My (Personal) Early Evaluation of the D&D 5thEd System – Wall of Text
I’ve played D&D since the old blue and pink boxed sets. Except 4thEd. I was never able to find a group willing to give 4thEd a try. Reading the books I was not impressed. Last several years I have played 3.5 and/or PF almost exclusively. Recently, my son talked me into giving 5thEd a try.
I will certainly not claim to have exhaustively explored every nuance of the system. I’ve played Adventurer’s League from 1 to 4. Plus a couple of one shots with others at level 5 and 7. The following is my impressions so far. (Again the comparison is mostly with PF, since that is my primary reference for the last several years.)
Pros:
1. Definitely has the feel of the original game, which is great for my sense of nostalgia (but probably doesn’t really help all that much with attracting new younger players).
2. Is actually pretty easy to learn for a new player (PF is definitely more difficult). Might be more difficult for a new DM since so much is left up to DM discretion.
3. Building a character is very quick and relatively straightforward. (In PF, I sometimes spend weeks coming up with a concepts design and build progression that satisfies me.)
4. Fewer corner cases for a rules lawyer to exploit and give the DM headaches.
5. Much is left up to the DM’s discretion in how to rule or resolve a given situation. If you have a really good DM that is creative, consistent, and good at ‘theatre of the mind’ descriptions – this is wondrous.
6. Can (and are even encouraged) to use different types of skill for various activities based upon how you, as the player, describe what/how you are trying to do something. I like that freedom.
7. Game moves pretty quickly. (In PF, even fairly low level fights can sometimes take quite a long time to resolve.)
8. Combat is deadly or at least a clearly high risk option. I like that. It encourages the players to try and find other ways to resolve situations. (In the ‘default style’ of PF play, the party expects to fairly easily win most fights. This encourages the ‘murder-hobo’ approach to most problems.)
9. Lower level opponents really are a threat. Several level 1 or 2 guardsmen can easily defeat or at least severely injure a 4th level player. (In PF, NPC’s that are a few levels below you are nearly negligible. They are unlikely to noticeably injure you and a couple rounds of rolling dice will see them eliminated.)
10. Party can’t just ‘heal to full’ after every single fight all day long. Back-to-back combats really will quickly wear you down.
11. Not nearly as dependent on magic items in general. (In PF, most feel you ‘must’ have a certain minimum level of magic items to function at a given level of play.)
12. Similarly, not as dependent on the ‘standard’ magic items. (In PF, most players don’t get much in the way of the plethora of neat / cool / unique / strange magic items because, they feel they must have the best ‘big 6’ items that they can afford just to be functional.)
13. Adventurer’s League games are pretty easy to find. If I’m traveling for work in the Detroit area and have an evening free, there is an AL game somewhere in the area almost every day of the week.
Cons:
A. In many ways the rules are too simple. Since there is no rule for even fairly simple activities, I as the player have no real idea how high of a DC the DM will set for many
common things. For examples: Throwing a grappling hook up on to the roof and climbing the attached rope. As a real person, with only little bit of experimentation, I would have a pretty good idea of how difficult that would be for me to attempt. I have had DM’s set the DC as low as a single DC 10 check to high as 3 DC 18 checks in very nearly identical circumstances. One didn’t even require any check at all “Oh yeah you are experienced guys, you can do that no problem.”
B. The character builds are too simple. Every sorcerer or wizard I‘ve seen so far is a blaster caster. (Maybe slightly different blast spells, but still a blaster.) Every fighter has a sword (war hammer) and shield, or two-handed sword and is planning on nearly identical feat/ability choices. Every ranger has had either a longbow or 2 shorts swords and is planning on nearly identical feat/ability choices. Boring… (In PF, I can make an effective fighter that specializes in disarming, tripping, and then tying up his opponents to take them alive. 5thEd has no rules for doing anything like this. In PF, I can make an effective caster that controls the battle field with clouds of damaging fog, pits in the ground, walls of spikes, etc… In 5thEd, I don’t see anyone even considering trying to do anything like that.)
C. Character build ‘sub-game’ is absent in D&D 5thEd. I am lucky to have time to game once a week. Usually more like once every two weeks. In PF, I can spend a lot of the in between time building characters, thinking about new uses for spells, possible combinations of archtype, feat, race, etc… Then I can also spend time discussing those possibilities with others in person or online. I can kill lots of little bites of free time working on things for PF even when I can’t be gaming. In D&D 5th Ed, the builds are so simple and similar that none of that really applies to any great extent. Considering a sword and board warrior type? Bam. Here it is. Done. I can understand why some people like that simplicity, but for me it eliminates a large part of what attracts me to RPG’s in general.
