D&D 5E Just a reality check.

[Dausuul]

Yeah, I'd say most of the discussion here is pretty positive. While there are a small number of strident complaints, most critical observations seem to take the form of "well this is interesting" or "is this how this works?". I don't see that as negative, just exploring the system.

Even among the complainers, not everyone is negative on the system as a whole. I have a few things that annoy me, and I've been fairly vocal about them, but overall I think 5E is an amazing piece of work and I'm eager to play and run it.

 

[Sir Hawk]

It's funny how someone's prime steak is someone else's reheated microwave dinner...

To each its own, I guess.

I was just thinking that.... Paraxis' complaints are what I see as positives. And I just disagree with the armor and weapon charts being crap.

 

[Pickles JG]

Why are you playing a game you don't like? Dude, it's a hobby find something that you enjoy doing in your free time. It sounds like you are just going to be more bitter about it the more you play. Clearly the game is not for you and that's OK. Not everyone has to like everything, I hope you find a game you do like though!

I suspect I am in the same boat as Paraxis. I do not know for sure whether I will like it or not though si suspect it's not quite to my taste & too hard to adjust, when I can just play 4e or FATE.

Even if it is not great if it means hanging out with my mates having a laugh & doing some RP & fighting & the other bits of D&D I like I will continue to play it despite not thinking it's very good (like it did with 1e 30 years ago)

Pathfiinder pushes too many of my WTF buttons for me to enjoy any more despite the quality of the PFS.

 

[SkidAce]

Armor and weapons charts are crap.

Could you clarify this portion for me? You assertion hit in the forehead like a hammer.

Seriously I don't understand this particular point..

 

[Grazzt]

I will play it because it is D&D, easy to get a game going and have members of my group that will play it for brand loyalty, but that doesn't mean I have to like it.

Why would you play it if you don't like it? Easy to get a game going, you can find other games that accomplish that. Brand loyalty...I don't get playing something you don't like; loyal or not. I've played D&D/AD&D since the early 80's (and so have most of the guys I play with; in fact most of us have been in the same group since then). We tried and hated 4e. So, we didn't adopt it, brand loyalty or not. (Had their been some that liked it, they would've found a group that played it, because I certainly wasn't going to.) We moved on to Pathfinder and also moved back to an older version of D&D/AD&D.

 

[thexar]

Reality check -?-
This is the internet, I reject your reality and substitute my own.
And my reality is: my friends and I like this version, and we will enjoy it while we eagerly await Exalted and hope it doesn't suck. And slip in a few Savage Worlds games between campaigns, or when too many people are on vacation but the rest of us still want to play a game.

 

[Paraxis]

Could you clarify this portion for me? You assertion hit in the forehead like a hammer.

Seriously I don't understand this particular point..

Sure although to me it is plain simple to see.

There is no reason to wear padded or leather armor when studded is 1 pt better AC, with no penalty, same with hide vs chain shirt, and ring mail vs chain mail. Yes there are weight and cost differences but those are trivial things with the amount of starting gold, found treasure, and encumbrance rules the way they are.

Weapons, you have things like maul being in every way better than a great axe, a spear (simple weapon) being exactly the same as a trident (martial weapon), things like that.

Balance, symmetry, simple math these things were not in the heads of the game designers.

 

[Paraxis]

Why would you play it if you don't like it? Easy to get a game going, you can find other games that accomplish that. Brand loyalty...I don't get playing something you don't like; loyal or not. I've played D&D/AD&D since the early 80's (and so have most of the guys I play with; in fact most of us have been in the same group since then). We tried and hated 4e. So, we didn't adopt it, brand loyalty or not. (Had their been some that liked it, they would've found a group that played it, because I certainly wasn't going to.) We moved on to Pathfinder and also moved back to an older version of D&D/AD&D.

Because the people I play with want to play it simple as that. I still run 13th Age and Savage Worlds regularly and play in a couple 4e games.

So the car can be a junker, the road trips fun comes from the people in the car with you.

I just wish 5e was a better car.

 

[Dausuul]

Sure although to me it is plain simple to see.

There is no reason to wear padded or leather armor when studded is 1 pt better AC, with no penalty, same with hide vs chain shirt, and ring mail vs chain mail. Yes there are weight and cost differences but those are trivial things with the amount of starting gold, found treasure, and encumbrance rules the way they are.

Weapons, you have things like maul being in every way better than a great axe, a spear (simple weapon) being exactly the same as a trident (martial weapon), things like that.

Balance, symmetry, simple math these things were not in the heads of the game designers.

First of all, we do not have the complete game yet. There may be feats, class abilities, and class restrictions that tie into specific weapons/armor. In previous editions, for example, druids weren't allowed to wear metal armor, so they had to wear leather or hide instead of studded or chain. And I shall be very surprised if there is not a feat that lets you do fancy things with a trident/net combo.

Second, optimizing PC gear is not the be-all, end-all of the equipment list. NPCs use equipment too, and they will not always have the latest and greatest. In the real world, you were a moron to pick mail over plate if you had the option; but lots of people wore mail anyway, because they couldn't afford plate or their armorsmiths didn't have the technology to make it.

Third, your starting gear won't always be the latest and greatest, either. PCs don't start with a ton of cash; an average of 125 gp for fighters and clerics, 100 for wizards and rogues. You may not have the extra 40 gp to spare for studded leather instead of padded. You may not even have the extra 20 for a greatsword instead of a greataxe. You'll have to make do for the first couple of adventures until you can upgrade.

 

[Xodis]

Sure although to me it is plain simple to see.

There is no reason to wear padded or leather armor when studded is 1 pt better AC, with no penalty, same with hide vs chain shirt, and ring mail vs chain mail. Yes there are weight and cost differences but those are trivial things with the amount of starting gold, found treasure, and encumbrance rules the way they are.

Weapons, you have things like maul being in every way better than a great axe, a spear (simple weapon) being exactly the same as a trident (martial weapon), things like that.

Balance, symmetry, simple math these things were not in the heads of the game designers.

Some things are just better, leather armor doesn't have to be somewhat better or equal to studded leather to validate it, same with the other types of armor. I would like to see the Trident be a better than a Spear, but really isn't it JUST a spear with a couple extra points? The only time we see a Trident used today is in the second Hunger Games, and really that big point in the middle was all he really needed.