Brand new DM to 5E and many concerns...

[WhosDaDungeonMaster]

I don't get it. The way it works in 5E was exactly the way it worked in Basic, 1E, 2E, and 3E. Literally the only edition that did things differently is the one you skipped. So... why does it now feel like a video game where it didn't before?

The biggest factor is the super high HP for everything I guess. In the case of the ogre, for instance, HP is triple what it was before. Despite their lower AC compared to 1E, they are much more dangerous. Having lots of HP and taking hit after hit reminds me too much of video games. What can I say, it is a gut reaction and usually for me, first impressions are correct LOL.

All of that said, however, 5E is far more balanced than any other edition except 4E.

I guess that will always be a matter of opinion and playing style. For my games, 1E with some 2E (mainly proficiencies) thrown in was always balanced and enjoyable for myself and my players. When 3E came out and the D20 system in general, min/maxing when rampant! It was so ridiculous, it stopped being funny...

I will probably use the grittier options in the DMG for my 5E since I prefer the older-style of play.

 

[TwoSix]

Yeah, I'm long familiar with it. I've had to explain to numerous players how an 8-point hit to a 10th-level level fighter with 55 hp isn't nearly as deadly as it is to the 1st-level fighter with 7 hp. The higher level character's combination of combat experience and skill, luck, etc. turns the blow at the last moment so it hurts, but doesn't run him through like the 1st-level guy.

Guess I was hoping 5E would go a better direction. I have to explain to my new players how all this works. Basically, D&D now seems too much to me like a video game... I'll give it a try, but I have a feeling I'm going to be putting my core books up on ebay in the next few months.

You might have better luck if you could explain how you think it should work, and we can point you towards a system that better matches your preference.

"This system doesn't do X" causes fights. "This system does do X" causes constructive discussion.

 

[Morrus]

The biggest factor is the super high HP for everything I guess. In the case of the ogre, for instance, HP is triple what it was before.

By "before" you mean in a different system.

What can I say, it is a gut reaction and usually for me, first impressions are correct LOL.

I guess if you value your gut reaction over actual play experience, there's not really much to debate, is there? You're right - you the way you feel about this game you haven't played yet is how you feel.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Guess I was hoping 5E would go a better direction. I have to explain to my new players how all this works. Basically, D&D now seems too much to me like a video game... I'll give it a try, but I have a feeling I'm going to be putting my core books up on ebay in the next few months.

Yeah, you would hope. On the plus side, they did stick in a line about how different DMs describe HP damage differently. If you want to say that every "hit" involves some physical impact with a weapon, then that's entirely supported, and nobody can tell you otherwise.

Really, the strength of 5E is that it's easy to mod... within certain parameters. If you want to say that everyone adds half of their proficiency bonus to AC, then you can just do that, and accuracy will be lower and everything is fine.

I would definitely recommend playing the game for a while before modding it, though, just to get a sense for what works and what doesn't. For example, I modded the fighting styles such that Defense includes a bonus to both AC and saving throws, and the other styles also scale with proficiency bonus, but I also made other changes to account for that.

 

[TallIan]

Oh, I am sure this is why I feel so wrong with a lot of the stuff I am reading!

What can I say, it bothers me that a Fighter with Dex 16 has the same chance of hitting as a Wizard with Dex 16 if they both use Finesse weapons. So, my Fighter, who has spent years training in weapons and armor and everything related to combat, is basically just as likely to hit as your Wizard who has spent most of his years studying spells and reading, etc. How does that make ANY sense???

As others have pointed out, the fighter can use rapiers, the wizard can't. The fighter also gets a fighting style - if he's using a rapier that'll probably be defense or dueling (he could also use short swords and two weapon fighting). Second Wind also gives the fighter staying power the wizard doesn't have in a knife fight. Finally, if the wizard has a 16 DEX, he almost certainly won't have a 16 CON (he'll want INT to be high as well), while the fighter can have a high DEX and CON - further enhancing his hit points. So again the fighter has a lead in a straight up fight.

