Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Dragonuspaus1 Jul 15, 2014 23:29:57	Why don't we just roll once for a stat. Like 18 and it is good for all 6 statistics(strength, dex,etc).It would be good for all the attack, and skill checks as well.And we do not need any skills groups, since every skill can be lumped under 1 skill( The everything skill)!!!!!  It would make the game so easy, anyone can then play it.    Is that not what you have done going from 3.5-4th addition. Now simplifying it further in 5th eddition. Simplified it to the point of stupidity!!!!  An how do you differentiate detwee one thief( thats into breaking in and cracking safes, from a thief thats into political intrigue, when both have a 5 ranks in thieving skills???? An then have the gall to charge $20.00, and we still had to download the basic rules in pdf (and print it out). Telling us its free to download. So are you going to reinburse us for the 110 sheets of priter paper, and printer ink needed to print it out? SOUNDS LIKE A CHEAP COP_OUT.    Didn't anyone at wizards of the coast Learn when they scaled back 4th eddition?     DUM-DUM-DUM-DUM-DUM!!!!!!!!!   Instead of trying to blatenly rip us off, by Dropping 3.5 (which had a huge fan base and source book set up). Just so we had to buy new players guide, DMG and MMs.You should have instead went with expanding the 3.5 with new worlds( for the modern, future, and traveller books)Maybe set up some deals with Lisanne norman(for her sholan series), Todd McCaffery( for the Dragon Riders of Pern), to make source books for adventuring there.Maybe also go back and update Spelljammer for 3.5.What about doing a d20 book for (Counsil of Wyrms).     D&D is a ROLE-PLAYING GAME....  Not Warhammer 40k(minitures war game), POKEMON(card game), I'm very disapointed in you guys. I've been playing D&D since I was 13 and it first came out of chain mail.An now I'm 50 years young. Stop being greedy, Your killing off D&D.     Sincerely      Paul Smarsh dragonpaus@aol.com
#2 Torg_Smith Jul 16, 2014 5:08:37	This forum is more about future products releases then general rants about the rules. The sub-forum Product and General D&D Discussions in the Fifth Edition section is a better place for this kind of post. Now if you were to post that you do not think they should be releasing the Fifth Edition Core books because you did not like the rules, and that they should start publishing Third Edition books. That would be appropriate for this sub-form. I have to be honest with you. I really don’t think that will be happening.
#3 Dragonuspaus1 Jul 16, 2014 11:02:07	Well since they have already re released the 1st edition Slavers series, and Tomb of Horrors series,and the 3.5 edition PHB,DMG,MM, with updates for 4th edition,Why shouldn't they continue reviving  3.5????    It has large potential,and already proven to have large fan base.    You going to tell me that it's OK to put out a basic set, with only half the basic rules in it, and make the players print out 110 pages of rules, that should be in the box set. and charge $20.00....  then put out the PHB,DMG,and MM and charge 49.95 each. Thats 150.00 to play a game. Video games don't cost 150.00 for 1 complete game.  Many gamers already have The PHB,MM,DMG for 3.5 and they only cost them 25.00 at that time.And you have the complete game rules.
#4 Torg_Smith Jul 17, 2014 17:37:43	Dragonuspaus1 wrote:
#5 Davane Jul 18, 2014 10:23:06	If you want to keep supporting 3.x, maybe it is worth looking at the Pathfinder RPG by Paizo Publishing?   For me, I like 5th Edition, and it is good to see that it is pulling the better things from 4th Edition (which was controversial, to say the least) and 3.x. I also like how it is pulling at ideas that have been used for a while in Pathfinder RPG too.   D&D is 40 years old, and to be fair, 3.x is still the best thing that ever happened to D&D, and had a lasting impact due to the fact that it created a more cohesive and universal system for the game. It is hard to see how any future edition will be able to bring about a better improvement than that. 3.5 was an issue, simply because it was a revision, rather than a truly new edition.   4th Edition tried some new things, which split the community - although the system itself was fine, in my opinion, the significant improvements could have been added to 3.x - it was the fact that it played a bit like an MMO, or in some cases, a CCG, that caused the main issues.   It is hard to point at what the breakthrough will be for 5th Edition, and how successful it will be - I think that the way Vancian magic has been tweaked to allow for more flexibility for spellcasting is good. You only have to go back to playing OD&D and see the difference beteen how spellcasters play. Of course, the idea of "at will" cantrips is another thing taken from the Pathfinder RPG.   I just think that it is useful to appreciate the previous editions and see how much things have changed over the last 40 years. The basic themes are still there, as is the basic gameplay concepts. As good as 3.x is, it is still using the same basic d20 method used for to hit rolls and ability checks since OD&D.   Even the humble cure light wounds still exist after 40 years, virtually unchanged from the idea that can be seen in OD&D. The specifics might be different (1d8 vs. 1d6+1, a single spell replacing a series of identical spells, and so forth).   As for costs - if people don't want to pay for the "useless paper" then they should release PDF versions of all products. For example, I want to see the information contained in the "white box" D&D set that was rereleased by Wizards, but I am not going to pay $149.99 for essentially a wooden box, especially when the material would be worth $4.99 per book ($34.99 for all seven books) as a PDF. I don't need any more dice - I already have enough of them!   