>>97861022
>It was praised for how much control it game DMs over the game
lol no it wasnt you fucking retard. I had played since the alpha pre-release and It was aleays garbage.
kill yourself

>>97861022
5e came out after 4e, which was disliked enough that Paizo could launch Pathfinder entirely off the back of all the 3.5 grogs who hated 4e, and despite 4e still being the best-selling RPG you wouldn't know if based on /tg/ and other RPG forums, where people largely ignored it in favor of 3.5 and PF ("3.PF" was a pretty common term to refer to both games since the rules were interchangeable aside from some very minor changes). Compared to 4e, 5e seems like a return to form, so it should hardly be surprising that it was positively received at the time. Over the decade that honeymoon period has worn off, and people have become a lot more aware of the system's flaws. It also doesn't help that "it's popular, therefore it sucks" is a common attitude here, and DnD is the most popular RPG and 5e coincides with the closest period DnD has ever been to "mainstream", so it attracts a lot of criticism because of that. Also some of the flaws of the systems just become more apparent with age, like how after a while you noticed how pretty much every class or specialization tends to pull a lot of its abilities from a pool of common abilities you more or less need for a class to work, and how there's actually very little freedom in building a character beyond choosing the class specialization.

It's just trolls. Trolls who've been allowed to get out of control.

Go anywhere other than here, and 5e is still getting top-billing and even widely being treated as THE rpg.

While many people have grown tired with the game over the decade, partly thanks to WotC's colossal mismanagement of it, it still is getting some pretty insane amounts of 3rd party support that keeps churning out an actually concerning amount of content, and the amount of lame/lazy memes regarding it is just a never-ending flood at this point, because it takes five seconds to slap "monk" in impact font on a webm of a guy doing a handstand or "rogue" on a webm of a guy getting fucked in the ass or whatever.

Here, we're just stuck with people who are scared of getting their Reddit/Twitter accounts banned so they do all of their trolling here.

File: images.jpg (5.9 KB)

5.9 KB JPG

>>97861022
> I was around 11 years ago for the launch of 5e and the sentiment was extremely positive.
The D&D Next playtest was a wreck with ignoring feedback, banning forum users and redoing polls.
A fucking "positive sentiment" originates from:
a. Supposed return to form from 4e. Have nothing to do with how game is actually played.
b. Critical Role and others (2015-2017). Have nothing to do with how game is actually played.
c. Pop culture exposure aka Stranger Things (mid to late 10s). Have nothing to do with how game is actually played.
d. Pandemic boost (2020) with online play. Game is played via VTT.

>>97861040
>lol no it wasnt
it was, this is a discussion for grown ups so I would see you off
>>97861487
I saw Pathfinder called 3.75 quite a bit.
>5e seems like a return to form, so it should hardly be surprising that it was positively received at the time. Over the decade that honeymoon period has worn off, and people have become a lot more aware of the system's flaws.
That was something I considered, however as I stated people are grilling the systems strengths after all this time, and that's incredibly odd. The game works perfectly for its intended purposes. 6 encounters per adventure day, resource attrition dungeon crawling, and roleplaying that is improvised DM fiat.

>>97862396
>The D&D Next playtest was a wreck with ignoring feedback, banning forum users and redoing polls.
That same thing appears to have happened during the OneD&D playtests this time.
>many people have grown tired with the game over the decade
That sounds reasonable to me, after 11 years with the system people might just be yearning to try other games for other themes and modes of play than what D&D is good at.

>>97861022
4e is not particularly mechanically crunchy, its just feels kind of like a stripped down mobile game to play. That said, there are some important factors
>D&D players have always been retarded
>old D&D players were especially retarded
Allegedly it was public playtest feedback that got maneuvers stripped out of the base fighter class in early 5e, something that is near universally recognized as fucking stupid in (current year). Those people coming from 3.5 and 4 had no fucking idea what they were talking about.
As for current 5e fans, a quick jaunt to reddit will tell you everything you need to know.
But
5e was a significant improvement over 4e in several key ways, and i would rather play 5e than 6e, 4e or 3.5 even today. Its head and shoulders above the rest of its siblings. That doesnt make it good, but its still the most playable.

>>97862518
4e is so crunchy that it's practically impossible to homebrew.

>>97862482
> The game works perfectly for its intended purposes. 6 encounters per adventure day

>>97862518
I supposed you mean 5e 2024, because I would be very interested in seeing what the next edition (6th) would be like, personally. I can see them doing what they did with 5e 2014 all over again. Looking at every edition of the game and starting from scratch.

Most people who play 5e don't even know other RPGs even exist, why would they discuss the game's positive and negative aspects in an RPG space if they're not aware of it in the first place?

>>97862578
Most people who enjoy D&D, enjoy D&D. I find attempts to belittle people boring.

