broad stabs at everyone enjoying 5e make that abundantly clear.
He needs to go back home to 3.pleasebuyallthesplatbooks.

True or not, calling him out on it just wastes space we could be spending on contributing to the discussion and makes it less likely third parties will continue reading. Once fingers start getting pointed most people will assume the thread will devolve into a flame war and get locked and thus stop reading and discussing with those still being reasonable. This is not the case on this forum which I really appreciate.



On the preceding discussion I think it's a case of conflicting business models. The similarity of "content" may cause us to expect Paizo and Wizards to follow a similar model and not compare them to other tabletop games (especially those that might only ever release one book). Paizo's plan from the start was to focus on adventure paths and other additional content, this in addition to the legality issues mentioned meant that for them it was very beneficial for them to release the core rules first to boost profits. However Wizards were following a very different business model, from the start their plan was to release only a couple of books a year, for them releasing the core rules would have been devastating as the profits from the core rules probably went some way to developing the following content.
These approaches to the release of new material required very different marketing methods. Which model is better seems mostly to be based on personal preference, but I believe it won't be easy to judge until more time has passed in 5e.

[Tanuki Tales]

For the record, I'd definitely play a few sessions of Next with Amaya, out of everyone else who posted here.

Well, except maybe Grod, but that's out of respect for the work he/she/they/ze/zim/proper gender pronoun/etc. put into Giants and Graveyards.

[RickAllison]

Being in breach of business contract =/= a crime. Usually.

In this case, it definitely is a crime. Specifically, it is copyright infringement, the use of a copyrighted work without permission of the owner. In the USA, penalties can include reparation of damages (not relevant in this case, though it might mean that Paizo could potentially owe them for every book made using it), a flat penalty ranging from $200 to $150,000 for each copyright violated, payment of all court costs and attorney fees, injunctions on further release of the unlawful materials, impoundment of the unlawful materials, and jail time.

So yes, not only would it be a crime, but a very serious one.

[Tanuki Tales]

In this case, it definitely is a crime. Specifically, it is copyright infringement, the use of a copyrighted work without permission of the owner. In the USA, penalties can include reparation of damages (not relevant in this case, though it might mean that Paizo could potentially owe them for every book made using it), a flat penalty ranging from $200 to $150,000 for each copyright violated, payment of all court costs and attorney fees, injunctions on further release of the unlawful materials, impoundment of the unlawful materials, and jail time.

So yes, not only would it be a crime, but a very serious one.

Continue that line of conversation as you wish, but it's not really allowed by forum rules. Or was that just giving legal advice...or both. It's hard to keep all of it straight sometimes.

[RickAllison]

Continue that line of conversation as you wish, but it's not really allowed by forum rules. Or was that just giving legal advice...or both. It's hard to keep all of it straight sometimes.

That's not legal advice (was not directed at anyone here), that is a discussion of legal facts. Giving legal advice would be the same spiel but in response to homebrew on the forum.

Heck, I don't even think that could be legal advice given on this forum because all the homebrew here is generally covered under the "fair use" clause. Maybe if someone was posting about plans to sell homebrew in a way that violated the copyright law, but that is a far cry from the current situation. In this case, it is a simple statement of fact that Paizo publishing a system that used the D20 system copyrighted by WotC would be copyright infringement. Same as stating that going out and stabbing someone in his or her bed is murder, or that channeling funds out of a corporate account for personal use is embezzlement. Or that oxygen gas is composed of two oxygen atoms with a double bond between them.

[mgshamster]

That's not legal advice (was not directed at anyone here), that is a discussion of legal facts. Giving legal advice would be the same spiel but in response to homebrew on the forum.

Heck, I don't even think that could be legal advice given on this forum because all the homebrew here is generally covered under the "fair use" clause. Maybe if someone was posting about plans to sell homebrew in a way that violated the copyright law, but that is a far cry from the current situation. In this case, it is a simple statement of fact that Paizo publishing a system that used the D20 system copyrighted by WotC would be copyright infringement. Same as stating that going out and stabbing someone in his or her bed is murder, or that channeling funds out of a corporate account for personal use is embezzlement. Or that oxygen gas is composed of two oxygen atoms with a double bond between them.

You know, the only reason he said that was to hide behind "forum rules" in order to avoid admitting you're right or he's wrong.

That's a growing trend here - every time he's had to admit error, he's either ignored the post, moved the goal post, or blamed someone else (a la, "I'm sorry you feel that way"). And now he's trying to claim you're violating forum rules in order to make you back off.

[Tanuki Tales]

That's not legal advice (was not directed at anyone here), that is a discussion of legal facts. Giving legal advice would be the same spiel but in response to homebrew on the forum.

I was saying I couldn't remember if it was just giving legal advice or if the mods also frowned upon legal ramifications and such being discussed in general. Or if those threads just tend to get locked because they inevitable slope down into forum unfriendly territory.

I wasn't insinuating you were giving legal advice.

[2D8HP]

@ 2D8HP: Then you definitely want 5th edition or E6 3.P. That simulates the level of sword and sorcery you're looking for, while full blown 3.P quickly escalates into high end mythology where you're fighting unborn moons while throwing mountains and channeling a spell capable of nuking cities from your private demi-plane, while controlling your army of custom made supersoldiers.

Yeah that doesn't sound like my thing (still better than Cyberpunk and Vampire though).Thanks for the heads up!

He needs to go back home to 3.pleasebuyallthesplatbooks.

No, it's 3.pleasespendhourscombingthesrdforalltheoptionssin cewedon'tactuallyrequireyoutoeverbuyasplatbooktoha veaccesstoourgamerules.

Get it right, silly billy.

O.K. those posts are pretty funny!

For the record, I'd definitely play a few sessions of Next with Amaya, out of everyone else who posted here.

Yeah @AmayaElls does read as pretty wise, but still that stings!

Well, except maybe Grod, but that's out of respect for the work he/she/they/ze/zim/proper gender pronoun/etc. put into Giants and Graveyards.

Giants and Graveyards? A special ruleset for use by the playground?
Maybe for PbP?
I like it!

[Tanuki Tales]

Yeah @AmayaElls does read as pretty wise, but still that stings!

It wasn't meant as a personal jab at you, so I do apologize if you took it as one. I don't know you well enough to know if I like the cut of your jib.

Edit:

Grod is pretty amazing.

[Baptor]

Then you definitely want 5th edition or E6 3.P. That simulates the level of sword and sorcery you're looking for

You know, my mates and I skipped out of D&D in 2008 with 4e. For one, we didn't get 4e. Not that we thought it was stupid, we just didn't get it. Plus, we all had recently married.

Once all that cooled off around 2011-2012, we seriously considered E6 Pathfinder. We'd have done it too, but right at that moment the Next playtest came out. I'm not sad we did that and we love 5e, but I wonder if E6 might have suited us better. Oh well.

while full blown 3.P quickly escalates into high end mythology where you're fighting unborn moons while throwing mountains and channeling a spell capable of nuking cities from your private demi-plane, while controlling your army of custom made supersoldiers.

You know, I typically hate that style of play. But when you describe it like that, I kinda want to try that out. :D