D. See number 5. Above “…Much is left up to the DM’s discretion in how to rule or resolve a given situation. If you have a really good DM that is creative, consistent, and good at ‘theatre of the mind’ descriptions – this is wondrous…” The converse of this is that if you do not have a DM that is creative, consistent, and good at ‘theatre of the mind’ descriptions – it can easily end up kinda lame. Some DM’s almost shut down if there is no rule, “you can’t do that.” Some DM’s are giving wildly different DC’s for nearly identical things even within the same session, just because they can’t remember last time or get bored with characters repeating actions. If the DM can’t imagine how something might be possibly accomplished and there isn’t a rule, they might just set the DC impossibly high.
E. I dislike that my 3rd level martial focused fighter is no better at swinging his sword than the 1st level sneak focused rogue. In fact, he is arguably worse since the rogue is using 2 swords (at no penalty) and so is twice as likely to hit and accomplish something.
F. I dislike the fact that since there are no difficulties set for almost anything (all DM discretion), I as the player have no idea if I can accomplish the individual items in the plan we are developing. Kicking in the exterior door into the manor house and the interior pantry door were both a DC 17 (It unexpectedly took us 3 tries for the big strong barbarian to bash his way into the simple pantry). Climbing a knotted rope was a DC 15 (we expected a knotted rope to be pretty easy). Climbing a simple tree was a DC 12 even though almost any 6 year can do it without falling to his death 50% of the time.
G. Skills - I dislike the fact that it is almost impossibly difficult to ever get better at anything but my initial few skills. Yes, I can take one of my very feat choices to make it trained skill. But that is a fairly serious impact to his primary utility as a fighter, sorcerer, or whatever. In PF, my barbarian can keep throwing a few points into studying about undead creatures (even though it is not something barbarians are normally good at) and eventually get pretty decent at knowing the weaknesses of most of his undead enemies. Even your trained skills are not going to get much better. Your 17th level wizard is probably only slightly better at knowing anything about dragons than he was at 1st level.
H. Adventurer’s League. Although I like the somewhat greater availability of A.L. over Pathfinder Society, I am not happy with the way it is run, administered, and setup.
a. Some areas there is always a “known” AL game(s) on such day of the week at such time. But no one is taking the time to put it on Warhorn (or whatever). So I don’t know what they are running, what tier it will be, or if there will be openings at the table. Twice in the short time I’ve been trying AL, I have taken the time to drive to the shop only to turn around and drive home again. This appears to be a fairly common occurrence in many areas.
b. I dislike that there is nothing like PFS pregens available to use if the only open table is tier 3 and I don’t have a character of that level.
c. I dislike the $5 fee to play the game. Not only do I have to by a $60+ book, I have to pay $5 at every game session. PFS has no charge to play. Most of us buy snacks/drinks at the game shop. Sometimes we buy some figurines, maps, dice, etc… With AL’s fee, I find myself less likely to buy anything else. On average, they are getting less money from me. But maybe they are getting more on average from others. I can understand this is setup to help make the game shops more supportive of AL, but I find it annoying.
d. I am really growing to really hate how treasure/reward is handled in AL. It is just stupid and is really impinging on my suspension of disbelief. Our groups have fought and defeated several low level enemies in plate armor, but no. There is no way you can have it before you get to tier 3. You’ve found dozens of potions of healing, but you have to spend 2/3 of the meager 75 gps you get just to buy 1 emergency healing potion that you are then afraid to use because it is such a huge portion of your wealth. Hooray! You came in first place in the city races, you won 5000 gps – but you get nothing. Certainly can’t afford ‘standard’ adventuring gear like holy water, alchemist fire, antitoxin, or even a horse. Makes no difference if you save the little girl or let her die. Makes no difference if you dispelled the danger threatening the city or simply barely survived while running away. Still the same negligible reward. Sheesh?!? (I will clearly admit that PFS has some of the same issues, but they are much worse in AL.)
Overall, for me, D&D 5thEd is a decent game. I don’t like it quite as well as PF, yet it is still pretty good and I can easily find
it enjoyable. If friends or family invite me to a game/campaign of 5th, I am more than willing to join in and I’m sure I will have a good time. However, if I am forming a new gaming group or planning to GM a campaign, it will almost certainly be PF.
PFS is way better than AL. I will finish Dragon Heist with my AL group. But I am unlikely to play any more AL stuff after that, unless a friend really wants some company. For my free time pickup games I will be choosing PFS.