>>97862555
I was homebrewing 4e when i was 10. I havent played it since then, but i keep a phb around and skimming it has never particularly impressed me. Maybe theres something in the DMG i dont know about though.

>>97862568
The current edition is 6e, I will not respect hasbro's pronouns.
>what will 7e be like?
Well they're haemorraging money and every few years or so WOTC try to launch another VTT experience, so my guess is a repeat of 6e
>push for proprietary vtt/ video game again
>microtransactions abound
>eternally punished gamdevs make a shit game because hasbro has zero skilled worker retention
>inoffensive "broader audience appeal" ai art
>ai vtt integration
>poorly implemented return of archaeic exploration mechanics or some other similar "we need a gimmick" sales tactic
>sending more PMCs to youtuber's houses
>another attempt at a more restrictive OGL that captures and monetizes fan content
>>97862597
>Most people who enjoy D&D, enjoy D&D
What do you call this? Its a trueism thats not even logically true. A falseism? Crazy

>97862597
What a weird reply.

>>97862715
>What do you call this?
It's literally true. People who play D&D mostly do it because they like it. It was in response to someone saying it was for belittling reasons instead.

>I was homebrewing 4e when i was 10.
It will result in unbalanced encounters and such. 5e allows for tweaks that land home better.

>The current edition is 6e
Negatory. They are currently working on 6th edition, then you will run into your "pronouns" problem.
>>>what will 7e be like?

>>97861022
>Now when you go look at 5e discussion you find people burning its strengths at the stake like a witch. People complaining about how hard it is on DMs, lacking in concise rulings for things, a lack of crunch they crave. I'm curious why the pendulum swung the other way.
Fashion. DnD is the industry giant, not the industry leader.
3rd and 4th ed lead to a lot of rules light, story driven indi games. Those got popular for a while, wotc finally caught onto the idea and did light lip service to the concepts but didn't really implement much of it. OSR happened, the indi games have all been shifting back toward mechanical complexity for a while (although there is still and likely will continue on, an established microlight churn). WotC and the games stuck on the plantation are just catching up so they're trying more rules.
Its a repeating cycle, happened to rpgs at least once already.

>>97862482
>6 encounters per adventure day,
No one plays like that
no one has ever played like that
the core of the system is based on something absolutely retarded

I hated 4e because it felt like they were trying to make a video game into an ttrpg. I hate 5e because it's been made to be as dumb as possible while technically playable. PF is the true successor to what D&D used to be.

>>97861022
I've always found it to be marginally less crunchy to run and prep than 3.x or 4e without either of those systems mechanical depth, but significantly more time consuming to prep than similarly simplistic OSR systems.

I don't mind it, especially as a player, but it's not really a system I gravitate towards for running. Especially since I've always been more of a sci-fi and post-apocalyptic guy at heart.

I played 5e a few times, and every time the system just got in the way.
Like we were all having fun, and then it was time to roll dice, do skill checks, get into combat, and the fun stopped.

>>97862396
>ignoring feedback
Knowing which feedback to ignore is rule 1 of any kind of research.

>>97862941
>>6 encounters per adventure day,
>No one plays like that
>no one has ever played like that
Good, then they've read the DMG. Because all it tells you is that maybe you shouldn't go over that number of encounters in a day because PCs lose their steam.

>>97862841
You're making stuff up that isn't there.

>>97863285
I feel like this as well. A lot of the fun stuff from the previous campaigns we've completely we're down to fun characters and a good GM. Rarely have their been notable "oh shit" moments that have arisen from the mechanics.

>>97862841
No. You said
>Most people who enjoy D&D, enjoy D&D
Which is the same as saying
>a few people who enjoy D&D do not enjoy D&D
You see the issue here? All people who enjoy D&D enjoy D&D. its an irrational statement logically, and a tautology rhetorically.

>>97861022
What worldbuilding?

>>97861022
It attracted the troons and drama club kids to the hobby, it's extremely dumbed down and all subclasses more or less play the same.

>>97861022
I said it was shit and a bunch of people got mad at me, now it's abundantly clear I was right but I never got the naked dogeza apology I deserve.

>>97864428
Why do people even keep parroting that number then?
>over
bro most people barely have one encounter a day.

>>97861022
>I was around 11 years ago for the launch of 5e and the sentiment was extremely positive.
You had no frame of reference and you were fed the opinions of a handful of retards. You're literally incapable to speak of "the sentiment". You're unironically mentally stunted for not realizing this yourself.

While 5e was considered better than 4e, it was still considered garbage by wide swathes of the existing fanbase at the time, and it still is.

There was no pendulum swing, you just got old enough to start interacting with a meaningful number of adults with experience on what they speak of.

You fucking idiot.

5e was always extremely flawed but now the honeymoon phase is over and its flaws have become public knowledge.

>>97864769
such is the way. remember the star wars sequels?

