(Mostly) Uncontroversial Quirks of 5E

[Satyrn]

I'll add it to the list. If we're talking about product defects . . .

. . . the ink in my PH smudges too easily.

 

[Bacon Bits]

The weapon armor table is still a debate point, some see it’s genericness as a strength.

Now the index? I haven’t met a single person who thought it was good, just varies from “utter garbage” to “meh it ain’t great”.

The only problem with the Index is that the author had no clue how a cross index is supposed to work. Your entry should never be "AC see Armor", especially when your index also says "Armor p150". You neither added value nor saved ink here. It should be "AC p150 see also Armor" (but only if Armor has multiple entries or subentries).

Also the fact that the classes that can use a spell aren’t listed in the spell description.

Yup. I understand kind of why (archetypes can gain access to spells... should we put Fighter, Rogue, Paladin, and Warlock next to Misty Step?), but nothing at all is just wrong. It makes the spell description extremely difficult to browse. Also, the Wizard spell list should include spell school. And if the spell list should either include a brief description of the spell (without specifics if they're worried about 3e-style misuse) or the page number of the spell description. It's a table of contents for the spells, dammit.

 

[BornChaoticNeutral]

It all sounds too simplified really...