D&D 5E 5E: The Best and the Worst

[The Crimson Binome]

I hear you. And most of the people I play with have been playing forever and it's not something they consider. Plus there are SO MANY for a DM to keep track of - a group of six with each having the standard two traits, an ideal, a bond and a flaw is 30 things the DM needs to track.

To be fair, characters have always had those things, for as long as people have been role-playing. The only difference is that now they've codified and labelled them.

In the game I ran, I just bundled all of those things together under the banner of "fleshed-out character" and ran the game as I always had. It's not terribly important whether something counts as a trait or a bond or a flaw, as long as it's part of who the character is.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

What do you mean by lack of player agency?

Sent from my SM-G925I using EN World mobile app

This exchange(the second quote is a direct reply to my first quote)from another thread sums it up:

My experience spans levels 1-9, and my statement does apply to the top end of that. It sounds like you and I are speaking of different issues. You seem to be speaking of a lack of real challenge, which isn't what I'm saying. What I'm trying to say is that in 5E both success and failure feel arbitrary and random, and it feels like what happens is due to sheer luck as opposed to any agency by the players or even the DM. The dice feel like they determine success, not any sort of competence on the part of the player of PC, and I find little satisfaction in this. It does become less dangerous and less challenging at higher levels, but that doesn't feel like it has anything to do with any agency on the part of the players.

I'd pretty much agree with this. Players are generally in the 50-70% success range for abilities, and level appropriate monsters are more broadly at the 30-50% success range for abilities that target PCs. 5e is dice dependent, and characters generally don't have a lot of resources to leverage those odds higher, other than to spend resources to get more rolls (via advantage). The goal of most sessions, in general, is to leverage the narrative outside of combat, which can be at odds with scripted adventures.

As someone who personally enjoys 4e and WoD, but also likes 5e, 5e just might not be the right game for your playstyle. Sorry.

 

[Blue]

To be fair, characters have always had those things, for as long as people have been role-playing. The only difference is that now they've codified and labelled them.

In the game I ran, I just bundled all of those things together under the banner of "fleshed-out character" and ran the game as I always had. It's not terribly important whether something counts as a trait or a bond or a flaw, as long as it's part of who the character is.

I agree. I'm talking strictly about how it's presented in the book, becasue my complaint was that it isn't being used in that format. A 5e character has more flaws/bond/ideal/traits then the average FATE character has aspects for a GM to tag, and aspects are one of the most important part of your FATE character as opposed to a subsystem that has little other effect.

My last three campaigns (14 years and counting) I've had the players give each other poker chips for great RP, really acting in character. Back in 3.0 & 3.5 it was for extra shares of RP experience for the session. It's really easy to make it inspiration - but that's because that's how I run.

Inspiration strictly as written in the book is easy to ignore, and *every* 5e DM I've played under has done so. I have never seen it awarded once when I was a player to anyone. Not once.

I'm not sayng it can't work - it very obviously can. My complaint was that "That inspiration wasn't made more integral." I'd like it to take a more front-and-center-role, and be an integral part of 5e instead of something DMs feel they can dump.

 

[pirate gonzalez]

Like: The update to spell preparation

Dislike: Spells aren't built equally. Fireball is specifically stronger than it should be at it's level, which means it's the default damage spell for that level. A player may feel like they need to take fireball because it's the strongest option. I prefer when spells all follow the same guidelines. Plus, it makes it easier to build your own spell that way.

 

[Brandegoris]

Like the : Advantage/Disadvantage system. replaces modifiers somewhat and makes the game streamlined and easy

Dislike: The classes all feel cookie cutter to some extent. All fighters seem basically the same no matter what aspect you choose for instance. Not enough to make your character unique.

Pathfinder for instance had TOO much info on making your class unique and 5th edition has almost none. Weapons also are basically all the damn same LOL

 

[Tony Vargas]

Dislike: The classes all feel cookie cutter to some extent.

Each class is pretty significantly different from each other class, even casters that share a lot of the same spells and have the same resource schedule have very different class features....

All fighters seem basically the same no matter what aspect you choose for instance. Not enough to make your character unique.

Oh, potential characters within a given class seem cookie-cutter? That makes a little more sense. You still have sub-classes and backgrounds to work with, at a minimum, when it comes to make a single-class character distinct from others of the same class...

Pathfinder for instance had TOO much info on making your class unique and 5th edition has almost none.

There are fewer PC customization options in 5e (so far) than in the other WotC editions, sure. But with the slower pace of publication, there are fewer supplements out for 5e over 2 years in than there were for 3.0 or 4e even a few months in, so that's still somewhat understandable.

And it looks, from UA, like the pipeline is just jammed with new sub-classes.

 

[SwivSnapshot]

Dislike- character creation, particularly backgrounds and skills. They just don't add much to the process.

Like- many, many things, but I'm going to go with ease of use as my official choice.