>>97861487
Best take in thread

>>97864769
>>97864810
>>97864866
Look upon this troll.
See his tactics and methods.
Despise him.

>focus on roleplaying
Just say 5e had backstories baked into vanilla instead of them coming out later. Backstories that are irrelevant for 99% of games.

>>97861022
I played 5e some.
Since 4e was my first D&D esperience, I liked it better than that, but I had already tried Runequest and Call of Ch'thulhu by then, so I never thought it was all that.
And I was once sent a reprint of the 2e AD&D monster compendium by mistake (got to keep it) so I know how much shallower the game has gotten.

>>97865125
Old editions just had the veneer of being deep by virtue of being convoluted. The 2e monster books are more concerned with "What do they eat?" than with "How do they behave?"

>>97864781
An encounter isn't necessarily combat bwo. A rickety bridge counts as one.

>97865031
Fuck off, troll.

>>97861022
I find your entire premise flawed. The pendulum has not swung. More people are playing D&D than ever. 5e has been a wild success. Yes: people now know the specific rules and have lived with them longer and have more to say about them. But the notion that everyone is constantly down on it simply doesn't line up w/ reality. People are happily playing more games of it than they've ever played games of anything.

>>97865231
Seriously though, you really have to give up on the whole "a game that has enjoyed more than a decade as the most played and best rated RPG in the entire world several times over is actually bad" thing. It's like if a 3-star Michelin Restaurant was as widespread as every fast food franchise combined. It's got popularity combined with critical appeal and proven longevity in a environment where most games are released and forgotten within a year or two.

You might not like it, but it's a solid game and your contrarian shitposting is really nothing more than attention-seeking trolling born out of a decades-plus worth of butthurt.

You're like a boxer who got his ass beat, watched his rival become the champion of the world and defend his title for a decade, and then when that rival started to show some signs of age while still being at the top of the world, that beat-up, washed-up boxer still holding onto that grudge would shout "See, I told you he ain't shit" at the empty bar he practically lives in.

>>97864810
>the existing fanbase
what fanbase? 3.5 players? lmao.

>>97865359
>comparing D&D to a michellin restaurant
D&D is mcdonalds, bozo

>>97865359
>>It's popular so therefore it's good
No. Fuck off.

>>97865359
>sports analogy
>D&D popular = good
Kill yourself asap

>>97865648
It's not just popular and widespread though, it's also a critical darling and has proven to have outlasted the initial hype to remain at the top.

Comparing it to restaurants doesn't really work, because no restaurant has dominated 50%+ of the market like 5e has. It's like all the most enviable aspects of every kind of restaurant put together: the high praise from critics that starred restaurants have, the endless endorsements from influencers that little boutiques get, the convenience and widespread availability of fast food franchises, 5e is so firmly stapled to the top of the charts that all the other RPGs are fighting over a distant second place.

>>97865660
>>97865690
No, it's good for a lot of reasons that are largely subjective so people can argue about them endlessly.
The thing you CAN'T argue against is its objective success and popularity, which is probably why those make you particularly mad.

>>97865708
>It's not just popular and widespread though, its actually popular and widespread!
??? Still doesnt make it good.
>>97865715
>It's good for a lot of reasons that are subjective
So, name some about the system specifically.
also
>its good for subjective reasons!
i say: its bad for objective reasons

>>97865708
>>97865715
heh, leave hasbro and mcdonalds out of this....youre just jealous!
its a bad game
>>97865715
No im mad at 5e D&D for ruining the hobby

>>97865737
>>97865745
>troll is actually retarded
It's not just popular, it's widely acclaimed and has a proven record of success and even people returning back to it.

For something that exists in the subjective realm like RPGs, it's incredibly easy to provide evidence for why it can call itself "The World's Greatest Role Playing Game" without any other game even coming close as a challenger.
Meanwhile, you have to beg people to take your contrarian shitposting opinions seriously, with just empty assertions and exaggerations while acting like whatever nitpicks you consider dealbreakers are not just ignored by the vast majority of people who actually play RPGs.

>>97865794
>you dont suck harsbro cock, youre a troll!
fuck off
>it's widely acclaimed
appealing to the lowest common denominator isnt a positive quality.
Its the mcdonalds of RPGs: hot dogshit, slurped up by retards and normies who dont care, or know better

>>97865815
No one said you had to suck anything.
You could stick to discussing games you like instead of trolling out of frustration that a game you don't like is popular.

>not even trying to hide how upset he is anymore
Oh poor baby.

>>97865824
>You could stick to discussing games you like
this thread is about 5e D&D. Why does calling it dogshit automatically retreat to
>"YOUSE TROLLIN!!!1!"
?
It's a bad game that appeals to the LCD.
Popularity among normmies/retards isnt a positive quality.

>>97865835
No one asked you to be here and to troll as you do. You could be in any thread where you actually play the game being discussed.