You have to look at the characters as a whole.

 

[WhosDaDungeonMaster]

Well, TwoSix, reading about the Bounded Accuracy concept behind 5E was what disappoints me. I never found any problem with the idea that a group (even large) of goblins and such should not be any real threat to higher level characters. As characters became more powerful, getting strong magical items went hand-in-hand with getting more powerful spells. Facing stronger foes that would crush lower-level characters was exciting at upper levels. To me such things made the game heroic on a classic scale. The escalator effect, or whatever it is called, was never an issue.

I have been thinking about it this afternoon, and I think an easy fix might be to do something like this:

Hit Dice is d10 or better, use Proficiency Bonus (PB) to Attack rolls, use PB - 2 for Skill Checks.
Hit Dice is d8, use PB -1 for Attack rolls and Skill Checks.
Hit Dice is d6, use PB -2 for Attack rolls, but PB for Skill Checks. For spells requiring an Attack roll, maybe use full PB still... I'll have to think about it.
Saves and other Ability checks use full PB for any type of HD.

But also I like the idea of Armor giving DR instead of increasing AC. It makes more sense. The target is still struck by a weapon, but the armor protects the wearer from the blow, taking all or some of the impact.

Anyway, I could go on and on, but that wasn't the point of the OP. The argument seems to be Fighters are balanced (for the most part) as is and Burning Hands (and similar) won't unbalance things either. But, if you have any suggestions I am listening LOL.

 

[Al2O3]

Given your dislike for bounded accuracy I would suggest you play to level 4 or 5 without changes. Level 5 is where you can start to compare spellcasters and fighters more fairly.

After an encounter day or two at level 4 or 5 I would expect that you know if the edition is for you or not. The house rule you might want for testing is session based leveling rather than XP. That is, if you want to test things quickly. Maybe 8-10 sessions total to test level 1-5 (reaching 6 at the end).

 

[ad_hoc]

What can I say, it is a gut reaction and usually for me, first impressions are correct LOL.

If you're just going to dig your heels in, why have the discussion?

Go with your gut and play a different game. You're happy. No one else is injured because you're not playing 5e. Problem solved.

 

[WhosDaDungeonMaster]

Given your dislike for bounded accuracy I would suggest you play to level 4 or 5 without changes. Level 5 is where you can start to compare spellcasters and fighters more fairly.

After an encounter day or two at level 4 or 5 I would expect that you know if the edition is for you or not. The house rule you might want for testing is session based leveling rather than XP. That is, if you want to test things quickly. Maybe 8-10 sessions total to test level 1-5 (reaching 6 at the end).

That's probably what I'll do. I was already planning on doing session-based leveling (2 for 2nd, 3 for 3rd, etc.) so I can advance the characters at a rate I think (having not played it before...) will work well. Even that might have to be changed though.

Anyway, I started this discussion because I had concerns from prior experience and wondered if others found similar problems. The general consensus is no, which considering the time and money I've already invested is good to hear. As for my personally enjoying the flavor of the game, I'll have to wait to see.

 

[guachi]

Re: a Wizard having the same to-hit bonus as a 1st level fighter.

I ran 50 trials pitting an unarmored 1st level Fighter vs. an unarmored 1st level Wizard. Each was dual wielding. Each had a 16 Dexterity. Each had a 14 Constitution. The Fighter had two-weapon fighting style and wielded two short swords. The Wizard wielded two daggers. Since their Dexterity scores were the same, I alternated which went first in combat.

The fighter won 47/50 times. The fighter won all 25 times he won initiative, 17 times the Fighter finished with all 12 hit points (sometimes because the combat ended in one round, others because the Fighter used Second Wind to return to maximum HP). The Fighter won 22/25 times he lost initiative, 5 times finishing with all 12 HP.