I am looking forward to 5th Edition, and I am loving the product quality of the series so far, although we have only seen the Starter Set. For the current rulebooks, sure, I will pay for them in hardback or softback. Because, for the latest stuff, you want the latest quality. You are most likely to use it as is, and it is mostly to show that you are a gamer. For old content, you only really need the PDFs, because it is information that is valuable, not the product. Chances are, most people are going to use the content from early products and convert it to the edition of their choice anyway! Why wait for Wizards to release Return to the Keep on the Borderlands, when you can just convert the original?   I say let Wizards focus on the future of the system and the setting, but we really need to keep the past, as it is a great historical reference system. People don't need 5th Edition versions of 3rd and 4th Edition books - they want new material from 5th Edition. This was the biggest problem with many of the early 3.5 products - the majority of them were simply expanded versions of earlier 3.0 products, and people felt that they were being ripped off.   The thing is that people don't like being made to pay for the same content over and over. They want the choice. Some people might buy PDFs of products they already have, if only as a show of support to Wizards. Some people find it easier to have their products in PDF rather than sitting on a shelf.   DNDClassics.com is where classic D&D rules should be available. 3.x, now over 14 years old, is one such classic. It may be the best version for many people, but it is still a classic, and people always want new content. This is where 5th Edition comes in. I don't expect new content for 3.x, any more than I expect new content for OD&D, or AD&D 2nd Edition. I do, however, hope that previously published content will be available, and not stored in a vault somewhere waiting for Wizards to harvest the IP. For me, Keep on the Borderlands and Return to Keep of the Borderlands are two different products, and I would like them to be available. A 5th Edition Return to Keep of the Borderlands would be another seperate product, and getting that would in no way change my desire to get the previous two products.
#6 greyhobbit13 Jul 26, 2014 3:30:21	In regards to the original poster: Simplifying isn't necessarily bad.  I prefer the term elegant.  The rules are fairly simple but give guidlines for doing just about anything you want.   You don't have to memorize a 2 page set of rules on grappling, or look over you dozen plus "powers" to see if one of them allows you to do something that physics says anyone can at least try.  Plus it so far, they seem to be doing okay with making it modular.  You can use the simple version of the rules (no feats, just one build per class, standard array of stats) or add on the bits that you like.  And I have found the play test easy to use with old 1E material.
#7 Saibias Jul 31, 2014 11:48:31	To adress a question you asked about what sets one rogue apart from another the answer is simple, the player and the way the player role-plays his or her character. Why get so rapped around the axel about numbers and stats, that in my opinion is missing the main point of roleplaying games. If you want a rogue who is good at political intrigue then role-play it that way. Why does it matter that you don't have a specific stat for every rougish ability? If there was to be a skill for every skill present in reality, then the character sheets would have to be twenty pages long. Also WotC is a business, and businesses have to make money to be able to produce their products. They would not be able to generate enough income just through modules and mini adventures. And I would be rather upset if they just kept releasing the same books every few years with different artwork and not try to make any improvements. Just because you loved one edition better than another doesn't mean they shouldn't make changes. There are people who feel that 3.5 was lacking, and it's because they are terrified of change or are extremely loyal to the edition they fell in love with playing. And if releasing new editions every few years means that more people are drawn into role playing and experience something that they truly enjoy, that is a good thing.  I can understand your frustration though, when 3.0 came out I was vehemently against it I accused WotC of being money grabbers and thieves, but as I got older and matured I realized that they are trying to draw more people into roleplaying. To adress the issue of price, when I was growing up I had to save money to make purchases, so when I see something that I can not afford immidiately and truly want, I save money and sell things I no longer need or use so that I can purchase them. It is very useful for keeping clutter out of my house as well.
#8 Falheim Aug 05, 2014 8:42:41	Saibias wrote:
#9 Dog_O_War Aug 07, 2014 8:51:13	Dragonuspaus1 wrote:
#10 jarisfein Aug 22, 2014 14:34:49	Dragonuspaus1, complaining about the loss of new material to your favorite D&D version is not going to change anything. Get used to it. I have played every iteration of D&D (and still have all of books sitting on 5 book shelves) and the need to change is a constant in all RPG's. There isn't a single RPG out that hasn't gone through revisions. If you like 3E, then play 3E and make up your new material.   As far as the PDF is concerned, it was released so players could read the new rules and decide if they liked the new edition before purchasing it. Honestly, that was a pretty cool thing for WotC to do. Instead of succoring people into purchasing a new product without knowing what was truly being offered, they gave you the full rules to view and make an informed decision. I see the best of all editions emerging in this new version of D&D. But like all things in life, some people will like it, and others won't. Play it if you like it, or find something else. But your whining isn't going to change anything.   And if you don't like the price tag on the books, you can get them for $20.00 less on Amazon.