Your personal opinion is so far outside the normal expected parameters and so brashly expressed that it can only be seen as trolling. Your opinion, ironically, is on the level of "Don't eat that delicious ice cream, I think it tastes like dogshit! You should be eating actual dogshit instead!"

You can have your minority opinion, but recognize that you have to actually try and convince people you're not insane, instead of proving that you are.

>>97865855
>No one asked you to be here
OP did when he posted the thread
>You could be in any thread where you actually play the game being discussed.
Why would I want to play 5e???
>Your personal opinion is so far outside the normal expected parameters and so brashly expressed that it can only be seen as trolling
LOL welcome to 4chan you dumb bitch
>You can have your minority opinion
Wow, thanks for authorization lmao
>but recognize that you have to actually try and convince people you're not insane
"If you dont like 5e youre either a troll or INSANE!"

How much is hasbro paying you to post?

>>97865869
>LOL welcome to 4chan you dumb bitch
Yeah, trolls being here isn't a surprise to anyone. And you're just a particularly dumb one.

>>97865883
Ahh, widdle newfag hasbro intern sad?
Your game is dogshit.
It is the mcdonalds of RPGs, not a michellin star restaurant.

5.5/2024 killed itself.
Kill yourself next

>>97861574
>It's just trolls. Trolls who've been allowed to get out of control.
>It's just trolls, only trolls don't like 5e DND, anybody who doesn't like the world's most popular game has got to be a TROLL!
lmao loser

>>97865359
>5e D&D is a 3-star michelin restaurant
LOL
Holy fuck how much are they paying you?

>>97866303
Not enough for 4 or 5 stars apparently. That costs big bucks.

>>97866675
>implying the hasbro marketing intern is getting paid

>>97866675
Three is the highest btw

>>97866693
and D&D 5e is negative three stars

>>97861022
5e was absolutely a very solid starting point for a new edition. That said, it was just that, a STARTING point. WotC didn't expand on it for shit. It released content but over 11 years there was not a single campaign book just adventures in other settings. No psionics, everything was sanitized in tone. It was "safe" D&D and never really advanced in any big way outside the CRBs. As such it got old fast and people got bored of it fast.

>>97866718
I love feature creep and new trash and cannot figure out how new games work either

File: dogeza.png (18.2 KB)

18.2 KB PNG

>>97864769

>>97861022
More people = more people complaining about the game

It’s a simple stats question

>>97864527
>Which is the same as saying a few people who enjoy D&D do not enjoy D&D
No, your comprehension is god awful. I said that the people who like D&D, like it. I said it was in response to someone saying people are enjoying D&D in spite of it. It's bizarre you cannot accept the reality of people enjoying the game.

>>97864810
>You had no frame of reference
The fuck does this even mean, I'm talking about 5e not whatever the fuck you're thinking of.
>fed opinions
I'm discussing the opinions that were held at the time, retard.

>>97865119
I was more referencing the flexibility in rulings that 5e presented. At the time people were ecstatic that so much was left up to the DM, because that meant roleplaying potential galore. Now- you see a ton of people criticizing what was once celebrated as a triumph of the system, Now, they say "it's so hard on the DM" that was the whole point of the game, it's the game's signature strength. The DM has a lot of authority over the game.

>>97865251
>I find your entire premise flawed. The pendulum has not swung.
Then just keep reading what I have continued to divulge. I am talking about something I find rather interesting. If you don't wish to engage then politely leave.

>>97866797
Technically he's right
>Most people who enjoy D&D enjoy D&D
implies that
>A minority of people who enjoy D&D enjoy D&D
Him pointing it out as a gotcha is sort of like pointing out a spelling error. But you can't deny the "spelling error."

>>97865815
>appealing to the lowest common denominator isnt a positive quality.
For starters that's incredibly ironic, you are not being positive, you have a very negative demeanor. Secondly, 5e got a lot of people into the hobby and that's a triumph.

>>97865835
>this thread is about 5e D&D
It's about the changing mentality of D&D, it's not for you to sound off about all the things you hate about it.

>>97866846
They saw that there was a 5e thread that’s not the gen and figured the topic was just 5e hate.

>>97866718
>over 11 years there was not a single campaign book just adventures in other settings
It launched with Tyranny of Dragons, which is a signature campaign using an iconic villain at the climax.

>>97866775
That's probably the simplest and most succinct answer.

>>97866841
What?? We arent talking about me being "positive". Are you a bot?
> 5e got a lot of people into the hobby
by appealing to the lowest common denominator, yes.
>and that's a triumph.
not even close, shill
>>97866846
>it's not for you to sound off about all the things you hate about it.
call the mods then, bitch faggot

>>97866693
Man that makes the comparison even sadder if anything. Does anyone genuinely believe 5e is as good as a system can mechanically be?

>>97861022
>I was around 11 years ago for the launch of 5e and the sentiment was extremely positive
Liar.

