D&D 5E Why does 5E SUCK?


log in or register to remove this ad

Tony Vargas

Legend
5e sucks because it tries so hard - and so successfully - to emulate 1e.

5e - like 1e did in it's day - sucks so hard that it has SUCKED more people into playing D&D than ever before.

Suck on that, suckers.

;P
 

Sleepy Mage

First Post
Unless you rolled at least 3 18s, ASI aren’t useless. You know that increasing your wisdom increases your AC, Wisdom Saves, and Stunning Strike DC, right? Dex is obvious, and Con should be for a melee, but your tertiary stats also matter, and will make you a better party resource if you really don’t see the use of any feats.

But let’s look at two feats for monks.

Mobile. Even greater speed, no Opportunity Attack from targets you have hit that turn (eliminating the need to pretty much even Disengage, and wildly opening up your combat mobility.

Mate Slayer, let’s you run straight to the mage, and take them down. The disadvantage on concentration when you deal damage to them is stronger on a monk than on most other characters, because you hit so many times.

Both excellent choices that will make you noticeably more effective. Then you got stuff like Skilled that is good for any character, plus the race feats if applicable, Tough, Durable, Athlete is extra fun on a monk, especially if your DM likes knocking PCs down.

As for class features...are you kidding? Tongue of the Sun and Moon is literally the only feature for monks that isn’t totally badass.

Slow Fall is crazy. Anyone else would have to cast a spell to avoid falling damage, you get it for free.

And you can run up walls, across water, and yes, by RAW, up waterfalls. In heavy enough rain, you could run up the rain. You can run up a secured rope.

Stunning Strike.

Not to mention whatever your subclass is.

Don’t be absurd. Monks are badass. Your issue is with you, not the game.

i do understand, sadly i think it has more to do with our game itself, considering im the only martial class in our group of five, two playing clerics with domains that allow heavy armor, and two wild magic sorcerers, i do feel as though i just dont do much, and considering im coming from pathfinder that has like ki powers and cool stuff like that, i am willing to admit i might be a bit biased. in our campaign its primarily through desert which means 99% of the time im never going to use slow fall or really get a good chance to use wall running, and my dex and wisdom is at 18 currently, thanks to racial and rolling decently, i do plan on spending my first ASI for a feat to improve my ac, its the dragonborn scales.


but again, this is mr from playing cool monks with ki powers and things like that, going into sun soul "everyone in my group does what i do but better" character, but if he dies ill end up going artificer and having fun that way hopefully, thanks for the feat tips though!
 

Ragmon

Explorer
I dislike that after you create your character, there is very little customization you can do (other then multi-classing).

Everyone just starts at level 3 so every one can just start the way they want (the first 2 level are almost pointless).

Tool Proficiency functions the same way as skills, but they aren't skills and you can spend time and money to learn them, but not skills?

The Spell descriptions are not marked by class.

Backgrounds are pointless, just give people the options for 2 skill. And 2 Tools, 2 languages or 1-1 of either. + 1 special quality of life ability. Instead of wasting pages on stupid backgrounds (maybe use 1 page for some examples for some character background ideas).

I miss the structure of the 3.5 splat books, they were standardized, easy to look trough and find stuff.

They should have just be smart about fixing 3.5, a ton of home brew solutions are out there they could have used. But oh well.
 


Tony Vargas

Legend
i do understand, sadly i think it has more to do with our game itself, considering im the only martial class in our group of five
Monks' Ki is explicitly magic in 5e, closest thing to a 'martial artist' in D&D they may be, but they're not martial in the sense of being contrasted with the broad group of " anything that can use magic."
considering im coming from pathfinder that has like ki powers and cool stuff like that, i am willing to admit i might be a bit biased.....t again, this is mr from playing cool monks with ki powers and things like that,
5e monks do have ki powers.
 

Sacrosanct

Legend
What do I hate about 5e? That apparently it's so welcoming, that even people who hate it and can't stop complaining about it every single day can't seem to give it up.
 

Satyrn

First Post
Monks' Ki is explicitly magic in 5e, closest thing to a 'martial artist' in D&D they may be, but they're not martial in the sense of being contrasted with the broad group of " anything that can use magic."

5e monks do have ki powers.
And yet you know that when he's calling the monk a martial character, he means it's not a spellcaster, and when he talks about missing Pathfinder's ki powers it's actually the diverse plethora of powes that he misses.
[MENTION=6952435]Sleepy Mage[/MENTION], 5e characters are indeed built simpler than Pathfinder characters. I find they play exceptionally well though when I don't look to what's on my character sheet. I just do what a monk would do, and force the DM to adjudicate the results.
 

Warpiglet

Adventurer
I don't like how small they drew halfling feet and how large Tiefling tails and horns are in the art. And...

Wow. I am pretty smitten. That's about it. Love it. I even started DMing it which has not happened since 1e. Found previous editions fun with feats and skills but did not like the work to DM.

This edition has as much customization as I require complexity that is "just right" (for me) and other things that I wished for but did not dare hope for.

I am old school I guess and dislike making magic items too easily and in fact dislike their sale as if they are a commodity like corn in America and oil everywhere. Despite playing wargames, I disliked the difference in a battle being a five foot step or some such. I like that some magic is back that breaks rules and changes stories (wish teleportation etc.).

I like that they used our old house rules about hit points and spell slots as actul rules of the game. Nearly anything they changed from AD&D 1e (besides action economy etc.) we were using as house rules.

So in answer to the question I hate nothing and love a lot. Exceeds my expectations in all ways save AD&D 1e seemed a bit more dangerous...

Yeah, sorry. I don't hate it at all.
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
I dislike that after you create your character, there is very little customization you can do (other then multi-classing).

Everyone just starts at level 3 so every one can just start the way they want (the first 2 level are almost pointless).

Tool Proficiency functions the same way as skills, but they aren't skills and you can spend time and money to learn them, but not skills?

The Spell descriptions are not marked by class.

Backgrounds are pointless, just give people the options for 2 skill. And 2 Tools, 2 languages or 1-1 of either. + 1 special quality of life ability. Instead of wasting pages on stupid backgrounds (maybe use 1 page for some examples for some character background ideas).

I miss the structure of the 3.5 splat books, they were standardized, easy to look trough and find stuff.

They should have just be smart about fixing 3.5, a ton of home brew solutions are out there they could have used. But oh well.

Sounds like you should look into Pathfinder 2.

The goal wasn't to make 3.5 but better.

They made something much better than they would have been.

I agree with some of those complaints, but the background part is nonsense, IMO.
 

Remove ads

Top