D&D 5E So Was That Z Fellow right?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
1. Some feats are OP, Sharpshooter and Great Weapon Fighter would be on this list, I would probably add healer feat these days.
They’re a bit above the curve, but I wouldn’t call them overpowered. All of the highest damage builds make use of them, but unless you’ve got a group of hardcore character optimizers, they’re not even a problem most of the time. And even if you do have such a group, they don’t break the game.

2. Feats in general break the game (in the PCs favour). Big offenders here are warcaster, resilient: con, and healer as they tens to negate the concentration mechanic and pacing of the gamer.
Nah, Feats are generally fine. These ones aren’t problems at all, because Concentration is its own limiting factor. Sure, you can keep up concentration on one spell despite being hit, but that’s not really a problem because you can only Concentrate on one spell at a time, and the spells are balanced with the expectation that you can maintain them for their full Duration if you want to.

3. Dex is stupidly OP unless feats are used (assuming you are melee, there is still sharpshooter).
Dexterity is still pretty much the god stat, yeah. I wouldn’t describe it as “stupidly OP”, but it is probably better than it should be.

4. Bless was OP/broken.
Nah. Bless is really good at helping you succeed at rolls, which is working exactly as intended. If your game is broken by players consistently succeeding at rolls, you have bigger problems than Bless.

5. The encounter guidelines did not work that well past level 10 or so (or 7 perhaps).
Yeah, but what else is new. 4e was the only Edition whose encounter building guidelines didn’t suck.

6. High level 5E was stupidly easy even ignoring the encounter guidelines with combats X5 deadly.
You get to a point after a while where the party’s victory in any fair fight is more or less assured. I’m not sure if this is a feature or a bug. At any rate, it is entirely possible to challenge a high level party, but it might require a little creativity. Legendary Monsters are generally a good place to start.

We did inadvertently stumble on some of the most powerful archetypes early on- light/life cleric, lore bard, diviner, paladins, battlemaster fighter but we also had war clerics, hunter rangers, rogues, champion fighters. We had magic weapons of course but early on most of them were from LMoP although I made the mistake of placing a +2 hand crossbow.
Life Cleric is one of the few things in the game I would describe as OP. Lore Bards can break the DC math, but again, if the PCs consistently succeeding at checks breaks your game you’ve got bigger problems. I haven’t found the other builds you mentioned to be OP at all. +X magic items do break the difficulty curve, but that’s working as intended. If you give the PCs +X magic items, you should expect them to be able to handle higher CR fights.

Now on ENworld and other sites the same complaints tend to come up again and again. So here we are 3 years later, was I right, wrong somewhere in the middle?
Somewhere in the middle. You correctly identified the most powerful options and builds in the game. You just have a different standard of OP than I think most folks do.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Istbor

Dances with Gnolls
Ah. A Zard thread that mentions Dexterity, Great Weapon Fighting, and Bless.

And here I thought he had died or was seriously losing his edge. Good to see you still around and unchanged.
 

The encounter tables and mechanic are set to “easy” mode.
And the easy is assume without feats or magic items, who are a bonus to players efficiency.
So when you got experienced players fan of optimization + feats + items the tables simply don’t follow.
 

Coroc

Hero
A bit of fiddling with the monsters aka not taking every stat/metastat from the monster manual as cast in stone, a bit of fiddling with the intelligence of opponents and I do not mean their stat here but their capability in tactics, a bit of resource management and many of those suscepted overpowers are dealt with totally easy.

I got much more headache with other things in 5e than how high the dpr of a group might be because of gwm.

The headache I got here is that we still do not have working mechanical conversion rules for some of the classic campaign worlds. (DS e.g. which is also one of your [MENTION=6716779]Zardnaar[/MENTION] sticks)

The headache I got with some class capabilities which prevent some styles of campaigning by making certain obstacles trivial.

The headache I got with you cannot easy take away some parts of the game without affecting class balance e.g. low magic world, in former editions you could balance things by making magic weaponry rare for the fighting classes as a counter to limit maximum spell level, does not really work good in 5E.

And with a new editions some naming errors for weapon and armor could have been fixed as well as to introduce a silver standard instead of gold for those interested in a halfway believable economy.

ah and btw at least I did not read it yet but some backgrounds are slightly OP e.g. criminal. It saves the party from needing a rogue, just have any high dex (and preferable good perception and search skill) character do the job instead.
Read it up I nthe PHB it really works well especially with Halfling or wood elf.
 


Werebat

Explorer
Oh don't think Zard was actually looking for a pat on the back. It's just been too long since he's made some kind of over-the-top, extreme claim that starts a chain reaction of responses. He needed an attention fix, so he said something outrageous. And look what happened!

Zard for President?

When one of his threads gets as long as "Why Does 5th Edition SUCK?", THEN we can talk. Until then...
 


CapnZapp

Legend
They’re a bit above the curve, but I wouldn’t call them overpowered. All of the highest damage builds make use of them, but unless you’ve got a group of hardcore character optimizers, they’re not even a problem most of the time. And even if you do have such a group, they don’t break the game.
That's way too lenient for me.

Yes if you have zero power gamers there is little issue.

Yes if you have only power gamers, that all correctly identify the "good builds", there is little issue.

But this is a ridiculously low bar to set on a modern game published in 2017! We can expect much more.

We can, and should, expect that a large variety of builds are effective, rather than some feats basically turn other builds into outright traps.

So, when you have SOME powergamers (or simply some players making lucky build choices) you can end up with some characters being easily TWICE as effective as others. And I would argue it is much more common to have some "mechanically minded" players in your group than none, or all.

So, no, that's a way too lenient and dismissive way to look at the actual problem.

Which is, the designers failed to identify, or just didn't care enough, a number of stupefyingly good choices. The balance simply isn't good enough, even for this game's FIFTH edition. (How many editions do we accept before they get it right!?)





Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app
 


Uchawi

First Post
The biggest detractors to games in general is complexity and lack of consistency. I believe 5E is somewhere in the middle, but based on its design it is much easier to detect mechanical choices that become preferred while others are placed to the side. With that stated, I would be reluctant to remove feats, since it has more of an impact on martial characters. At least casters have spells to allow interesting choices.

From my viewpoint, 5E could be much better, but that is not going to happen for at least 10 years. I still play, but it is not the only game in town.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top