>>97866821
Yeah anyone with a brain could have told them that's retarded stance to take. It doesn't matter if you can ask your DM to allow you to interpret rules in a specific way if the rules you actually have to use are dogshit.

>>97866821
>I was more referencing the flexibility in rulings that 5e presented
... Anon that's something ALL rpgs do. Including 4th, 3.5, fucking FATAL. It's a feature of the hobby that goes back to 1966 when Dave Jeffery had to improvise rules for a duel between two players at his game of Braunstein.

>>97867015
The rules for 5e are quite good, people take issue with it allowing a lot of DM fiat decisions to be made. They didn't take issue with that 11 years ago. You are free to do some digging and see for yourself. This is a fascinating subject to me.

>>97867088
It's much harder to homebrew for those other systems, I am unfamiliar with FATAL however. Those systems were very mechanically dense and crunchy, 5e actually prides itself on flexibility, and it used to be widely celebrated a decade previously.

>>97867232
>The rules for 5e are quite good,
LOL
LMAO, even

>>97861487
>despite 4e still being the best-selling RPG
Again repeating those lies? Nothing supports this. Hasbro fired the head of D&D every year. 5e is superficially framed as closer to 3e and previous editions.
4e did ok with the first cores before everyone realized it was shit.

>>97867242
How much are they paying you, or are you just a marketing intern?

>>97867259
Nta, I heavily dislike 5e, but I'd be willing to guess that it's definitely the best selling edition, given that they sell the books at Walmart and Target, and you can find merch for it basically anywhere.
The whole stranger things appeal to normies phenomena was very much real

>>97865174
>The 2e monster books are more concerned with "What do they eat?" than with "How do they behave?"
I can shit on 2e from today to eternity but the 2e monsters have abundant info for all of that, and more. Plus morale.

>>97867270
I am talking about 4e. 5e it is.
Fun fact: I hate 4e but I would rather play 4e than 4e because 4e has its own identity and, like 3e
1) Doesn't assume the players and DM are retards
2) Doesn't ask you to wing it, it has just a different focus
3) in 4e, like 3e, level differences matter

>>97867280
I'm sorry I read your post and somehow in my mind completely misunderstood what you were saying.
I formally concede

File: 4e sales makeup.png (1003.2 KB)

1003.2 KB PNG

>>97867259
>Nothing supports this.
Incorrect. Note that this is during the 2 year span where 4E was dead.

I fucking new it. It's the "vendetta" and "worst troll" troll that starts accusing everyone of samefagging whenever D&D 5e is criticised.
If the mods weren't hellbent on making /tg/ worse, he'd be long banned.

>>97861022
My sentiment for 5E was negative from the moment they got rid of martial dice. Shit game, shit players.

3e walked so 4e could jog so LANCER could run and 5e could throw itself off a cliff and into a bubbling pit of acid called brand identity

>>97862518
>Allegedly it was public playtest feedback that got maneuvers stripped out of the base fighter class in early 5e
A lot of interesting features were stripped out of early 5e. I'm not sure why though, I just remember rumors about the reasoning.

>>97867661
The real answer is Mike Mearls.

>>97865708
People also enjoy Pokemon, watched Dune and Dune Part 2, and drive non-Toyota cars. That doesn't mean they are good.

>>97867088
That's definitely not true. You don't get the same flexibility in all systems and that's by design. RPGs are not sold based on what's on the cover.

>>97867639
>from the moment they got rid of martial dice
The playtest was great, and then they decided to ruin fighters and ruin bards

>>97867703
You literally do. 5e isn't any more conductive to ignoring the rules then any other RPG. It has little resources to change the rules and it doesn't have particularly simple rules to begin with.

>>97867661
I really thought that 2024 was going to just put them back into the game lol.

>>97868261
>5e isn't any more conductive to ignoring the rules then any other RPG
and? we weren't talking about ignoring the rules, we were talking about having the DM make decisions fiat as per the rules

>>97865174
>>97867272

The 2e Monster Compendium, which I still possess, has fairly detailed notes on the ecology, range and number likely to be encountered in a group of any creature therein.

That's actually great information if you're a versimilitudefag like me.

>>97867232
>The rules for 5e are quite good
I'd say at a very, very basic level they are fine, but it's exceptions based rules design, and it falls apart pretty quickly. There are classes, and even stats, that are just plain better than everything else. If you play a charisma caster you're essentially better than anyone else in the game, you can do damage, do "roleplay" and do utility all off of one stat. Fighters and, to a lesser degree, Rogues, just aren't very good. And, because the only mechanical carrot for creative thinking is advantage/mitigating disadvantage, once you have a class feature that grants you advantage, you're always better off pulling that lever than trying to figure out a creative way to get it. It also wants to be a theater of the mind game and a map game at the same time, so certain classes get hosed if you're not using a map, but using a map doesn't generate any interesting mechanics relating to things like facing or hanging up. It also got rid of good mechanics from 4e like marks.

