D&D 5E Why does 5E SUCK?

TwoSix · Sep 27, 2018

doctorbadwolf said:
I keep trying, and I just don’t see the OSR in 5e. What about it takes folks back to their old school gaming days?

This can certainly be nitpicked, but some of the OSR (or at least, pre-3e) stuff I see:

1) Frontloading of mechanical choices. Once you pick race, class, subclass, you really don't make a lot of choices when you level. You just gain new abilities. (Less so with feats and multiclassing turned on, but still much less overall than 3e and 4e).

2) Simplification of combat. You can move and either cast a spell or swing a weapon, and occasionally do something else. Broader options do exist (there's that 3e and 4e DNA again), but there's nothing like the trading of move actions for other options or full-round actions of 3e, or the menu of standard/move/minor actions of 4e.

5e is like the half-sibling of every other edition, you can see the resemblance if you look, but it's still obviously its own thing.

Mistwell · Sep 27, 2018

doctorbadwolf said:
I keep trying, and I just don’t see the OSR in 5e. What about it takes folks back to their old school gaming days?

The spirit of the game is very much one of "rulings, not rules", which is more of an OSR spirit.
The structure of the rules are extremely modular, making houserulling easier.
Multiclassing and feats were shunted to optional rules, making emulation of a style of game without them much easier to pull off.
Maxing ability scores puts more emphasis on levels than on ability scores, which is more similar to OSR.
Del-linking magic items from expected power levels makes it somewhat similar to the OSRs reliance on more randomness in magic items. You not longer have magic item wishlists players submit to DMs with some expectation of acquiring them through treasure found or purchase, much like the OSR style.
Speaking of randomness, all the friggen charts of wandering monsters and random events is very OSR in style.
The ability to run actual OSR modules/adventures with so little effort because the 5e math is predictable and tolerance levels for the math so forgiving that you can adapt on the fly a 1e module to a 5e game (which I and many have done). That was tough to do in 3e and almost impossible in 4e without massive work.

Sacrosanct · Sep 27, 2018

Mistwell said:
The spirit of the game is very much one of "rulings, not rules", which is more of an OSR spirit.
....
The ability to run actual OSR modules/adventures with so little effort because the 5e math is predictable and tolerance levels for the math so forgiving that you can adapt on the fly a 1e module to a 5e game (which I and many have done). That was tough to do in 3e and almost impossible in 4e without massive work.

These are the two biggest and obvious ones to me. As someone who kept playing AD&D all through the 3e and 4e years, and now plays 5 since it came out, I can say 5e is definitely more of an OSR feel than the other two editions for those reasons.

Heck, during the playtest days when we really didn't have 5e adventures, I was able to run my old 1e modules with almost no conversion at all needed. When I wrote Depths of Felk Mor in 2012 (link in my sig), you can instantly see how a 5e ruleset supports OSR style easily and well.

doctorbadwolf · Sep 28, 2018

Sadras said:
DM adjudication

So, an element that is present in literally every TTRPG, including every edition of DnD?

doctorbadwolf · Sep 28, 2018

Mistwell said:
The spirit of the game is very much one of "rulings, not rules", which is more of an OSR spirit.
The structure of the rules are extremely modular, making houserulling easier.
Multiclassing and feats were shunted to optional rules, making emulation of a style of game without them much easier to pull off.
Maxing ability scores puts more emphasis on levels than on ability scores, which is more similar to OSR.
Del-linking magic items from expected power levels makes it somewhat similar to the OSRs reliance on more randomness in magic items. You not longer have magic item wishlists players submit to DMs with some expectation of acquiring them through treasure found or purchase, much like the OSR style.
Speaking of randomness, all the friggen charts of wandering monsters and random events is very OSR in style.
The ability to run actual OSR modules/adventures with so little effort because the 5e math is predictable and tolerance levels for the math so forgiving that you can adapt on the fly a 1e module to a 5e game (which I and many have done). That was tough to do in 3e and almost impossible in 4e without massive work.

Interesting. I think the math tolerance levels are definately something that only 3/.5e was missing, but the rest of that groks. IMO, 5e is overwhelmingly "new school", but it does accomplish many of the same design goals as ADND.

TwoSix said:
This can certainly be nitpicked, but some of the OSR (or at least, pre-3e) stuff I see:

1) Frontloading of mechanical choices. Once you pick race, class, subclass, you really don't make a lot of choices when you level. You just gain new abilities. (Less so with feats and multiclassing turned on, but still much less overall than 3e and 4e).

