D&D General Is WotC's 5E D&D easy? Trust me this isn't what you think... maybe

[tetrasodium]

I briefly read this last night, but my bed was more enticing than replying then.

Generally, yes, we have very different experiences:

• We always play in private settings (often my place, but sometimes another group member's home).

Sometimes our NonAL game will slide off to a private setting, but just as often we keep it at the flgs because it's more central to those in the group. Al might be just as icky as you'd expect, but it makes for a pretty decent way to pull a group together and figure out who's going to show up on time learn rules etc for us.

• My region is more rural/suburban than urban. From the sounds of it you are in or on the edge of major city? The closest major city is at least an hour away from where I live (we have several smaller cities all around though).

Yea, south east Florida is a huge sprawl pretty much from Miami up to somewhere in Palm Beach county and pretty much all of it grew out since the 70s 80s or 90s , I'd be hard pressed to drive through wilderness for any length of time more significant than an empty field or something without seeking it out but used to do it all the time years ago . Some of that is because of the age and some is because the government was still giving away land to people who farm it x years till the early 1900s iirc so it's easy to drive 5 miles and go through several cities.

• We get a fair amount of tourism (upstate NY), but no one joining our groups would be a tourist--everyone lives locally.

Yea, a lot of tourists come here for some variation of beach (daytime) visiting relatives and just escaping the cold of places like upstate ny . It makes for a vacation where finding something less expensive and alcoholic than dining out or clubbing at night and allows someone to get away from relatives for an evening a week or whatever . Nearly all of my al &non al players live locally, but "locally" is often 30minutes or so of mostly high speed highway travel.

• New players join by word-of-mouth typically. Only once, when we were first starting out, did I post online looking for players.

The flgs does a lot of outreach between various bench ads and social media, brand new never even opened the box of dice they just purchased in the other room newbies are fairly common for us.

• You probably brought up the experience issue because I did. Only five of the 30+ players I've played with played prior editions.

But those newbies buying a few "player's" books are a significant part of why WotC caters to the demographic.

I wouldn't call a month or two of weekly sessions with experienced players happy to help answer questions and such to still be a newbie, especially if they joined a game in progress instead of starting at L1. Lightly experienced perhaps, but newbie is a much lower bar. Usually within the first one to six months they buy the phb some other new book or enough ddb stuff to wing it but first session with the phb already purchased is definitely not the majority for the newbies I see.

Sure, I get that. I sounds like you have a LOT more turn-over given you play in public with strangers. Only 3 players I can recall in my 5 years were "strangers" to the group--usuaully someone knows them before they join (friend, co-worker).

My regular group who were friends first broke up many years ago (work life kidsetc). I think that you might have more strangers in that batch than I do people I knew first or didn't meet at some other d&d/pf/etc game

True, it is subjective. I think from your experience, newbies are also more likely to hang around and watch for a while before jumping in?

Not at all. If your going to be at the table you might as well do it while playing.. especially when it's someone who drove to a shop and paid 2$ or bought something like a silly bag of Japanese candy. I've seen cases of a parent with kid where only one was technically playing but the other was pretty much just helping them. Showing up and just watching is super rare IME.

My two cents:

If you're playing a 5th level PC you started at 1st, you shouldn't be a newbie really. It took our group 3 months of weekly sessions to get there the first time we played 5E. But by the time you reach 5th level, the game is even more in easy mode as far as PC survivability is concerned.

This might be even faster advancement than some (most) of my non al games, but when 5e is still targeting "never even seen polyhedral dice and learning to play session one with no experienced help" level newbies across all levels with 5e it's a problem

 

[Stalker0]

If you're playing a 5th level PC you started at 1st, you shouldn't be a newbie really. It took our group 3 months of weekly sessions to get there the first time we played 5E. But by the time you reach 5th level, the game is even more in easy mode as far as PC survivability is concerned.

Its one of the "flaws" in dnd from a purely gamist perspective (aka ignoring any sense of thematics or roleplay for the moment).

In most modern games, you want the player to have an intro experience. They often have a "learner" level where you get a feel for the mechanics, figure out how to play the game, and the challenge is either very low or even non-existant until the "real game" starts. Then the challenge tends to rachet up from there.

In dnd, 1st level is often one of the hardest levels. You are frail, you are weak, and even the basic monsters can prove a deadly challenge. Then you get some experience under your belt, get to 5th level or so....and now in comparison your invincible (at least relatively speaking). Its completely backwards!

 

[tetrasodium]

Its one of the "flaws" in dnd from a purely gamist perspective (aka ignoring any sense of thematics or roleplay for the moment).

In most modern games, you want the player to have an intro experience. They often have a "learner" level where you get a feel for the mechanics, figure out how to play the game, and the challenge is either very low or even non-existant until the "real game" starts. Then the challenge tends to rachet up from there.

In dnd, 1st level is often one of the hardest levels. You are frail, you are weak, and even the basic monsters can prove a deadly challenge. Then you get some experience under your belt, get to 5th level or so....and now in comparison your invincible (at least relatively speaking). Its completely backwards!

Rats+a hidden passage with a monster in the basement was a common opener for a reason it gave the group a chance to quickly work that stuff out and gel a bit while settling in their roles while still being close enough to civilization that the players can safely retreat or gear up around any shortcomings before taking on a real adventure.

 

[DarkCrisis]

Reading all this got me to think of the differences between modern Adventures and old school Modules.

Currently an adventure is level 1-10 and usually made "My first adventure" friendly. Rinse and Repeat for every new modern adventure.