On top of mechanics, they've also really gutted procedures, and the dmg (both in 5 and 5.5) is absolutely dogshit, and does a very, very bad job of actually explaining how to prep and run a game, excepting how to design fights. That's given rise to the dedsult "occasionally hyper violent tea party" railroad games. Dungeons aren't dangerous places to explore, they're places to have fights in. The wilderness isn't a dark foreboding area of travel and exploration, it's a place to have fights in. It doesn't help that all the campaigns they've published are all deeply flawed railroads, so that any new GM who picks one up to run a game with training wheels will be absolutely fucked.

>>97868941
>once you have a class feature that grants you advantage, you're always better off pulling that lever than trying to figure out a creative way to get it.
Most of those features have limited uses or require some other trade-off, such as spending additional actions or getting into a position where you're more likely to attacked. Being creative is often cheaper and more fun for those at the table. Once you leave the optimizer mindset, even mechanically subpar choices that fit your character become more attractive. The inspiration mechanic additionally allows rewarding players for good roleplay, reducing the incentive to play optimally at all times.

>>97868999
Or maybe the game could be fun if you aren't intentionally playing like shit.

>>97868999
The problem is that all of those options don't have clear rules. It's basically up to your GM as to whether or not an action counts. I will give it to 5.5, though, it has done a much better job handling inspiration.

>>97863061
Then paizo abandoned it to make 4e but shit. Rest in piss PF2E.

>>97868999
>leave optimizer mindset behind
>immediately have immersion broken the moment something that makes sense to do in character does absolutely nothing because LOL advantage
GG no re retard

>>97869023
Dude Pathfinder 1E at its peak was doing the kind of numbers 3.5 and 4E at their worst were and Pathfinder 1E at its worst was making books that weren't selling enough to cover their own development and printing costs. PF1 got abandoned for a very good reason.

>>97867259
Most "hardcore" RPG players hated 4e, but it still outsold PF because of the brand recognition (if the average person has heard of any RPG it's going to be DnD, so someone wanting to get into RPGs is probably going to buy the DnD rulebook because of recognizing the name). However, even if it did outsell other RPGs at the time it would have been clear to WotC that it was not popular among their most dedicated and vocal consumer base (and all those PF sales theoretically represent lost 4e sales), so it would have made sense for them to walk back some of the changes between 3.5 and 4e to recapture that audience.

>>97861022
I was around back then too and all I remember was people were just happy to see the end of 4e.

>>97861487
>"it's popular, therefore it sucks"
more like it's so popular it's hard to find anything else, and no game is good at everything so you really want to find other games

>the RPG space has welcomed a lot more people into the hobby and the newcomers dislike it
"welcomed" lol, it was only the companies and secondary profit seekers welcoming a horde of new customers, the people who cared about the games themselves always knew it was a disaster to dilute and dumb down the entire thing

>>97869231
>it would have made sense for them to walk back some of the changes between 3.5 and 4e to recapture that audience.
5e also tried to hearken back to TSR editions to recapture these audiences as well, which included hiring guys like RPGPundit as consultants. Another anon aptly described 5e as being intended to be everyone's second-favorite edition.

>>97869302
Except for 4E players. They could just get fucked.

>>97866859
That's an adventure book, anon.
Campaign books are SETTINGS.
For example, Dragonlance campaign book would give you a breakdown of the world, history, key figures, gods, classes, spells, etc unique to that setting. Frequently these books are followed up with setting specific monster manuals and such. They weren't adventures but everything you needed to make as detailed an adventure that you wanted. 5e just abandoned doing anything like that.

>>97869381
>5e just abandoned doing anything like that.
What are these?
>Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide
>Eberron: Rising from the Last War
>Explorer's Guide to Wildemount
>Spelljammer: Adventures in Space
>Planescape: Adventures in the Multiverse
>Forgotten Realms: Adventures in Faerûn
>Forgotten Realms: Heroes of Faerûn

>>97862715
>The current edition is 6e
if you want to be like that, wouldn't this be about 10e?

>>97869023
You haven't actually played 4e or PF2e if you think they're basically identical. It really sounds like you have an irrational hatred of anything that's not a 3rd edition derivative, which is really sad if I'm being honest.

>>97867292
Source: your anus

>>97869231
>but it still outsold PF
Wotc behavior says otherwise.

>>97867282
On my side, I should have written here
>rather play 4e than 5e
Welcome to the retard club anon, I guess

>>97869231
>However, even if it did outsell other RPGs at the time it would have been clear to WotC that it was not popular among their most dedicated and vocal consumer base
This is such a cope. Wotc wouldn't have have given a rats' ass if they found more buyers of a different demographic.
The truth is that the cope numbers are for the very early period, the head of D&D was fired every December or so, those retarded videos were a PR disaster, and PF1e did great until they decided that their business models was shovelware instead of a "distillation" of 3e plus adventure paths.