2) Simplification of combat. You can move and either cast a spell or swing a weapon, and occasionally do something else. Broader options do exist (there's that 3e and 4e DNA again), but there's nothing like the trading of move actions for other options or full-round actions of 3e, or the menu of standard/move/minor actions of 4e.

5e is like the half-sibling of every other edition, you can see the resemblance if you look, but it's still obviously its own thing.

Fair points!

Jester David said:
I've described 5e as the "Rorschach Edition" a few times.
If you hate 5e and hated 4e, you'll look at 5e and see all the stuff you hated in 4e. If you love 5e and loved 3e, you'll see all the stuff you loved from 3e. And vice versa. It's very much an edition that is influenced by your perceptions more than its contents.

Maybe!

Tallifer said:
Having played AD&D in the 1980s and having recently played lots of Labyrinth Lord etc with OSR groups (and at the same being someone who prefers 4E), 5E has many similarities: Vancian spells and spell lists; descriptive spell descriptions rather than the Magic Card format of 4E powers; no magic item creation/treasure parcels; no paragon paths or epic destinies; no Powers for martial characters; a reversion to old school rôles (fighting, exploration, magic) versus the 4E rôles of defender, control, striker and support.

Um...you could mostly be describing 3.5, there. 3.5 isn't Old School DnD. ADnD is Old School DnD.

Sadras · Sep 28, 2018

doctorbadwolf said:
So, an element that is present in literally every TTRPG, including every edition of DnD?

Mistwell's first two points cover what I mean by DM adjudication.
3.x was heaven for the rules lawyers and rule mastery, 4e's system engine was just so neatly designed it certainly barred much need for DM adjudication, whereas 5e is a revert to the older way of play - leaning towards 'mother may I' sort of style (and I do not mean that negatively).

Tallifer · Sep 28, 2018

doctorbadwolf said:
Um...you could mostly be describing 3.5, there. 3.5 isn't Old School DnD. ADnD is Old School DnD.

I have never played 3.5 (I skipped any roleplaying between the 1980s and 2009). I was merely stating all the stuff that I have recognized in 5E from my days playing AD&D, which is as you say Old School.

Lord Mhoram · Sep 28, 2018

vicberg said:
Because 5e doesn't enhance immersion in the game. It becomes a game onto itself and the focus isn't on the story or the character, it's on how many dips you make into other classes, what feats, what spells you have what your damage output is.

I find this amusing as half of the things complained about are optional rules that don't exist in every game.

vicberg · Sep 28, 2018

[MENTION=4789]Lord Mhoram[/MENTION], you're absolutely right. This isn't my first rodeo in being a GM. I started in 1983. This was my first foray into 5e, having taken a long hiatus from D&D (GOT 3.5 was the last D&D I ran) and I didn't limit feats or multi-class. If I ever jump into it again, I certainly would as it would have alleviated a lot of headaches.

And yes, power gaming has been in an issue in every system since role playing started. That's not new. What really surprised me was the sheer number of people focused on the power gaming side, in large part due to feats and multi-classing. They were actively out there looking for builds that would do 800 HP in a single hit, stuff like that. So I can say, I shot myself in the foot.

It was amusing, tbh.

vicberg · Sep 28, 2018

What made the entire experience actually very amusing, before I blew the game up, was that one character died (no small feat in 5e) the session before, and there were tears. Lots of them. And I thought, I've done my job. These guys are immersed. Right?

Then I find out a few days later, that all the fighter types (4 characters) want to switch into spellcasters (clerics, druids, wizards) to make a party of 7 spellcasters, including the character that died (and was brought back) and the characters that were crying. So one moment, they seem totally immersed and the next they want to abandon 3 1/2 months of game play and character development. What? Wait? Where did I zig when they zagged?

That is ultimately my fault. No excuses. But I can say that at 7th level, with feats and multi-class, the spellcaster power level goes up drastically and to see a party now of 7 spellcasters, suddenly at 7th level and not before when they would have been TPK'd, wasn't coincidence. So 5e (with feats and multi-classing) didn't help me very much.

D&D 5E Why does 5E SUCK?

TwoSix

Dirty, realism-hating munchkin powergamer

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)

Sacrosanct

Legend

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle

Sadras

Legend

Tallifer

Hero

Lord Mhoram

Hero

vicberg

First Post

vicberg

First Post

Similar Threads