Most frustrating quirk of 5E?

[Blue]

3.) Along the same lines with my first two quirks, the biggest problem I have with the character classes is that everyone is a superhero. That Fighter that went out on his first adventure in 1E was the farmer's kid that was striking out to make a name for himself. He started out weak and through levels and magic items he gained that power. Through adventuring he grew and made a name for himself. He came back to town as the victorious adventurer. In 5E the level 1 character might be a little weak but the super fast progressions ensures that he is a level 3 superhero in no time.

I heard you on the other ones, but this one seems off. A medium encounter @ 1st level has an XP budget of 50XP per PC. But that's not actually 50XP earned each, that's after the difficulty modifier - x2 for 3-6 monsters, a common place. So it's 25XP per PC per encounter. 300XP is 12 encounters.

For us, that's about two encounters a night, and we play every other week. So it's about 12 weeks to get from 1st to 2nd. Sure, some encounters are tougher and grant more XP, but not every session has two encounters, so it evens out.

The point before had the DM controlling the speed of power creep by the rate of giving out items. If your table finds it to fast do the same, control the speed of leveling to be happy for your table.

 

[Azzy]

The point before had the DM controlling the speed of power creep by the rate of giving out items. If your table finds it to fast do the same, control the speed of leveling to be happy for your table.

There's also the option to increase the experience points nececarriy for obtaining a new level by some multiple. Want to double the time it takes to level? Multiply the numbers in the current character advancement table by 2.

 

[DQDesign]

I just find it dumb that if they were going to be shave off an existing armor type from the game that they went with one that actually existed instead of the one that didn't (and that is also kinda dippy). But keep on truckin', buckaroo.

Instead I find the approach of favouring non existing stuff perfectly reasonable in a fantasy game.

 

[delericho]

I'm going to go with the language used in the DMG - there are several areas where the underlying systems are fine, but explained really badly. If they were to do a new version of the game that made no rule changes at all, but rewrote the text for clarity, I'd happily buy a new set.

(Though they should also fix the index at the same time, of course. And the armour list sucks. But while annoying, neither of those is my "most frustrating quirk". )

 

[Seramus]

Very few encounter powers.
I loved encounter powers from 4E.

 

[ccs]

Very few encounter powers.
I loved encounter powers from 4E.

That's a feature, not a bug.

 

[Seramus]

That's a feature, not a bug.

Because the game really needed more basic attacks.

 

[ccs]

Because the game really needed more basic attacks.

No, I was thinking because the game has to sell to the widest audience.

 

[GothicEmperor]

That's a feature, not a bug.

Yeah, with 5e combats only lasting about 3 or 4 rounds at most, common per-encounter powers wouldn't really work.

 

[PrimevalSeeker]

I really like 5e but there are quite a few things that could be done better/differently.

Having to choose between feats and ASIs.

Tool proficiencies being for the most part flavor only but taking up the space of a skill.

The ranger :/

This is more of a personal pet peeve. Different classes getting class and subclass abilities at different levels instead of having a shared table. It feels as if each class was developed by a different person or they run out of time and outsourced it to different people without giving direct guidelines.

Edit: No primal spell list for druid and ranger.