>>97869725
I think you are both right... in a way. PF2e feels less padded and "solves" certain gaming situations differently. PF2e combat math also works from day 1 - they managed to have a threadmill that worked instead of what happened with 4e monsters. They way they link critis to level is quite interesting. PF2e has also a rarity system that should be stolen even by OSR players - but applied differently of course.

However, both games have a "videogamey" feel in their approach to HP, or with 4e minions that break immersion in the same way thugs of a super high level are added to be a threat in an high level PF2e adventure.

3e/PF1e has a special freedom in design space that needs a bit to be properly organized but each choice feels real in-universe in a way games that came after cannot do.

>>97870276
Video games are when you're allowed to use any monster in the manual? Isn't that more freedom, not less?

>>97870365
I feel you are attempting a strawman here, clumsily, while just showing your utter incompetence.
Am I right?

>>97868941
>I'd say at a very, very basic level they are fine
That's kind of the point of 5e, to be a basic system that places more work on a DM and remove obfuscation from players. If 5e has any big problems, it's with player facing rules being in the DM guide instead, such as magic item crafting.

>>97869255
They were happy 4e was over, that the system encouraged roleplaying instead of roll playing, that it was closer to 3e again, and that it was easy to understand and run.

>>97869377
I believe 5e does sort of re-present some things from 4e

>>97870089
Source WotC leaked numbers.

>>97869381
>Campaign books are SETTINGS.
Lmao, no they aren't. The word campaign comes from war games, they are a series of adventures that are collectively called campaigns. You have the wrong idea of these sorts of things. I will admit a book like Tales from the yawning portal are a collection of adventures, and is precisely and adventure module. However the series of adventures in something such as Tyranny of Dragons is in fact a campaign, they all tie together in the same series of adventures and climax against a world ending threat. THAT is a campaign.

>>97870256
2018 Paizo was doing nothing different than 2013-2014 Paizo which was Paizo at its peak with PF1. The difference is that there is a natural falloff to the endless content treadmill and D&D in 2018 is in a vastly different state from D&D in 2013.

>>97872034
>it's with player facing rules being in the DM guide instead, such as magic item crafting.
Magic item crafting is DM facing since the DM alone decides their availability according to the tone of the campaign.
The 2024 rules water this down a bit with the retarded magic items awarded by level table/tracking sheet and by having rules for brewing potions of healing and scribing scrolls in the PHB.

>>97867661
basically everything interesting was deleted from the playtests for the sake of shrimplification and making a more boring game
>maneuvers were something EVERY martial got, and your maneuver dice refreshed EVERY ROUND, if you wanted to turn your brain off and just attack you could just dump them into damage, but you could also use them for a bunch of other useful shit and fighting styles granted additional specific maneuvers not just a boring static bonus.
>sorcerers all used spell points by default, represented as Willpower, and the more you spent your Willpower the more your magical bloodline mutated you and started to take over until you rested and regained your willpower, so sorcerers would transition from one combat role to another over the course of an adventuring day as they mutated more and more, with draconic sorcerers getting martial armor and weapon proficiency, growing scales and claws, getting melee damage bonuses and defensive boosts as they mutated, also distinguishing them from wizards who had more versatility day to day but ran out of gas and got weaker as they lost spells without a backup.
>warlocks didn't just use spells, they chose from minor and greater invocations giving at-will abilities or specific powers in place of spells, often with weird and eerie side effects instead of generic spells shared with wizard/sorcerer/druid/etc.
these 3 were all way more interesting in playtests than the final product we ended up getting.

>>97872058
Where's the campaign take place?

>>97873511
You tell me

>>97873476
I almost suspect they planned to release these options as supplements down the line

>>97873476
fuckkk we were robbed.

>>97870276
>They way they link critis to level is quite interesting.
Is this really all that different from BAB increases of 3.5/PF1e? Or adding a rank to a skill per level ?

>>97872043
What mechanics in 5e encourage roleplay? If they're at all mechanically related to combat or skill checks the same argument can be levied at you dear faggot.

The only one I can remotely think of is Inspiration but even 5e realized the way Inspiration dropped was some mother-may-i type turd sandwich and gave more mechanical ways to earn it.

>>97870660
No, your point is just stupid. Having ways to use enemies early and late in the game by adjusting their template is just an efficient use of design space. You're going to generally have templates and stat blocks for various types of enemies at any level because not every encounter is just going to be fighting the strongest thing available for your level because it might just not make sense for the situation at hand.

So the more elegant solution is to widen the range certain enemies are threats at. This can be due to numbers, better equipment, better training etc. Not every cultist is identical because not every cult is identical. If you see this sensible design choice and go "video game" because a JRPG you played used recolored enemies once, the problem is within your own mindset anon.