I’ve played D&D since the old blue and pink boxed sets. Except 4thEd. I was never able to find a group willing to give 4thEd a try. Reading the books I was not impressed. Last several years I have played 3.5 and/or PF almost exclusively. Recently, my son talked me into giving 5thEd a try.
I will certainly not claim to have exhaustively explored every nuance of the system. I’ve played Adventurer’s League from 1 to 4. Plus a couple of one shots with others at level 5 and 7. The following is my impressions so far. (Again the comparison is mostly with PF, since that is my primary reference for the last several years.)
Pros:
1. Definitely has the feel of the original game, which is great for my sense of nostalgia (but probably doesn’t really help all that much with attracting new younger players).
2. Is actually pretty easy to learn for a new player (PF is definitely more difficult). Might be more difficult for a new DM since so much is left up to DM discretion.
3. Building a character is very quick and relatively straightforward. (In PF, I sometimes spend weeks coming up with a concepts design and build progression that satisfies me.)
4. Fewer corner cases for a rules lawyer to exploit and give the DM headaches.
5. Much is left up to the DM’s discretion in how to rule or resolve a given situation. If you have a really good DM that is creative, consistent, and good at ‘theatre of the mind’ descriptions – this is wondrous.
6. Can (and are even encouraged) to use different types of skill for various activities based upon how you, as the player, describe what/how you are trying to do something. I like that freedom.
7. Game moves pretty quickly. (In PF, even fairly low level fights can sometimes take quite a long time to resolve.)
8. Combat is deadly or at least a clearly high risk option. I like that. It encourages the players to try and find other ways to resolve situations. (In the ‘default style’ of PF play, the party expects to fairly easily win most fights. This encourages the ‘murder-hobo’ approach to most problems.)
9. Lower level opponents really are a threat. Several level 1 or 2 guardsmen can easily defeat or at least severely injure a 4th level player. (In PF, NPC’s that are a few levels below you are nearly negligible. They are unlikely to noticeably injure you and a couple rounds of rolling dice will see them eliminated.)
10. Party can’t just ‘heal to full’ after every single fight all day long. Back-to-back combats really will quickly wear you down.
11. Not nearly as dependent on magic items in general. (In PF, most feel you ‘must’ have a certain minimum level of magic items to function at a given level of play.)
12. Similarly, not as dependent on the ‘standard’ magic items. (In PF, most players don’t get much in the way of the plethora of neat / cool / unique / strange magic items because, they feel they must have the best ‘big 6’ items that they can afford just to be functional.)
13. Adventurer’s League games are pretty easy to find. If I’m traveling for work in the Detroit area and have an evening free, there is an AL game somewhere in the area almost every day of the week.
Cons:
A. In many ways the rules are too simple. Since there is no rule for even fairly simple activities, I as the player have no real idea how high of a DC the DM will set for many
common things. For examples: Throwing a grappling hook up on to the roof and climbing the attached rope. As a real person, with only little bit of experimentation, I would have a pretty good idea of how difficult that would be for me to attempt. I have had DM’s set the DC as low as a single DC 10 check to high as 3 DC 18 checks in very nearly identical circumstances. One didn’t even require any check at all “Oh yeah you are experienced guys, you can do that no problem.”
B. The character builds are too simple. Every sorcerer or wizard I‘ve seen so far is a blaster caster. (Maybe slightly different blast spells, but still a blaster.) Every fighter has a sword (war hammer) and shield, or two-handed sword and is planning on nearly identical feat/ability choices. Every ranger has had either a longbow or 2 shorts swords and is planning on nearly identical feat/ability choices. Boring… (In PF, I can make an effective fighter that specializes in disarming, tripping, and then tying up his opponents to take them alive. 5thEd has no rules for doing anything like this. In PF, I can make an effective caster that controls the battle field with clouds of damaging fog, pits in the ground, walls of spikes, etc… In 5thEd, I don’t see anyone even considering trying to do anything like that.)
C. Character build ‘sub-game’ is absent in D&D 5thEd. I am lucky to have time to game once a week. Usually more like once every two weeks. In PF, I can spend a lot of the in between time building characters, thinking about new uses for spells, possible combinations of archtype, feat, race, etc… Then I can also spend time discussing those possibilities with others in person or online. I can kill lots of little bites of free time working on things for PF even when I can’t be gaming. In D&D 5th Ed, the builds are so simple and similar that none of that really applies to any great extent. Considering a sword and board warrior type? Bam. Here it is. Done. I can understand why some people like that simplicity, but for me it eliminates a large part of what attracts me to RPG’s in general.