Old school where leveling took longer a module was about 3 levels. (1-3) (4-6) (7-9) etc

So an adventure that started at level 4 or 7 would imply the player had some experience and this could be more of a challenge.

Modern D&D doesn't do this. As others have pointed out, every new adventure book has to cater to the inexperienced.

Time and time again I've seen peopel wonder why WotC doesn't make adventure starting at higher levels 5+ and 10+. Though I think the new Vecna one is 10+ to cap everything off.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

Just remove death saves and have characters die when they hit 0 hp, and 5e will be almost as deadly as 2e.

 

[payn]

Reading all this got me to think of the differences between modern Adventures and old school Modules.

Currently an adventure is level 1-10 and usually made "My first adventure" friendly. Rinse and Repeat for every new modern adventure.

Old school where leveling took longer a module was about 3 levels. (1-3) (4-6) (7-9) etc

So an adventure that started at level 4 or 7 would imply the player had some experience and this could be more of a challenge.

Modern D&D doesn't do this. As others have pointed out, every new adventure book has to cater to the inexperienced.

Time and time again I've seen peopel wonder why WotC doesn't make adventure starting at higher levels 5+ and 10+. Though I think the new Vecna one is 10+ to cap everything off.

One thing to consider is there are more new players, and thus GMs, entering D&D than seen in decades. An explosion in folks learning or relearning to play the game. I'm not sold that the WotC adventures are a smooth and easy ride from level 1-10 rinse and repeat. Though, post Hickman revolution play does lead to a more set up and pay off experience than the episodic dungeon crawl aspect of old school modules. Folks expect a little more than numerous Mayor info dump NPCs and neon signs that say "dungeon this way ". Perhaps this expanded campaign ideology makes it seem easier since a nintendo hard skill play design philosophy has largely been abandoned.

 

[Hussar]

That is a strong point. The WotC adventures are generally “campaign in a can”. I wonder if there is a trend where players start off DnD with one of these adventure modules, then shuffle off to home brew. That was my experience way back when. We started off with Keep on the Borderlands and Isle of Dread, then it was largely homebrew campaigns for a long time.

Modules were seen as filler. The dm got busy with life and needed a break, so do a module.

Isn’t there polling out there that shows that like half of gamers homebrew? Heck, you still see people proudly proclaim that they never use modules.

Maybe the reason the WotC modules look like they do is because many groups don’t exclusively play modules?

 

[DrJawaPhD]

Maybe the reason the WotC modules look like they do is because many groups don’t exclusively play modules?

I do think this is a big part of it. The only people playing modules straight out of the box will be new players who need an easy adventure. If you are experienced and want something harder, you're probably homebrewing anyways.

On top of that, I would bet that most people purchasing adventure modules don't even plan to ever play them, so balance is completely irrelevant to them. In my completely anecdotal first-hand experience, most of the book purchases come from a small handful of collectors who are going to buy every single product because they enjoy holding the books, reading the stories, being immersed in the artistic imagery, but then never actually playing any of the modules. I would wager that the percentage of people who even CARE about whether the adventures are easy or difficult is rather low.

 

[payn]

That is a strong point. The WotC adventures are generally “campaign in a can”. I wonder if there is a trend where players start off DnD with one of these adventure modules, then shuffle off to home brew. That was my experience way back when. We started off with Keep on the Borderlands and Isle of Dread, then it was largely homebrew campaigns for a long time.

Modules were seen as filler. The dm got busy with life and needed a break, so do a module.

Isn’t there polling out there that shows that like half of gamers homebrew? Heck, you still see people proudly proclaim that they never use modules.

Maybe the reason the WotC modules look like they do is because many groups don’t exclusively play modules?

Im not sure how popular WotC adventures are or not, but I do know Paizo APs are very popular amongst their players; myself included. Though I think there is likely another culprit than the homebrew will take it from here idea. Most folks dont play high level. It takes a long time to get there and keeping a group together is no small task. Even in my heyday of PF1 APs, my group was very ready to finish around level 12 and start over again. An army of posters are clicking away on their keyboard right now to say they always play high level, but I think its fairly rare, homebrew or otherwise.

I speak more about the Paizo structure because I have more experience with it. The best kept secret is that APs dont have to be run from start to finish. They operate very much like the old modules of 1-3, 4-7, 8-11, etc.. It takes a little work but they can come apart and dont require you to go the full way with them. Not sure how WotC campaigns measure up in that department?

 

[Hussar]

I speak more about the Paizo structure because I have more experience with it. The best kept secret is that APs dont have to be run from start to finish. They operate very much like the old modules of 1-3, 4-7, 8-11, etc.. It takes a little work but they can come apart and dont require you to go the full way with them. Not sure how WotC campaigns measure up in that department?

Depends on the AP to be honest. Obviously, the collection AP's like Candlekeep Mysteries aren't really even meant to be played as a single campaign. The whole book is plug and play with a bunch of short adventures. And even more thematic AP's like Ghosts of Saltmarsh are still very much plug and play - it is a collection after all.

The more serial adventures like Avernus might be a bit trickier to drag and drop from, but, certainly not impossible.

And that's also a point. How many people are simply mining the AP adventures? From my own experience, I've used three or four levels of Undermountain in other campaigns. And I've certainly borrowed elements of modules - monsters, NPC's, items, that sort of thing - into pretty much all my campaigns.

It does help when I play on Fantasy Grounds, since all that material is right there, ready to be used. I need a CR 3 NPC? I can search through my stuff instantly and get one - ten second later and maybe a name change, and poof, I've to a ready made NPC to use in a totally different adventure. I imagine that people who heavily use D&D Beyond have similar experiences.