>>97874370
>requires spoonfeeding

>>97874509
so there aren't any?

>>97867259
>Hasbro fired the head of D&D every year.
And subsidiaries get shut down by their parent video game companies every year for not turning CoD-tier profit despite selling like hotcakes, what's your point? The suits just have completely irrational expectations of the market

>>97874509
I gave criteria and an example. If I'm so wrong it should be easy to explain why and how.

>>97873476
You fail to say that the sorcerer and warlock were only in one playtest package that went to level 5 with a single subclass only and were dropped afterward. They were so half-baked that two of the Draconic Sorcery abilities (one to reduce incoming damage, one to gain resistance to a damage type) are both named Dragon Scales. The latter was reworked into Elemental Affinity. Two of the fey patron's powers are so limited they're practically useless (guess if target's max HP is lower than yours, advantage on Charisma checks if you guessed right; disadvantage on a single melee target against you but not if the attacker is undead), the other was a precursor to Misty Escape.
The last couple of playtests even considered dropping the classes entirely and turning them into subclasses (not part of the playtest packages) of a renamed wizard, the mage.

>>97873938
In a setting you fuckwit.

>>97873476
Does anyone have a pdf for these playtests. I would like to take a look at them.

>>97876082
When I followed the link the folder I downloaded was empty.

>>97876043
>>97876143
This one should work. Catbox seems spotty right now. Expires in three days.
https://litter.catbox.moe/pcd9c5mlcc1aphnl.7z

>>97876209
Thank you

>>97870256
Unlike Hasbro and WotC, Paizo did actually put out public numbers at one point. $11.2m revenue for 2012 in Publishers Weekly just a bit before the peak of PF1. Grew some in 2013 and early 2014 and went on a long decline after 5E's release. That's incredible for a third party but would be an immediate dismal failure by D&D standards.

>>97875327
Which one?

>>97861022
You believed unironic wotc shills. Anyone who had hope for 5e lost it during the playtest.

>>97861022
5e was loved for NOT being 4e. However the problems with the system were never fixed and often required 3rd party and home brew to fix it. 5e was basically 3.5/PF with some of the good stuff of 4e. However everyone admitted it was a mess, from how bad some of the classes and subclasses were, to how you basically needed 3rd party works and homebrew to make the system worth playing outside of causal play. It only got big due to it's being D&D and the whole Critical Role blowing up and bring tourists and worse activists in. Since once they slipped in like they did into every pop culture thing in the 2010s they basically turn it to shit. (Look at comics, games, shows, movies, etc.)

Hints why I quit D&D for better systems. (ACKS, Sword World, Veiled Riders, DC20, Broken Empires, X without Number, etc)

>>97879917
>better systems
>ACKS
Almost fooled me.

>>97861574
WotC are literally firebombing 5.5e due to lack of interest. Party's over for 5e, and the consumer base they chose to cater to have no interest in learning a new ruleset.

>>97879917
You really need to leave this site and stop this brainless shitposting you do.

File: H2006-L312610007.jpg (227 KB)

227 KB JPG

>>97869397
Three of them are supplements for the core setting and the rest are pretty piss poor books for setting books.

Compare that to what you got for Eberron for 3e and it's just laughably thin.

>>97880571
Good job talking to yourself.

>>97880638
Why didn't the give the races of Eberron book the same binding? What the fuck is wrong with people?

>>97880953
it's a funny prank some companies like to play on autists

>>97861487
This is true, it’s nearly impossible to overstate just how absurdly hated 4e was.

Which is funny considering a lot of games nowadays take a lot of cues from it.

>>97885726
People could sense how much it was going to mess up RPGs in the future when everyone copied it.

>>97880953
Because it was technically part of the "Races of" Player's handbook sub-series rather than being an Eberron book.

>>97885726
4e wasn't hated for mechanics, it was hated for presentation. The initial PR blitz was antagonistic to 3.X fans and the initial GSL forced 3rd parties to pick a side of the edition war before even release. The formatting of the power system was also not easy to intuitively parse leading to many powers to look the same at first glance while being mechanically different.

4e is a good example of a game that had good ideas but presented them in the wrong ways.

>>97890907
There was no good way, because the primary complaint was that it wasn't more 3.5.
It was all, ironically, the same complaints people had about the 2e->3e changeover, right down to the 'antagonistic advertising' and the comparisons to video games.

>>97861022
I don't understand the big push on youtube to get people to switch from 5th edition to 2nd edition right now. Like, what for, they act like only 2e enables a certain style of play, and that this certain style of play that only OSR can provide is inherently superior. It's so bizarre.

>>97861022
I remember being a bit hyped because of the talks about retro-compatibility, but then that never happened.

>>97892683
>2e
>OSR
bait

>>97893916
Give up.