D. See number 5. Above “…Much is left up to the DM’s discretion in how to rule or resolve a given situation. If you have a really good DM that is creative, consistent, and good at ‘theatre of the mind’ descriptions – this is wondrous…” The converse of this is that if you do not have a DM that is creative, consistent, and good at ‘theatre of the mind’ descriptions – it can easily end up kinda lame. Some DM’s almost shut down if there is no rule, “you can’t do that.” Some DM’s are giving wildly different DC’s for nearly identical things even within the same session, just because they can’t remember last time or get bored with characters repeating actions. If the DM can’t imagine how something might be possibly accomplished and there isn’t a rule, they might just set the DC impossibly high.
E. I dislike that my 3rd level martial focused fighter is no better at swinging his sword than the 1st level sneak focused rogue. In fact, he is arguably worse since the rogue is using 2 swords (at no penalty) and so is twice as likely to hit and accomplish something.
F. I dislike the fact that since there are no difficulties set for almost anything (all DM discretion), I as the player have no idea if I can accomplish the individual items in the plan we are developing. Kicking in the exterior door into the manor house and the interior pantry door were both a DC 17 (It unexpectedly took us 3 tries for the big strong barbarian to bash his way into the simple pantry). Climbing a knotted rope was a DC 15 (we expected a knotted rope to be pretty easy). Climbing a simple tree was a DC 12 even though almost any 6 year can do it without falling to his death 50% of the time.
G. Skills - I dislike the fact that it is almost impossibly difficult to ever get better at anything but my initial few skills. Yes, I can take one of my very feat choices to make it trained skill. But that is a fairly serious impact to his primary utility as a fighter, sorcerer, or whatever. In PF, my barbarian can keep throwing a few points into studying about undead creatures (even though it is not something barbarians are normally good at) and eventually get pretty decent at knowing the weaknesses of most of his undead enemies. Even your trained skills are not going to get much better. Your 17th level wizard is probably only slightly better at knowing anything about dragons than he was at 1st level.
H. Adventurer’s League. Although I like the somewhat greater availability of A.L. over Pathfinder Society, I am not happy with the way it is run, administered, and setup.
a. Some areas there is always a “known” AL game(s) on such day of the week at such time. But no one is taking the time to put it on Warhorn (or whatever). So I don’t know what they are running, what tier it will be, or if there will be openings at the table. Twice in the short time I’ve been trying AL, I have taken the time to drive to the shop only to turn around and drive home again. This appears to be a fairly common occurrence in many areas.
b. I dislike that there is nothing like PFS pregens available to use if the only open table is tier 3 and I don’t have a character of that level.
c. I dislike the $5 fee to play the game. Not only do I have to by a $60+ book, I have to pay $5 at every game session. PFS has no charge to play. Most of us buy snacks/drinks at the game shop. Sometimes we buy some figurines, maps, dice, etc… With AL’s fee, I find myself less likely to buy anything else. On average, they are getting less money from me. But maybe they are getting more on average from others. I can understand this is setup to help make the game shops more supportive of AL, but I find it annoying.
d. I am really growing to really hate how treasure/reward is handled in AL. It is just stupid and is really impinging on my suspension of disbelief. Our groups have fought and defeated several low level enemies in plate armor, but no. There is no way you can have it before you get to tier 3. You’ve found dozens of potions of healing, but you have to spend 2/3 of the meager 75 gps you get just to buy 1 emergency healing potion that you are then afraid to use because it is such a huge portion of your wealth. Hooray! You came in first place in the city races, you won 5000 gps – but you get nothing. Certainly can’t afford ‘standard’ adventuring gear like holy water, alchemist fire, antitoxin, or even a horse. Makes no difference if you save the little girl or let her die. Makes no difference if you dispelled the danger threatening the city or simply barely survived while running away. Still the same negligible reward. Sheesh?!? (I will clearly admit that PFS has some of the same issues, but they are much worse in AL.)
Overall, for me, D&D 5thEd is a decent game. I don’t like it quite as well as PF, yet it is still pretty good and I can easily find
it enjoyable. If friends or family invite me to a game/campaign of 5th, I am more than willing to join in and I’m sure I will have a good time. However, if I am forming a new gaming group or planning to GM a campaign, it will almost certainly be PF.
PFS is way better than AL. I will finish Dragon Heist with my AL group. But I am unlikely to play any more AL stuff after that, unless a friend really wants some company. For my free time pickup games I will be choosing PFS.