#11 Rolemancer Aug 26, 2014 23:22:22	Well, they need to release a PDF FIRST, then release the printed product.  This way they can get the errata in BEFORE the printed version goes out.  Missing spells,etc. is BULLSHIT.  Editors and proofreaders should lose their ****ing jobs.
(Reply to #11) AaronOfBarbaria	Rolemancer wrote:
#13 shamurai7 Aug 29, 2014 23:10:37	Never seen a more appropriately named thread..... I read the op and immediately thought about how 'simply stupid' it was. I'm outta this one.....ha-derp.
#14 caridhor Sep 02, 2014 0:46:35	I dont think they did a bad job with 5.0, I am one of those that really liked 4th ed. But I will say, 5th is just bland, and at 50.00 for a msrp book, it leaves alot to be desired. If they had the pdf first, I most certainly would not have bought a PHB. Again, not that it is a bad product (overpriced) but not bad, its just also not great, its just good.  Overall I guess I expected alot more out of it, I was really excited about it....then I saw it...and yeah, its solid, but there is nothing about it that "Pops" if I summed it up in 1 word, it would be "bland". I can't put my finger on just what it is, but going through the PHB there just isnt anything special about this edition that makes me say " yeah its worth the money to switch"
#15 FaerieGodfather Sep 05, 2014 8:05:02	You know, I was excited for 3e when it first came out. I read the previews in Dragon, and I played with the house rules they suggested, and I bought all three core books on launch day. I actually bought the first book out-of-the-box at my local bookstore for the PHB and the MM. I was a regular on EN World, and I followed all of the news and all of the stupid flame wars over the edition change. I followed the same stupid edition war nonsense when 3.5 came out, and I bought all the books and I played and I played until I burned out on 3.5 and realized just how flawed the d20 System was and how much they'd changed D&D from the TSR era.   I picked up 4e when it came out. I looked at it, and I put it back down, and I never picked it back up again. I've played a couple of games of 4e, but I never owned the books, never tried to run the game myself, and never considered myself a fan. I didn't like 4e.   And then they announced the Next playtest, and I signed up for it. I didn't like what I saw. The few interesting new bits that I did get excited about, there was a massive fan backlash against and they got cycled out in the next playtest packet. I lost interest and stopped following the playtest updates. I didn't like Next, and I figured I'd just skip it liked I'd skipped 4e.   Well, the PHB came out, and I picked it up. And I read it. And I bought it. Maybe I missed something in the playtest, or maybe they'd changed it after I'd given up, but the new PHB was good. It made me want to play D&D again; it made me want to run D&D again. There's still some stuff I don't like about it, and there's some stuff I'm going to change before it hits my table... but it's the best version of D&D I've ever seen. Better than 3e. Better than AD&D. Better even than the Rules Cyclopedia. It's as easy to pick up and play as OD&D, as easy to customize as AD&D, as flexible as 3e, and-- as near as I can tell-- as easy to run as 4e.   This idea that it's "overly simplified"-- to the point of stupidity-- is ludicrous. The math is simpler, the progression of power is flatter... but the game has the same scope and scale as any previous version of D&D, with greater flexibility.
#16 Arilon Sep 09, 2014 12:09:25	At the outset, and in the interest of full disclosure:  I run a number of games for Pathfinder Society, and am heavily involved in Paizo's Organized Play for Pathfinder.   I have played DnD since around 1979.  When AD&D was moving to 2nd Edition, I was furious - I didn't think there was anything wrong with AD&D.  Then, I got into 2e and I enjoyed it.  3e came along, and I felt upset - I thought it was just an inflation in power curves that catered to power gamers.  But, my group switched to 3e and then 3.5, and we enjoyed it.  4e came along, and though I played a lot of LFR and a couple of home games, I couldn't get into it.  It just wasn't D&D to me, despite its name.  So, I jumped over to Pathfinder, which was like coming home - it was, at its core, 3.5, with a number of improvements.   I enjoy Pathfinder very much, and I like the fact it has a much more robust and comprehensive rule set.  That type of system caters to my style of gaming.   But, I bought the Starter Set for 5e, and the PHB.  I made a character and played at Encounters last week.  And I like 5e. The game feels very much like old school D&D, with some improvements and good enhancements.  I still think it's a bit too simplistic for my preferred gaming style, but not so simple that I can't enjoy it.   So, I'm going to play BOTH Pathfinder and 5e.  I don't feel I have to choose between one or the other.   Innovation and updates of games are, on the whole, good things - at least, they can be.  However, they need to be well-thought out, well-designed, and well-edited.  4e was NONE of those things; at least on the surface, 5e seems to hit that mark.   At any rate, that's just one gamer's opinon.    TL;DR:  I play Pathfinder and 5e, and enjoy them both.