What 5e got wrong

[Herschel]

No, it's like saying "I want to cast spells without having to rely on INT" which, oh, look, Warlocks, Sorcerers, Clerics.......

 

[ChrisCarlson]

So you've hung out with 3.5/PF fans and their general consensus is that 5e is better? I don't think so.

<raises hand> I have! I have! And yes, I have. In case you haven't heard, I help run the largest game convention in SoCal, three times a year. We get multiple hundreds of roleplayers in, every day of the long weekend. Old school, PF, 5e. Is PF still hugely popular? Yep. Sure is. But as you and others love to point out when it suits your argument, PF is not an edition of D&D. So not sure why you even bothered to toss it in to your argument. Yet even still, I know quite a few PFSers who have jumped over to AL. And they are having the time of their lives and haven't looked back.

Heck, AL is bursting at the seams, participation has been growing at a steady pace. We even had to move it to a different part of the convention to accommodate its increasing numbers.

I invite you to come on out this President's Day Weekend (Feb. 12-15) and check it out for yourself if you don't believe me. Our website is www.strategicon.net. Check us out. Good times had by all. Everyone is welcome. (Well except for a specific few - but y'all know who you are...)

 

[Sacrosanct]

So you've hung out with 3.5/PF fans and their general consensus is that 5e is better? I don't think so. .

I have actually. But just go to your FLGS. The ones I go to also aligns with most of what I've heard from others as well. 5e is the edition of choice, including those 3.5/PF players who switched over. And before you say, "Well, it's probably just because 5e is the one currently supported", I will point out that after 4e came out, those same players were still playing 3.5/PF in the FLGS stores and didn't move to 4e. Up until two years ago there were more PF tables than there were 4e tables. Now it seems most are playing 5e, judging by the game tables I'm seeing.

 

[darkrose50]

ANyway, I don't htink I've acutally made a list of my gripes with 5e.

So, here it is. Note that most of these aren't things I think 5e got wholly wrong, and 5e is my second favorite variation of DnD.

Advantage: I like it, but I think they miss stepped by having there only be one bonus, as it were.

Trying to put "4e style" gameplay in a "tactical play" module in the DMG. It's a failure, IMO. I don't know what the numbers are, but not a single person I know who liked 4e wanted to play a game that mechanically resembles warhammer. At all. That isn't what 4e is, and while it's cool to have as an option, it is not a 4e style option. 4e's "thing" was tactical options built into class abilities. Not...facing.

The art style. The conceptopolis stuff is great, mostly. The halflings are an abomination. They look like gross cartoon people halfway turned into real people. I feel like they're going to plead with me to kill them while the artist isn't looking.
There's some great art from 4e, like this: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v229/JonasAlbrecht/Gwenn.jpg that is vastly more interesting than most of the art in the 5e books. Or stuff like this from Jon Hodgson, who does the art for The One Ring rpg: http://jonhodgson.deviantart.com/art/Solku-119883066

Not having more "modules" for more complex play in the DMG. Bigger weapons table with more weapon properties, for instance.

Not putting out some pamphlets for the more popular non FR settings, or a book with info on multiple settings, maybe with worldbuilding advice from setting creators like Keith Baker, etc.

No digital tools. I've heard this isn't really their fault, as bad luck struck again, but they need to stop messing around with companies no one has heard of, and figure this situation out for real. Either develop a department of digital production, or work with one of the companies making DnD video games/mmos.
Maybe hire some talented app makers who have made char builders for various editions, and give them the money to do it right. Heck, allow digital tools on the DM Guild, now that that's up.

Not allowing there to be both class and subclass iterations of ideas. IMO, this would open the game up without unbalancing it, and allow certain concepts without MCing, etc. If you have to, put the class versions of things like assassin and any given summoner/pet concept in a special area of the rules called Advanced Options or something, to satisfy the grognards and the folks who hate there being more options.

Like I said, none of these is a big deal, really.

It would seem that you and I are not the target audience. I would much rather have more content.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I have actually. But just go to your FLGS. The ones I go to also aligns with most of what I've heard from others as well. 5e is the edition of choice, including those 3.5/PF players who switched over.

The highest praise I've heard from 3.5/PF fans for 5e is "nothing really bad about it." I haven't seen or heard a lot of defections - the EN headline we saw a while back about 5e widening it's lead on PF was about a 1% widening of that gap, pretty minor, really. Most 5e players at our FLGS have been playing since Encounters or are are returning fans having last played 2e (a heartening number of them, really - I see faces every week that I only used to see 1/yr at conventions).

But, as positive as I like to see many of the things about 5e, I can't buy that it's being hailed as bestestevar the way you imply, outside of the usual uncritical WotC apologists squeeing over the current edition, of course. It's successfully evoke the feel of the classic game and is bringing long-lost fans back into the fold. That's a great accomplishment, but it can all too easily be oversold.

It would seem that you and I are not the target audience. I would much rather have more content.

The SRD and DMsGuild have got to help with that, going forward.

 

[Sacrosanct]

The highest praise I've heard from 3.5/PF fans for 5e is "nothing really bad about it." .

Well, this is flat out untrue, because I know you've been here a long time, and many posters here who happened to be 3.5/PF fans have had a lot more positive things to say about it than that. But judging from your posts over the last couple years about 5e, it seems clear to me that you only like to cling to the negative commentary while ignoring the positive commentary (and objective facts) for anything that runs counter to your biases. So I can't say I'm all that surprised that you'd make a claim like the one you just did. Don't sit there and tell me that you'd like to say or hear positive things about 5e when your posting history clearly infers the opposite. You've largely been poopooing it since day 1, never giving it credit it deserves. At best, it's been "meh".

 

[Jessica]

The issue is, in many cases, the elements they chose were the worst ones. Multiclassing, for example. 1E, 2E and 4E all had essentially the same take, yet they chose to use the terrible 3E version and make it worse.

There are so many good ideas brought about for 5E that were just botched in execution. It turned out a rather kludgy, fan service edition for grognards rather than a great product to the point you'd swear Mike Mearls and JJ Abrams were the same person.

I agree. I much prefer the non-3.X methods of multiclassing. I wish they would have brought in 2e multiclassing or 4e hybridization.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Well, this is flat out untrue

What I've heard from actual Pathfinder fans is not what I've heard? Sorry, no, I was telling the truth.

What gets tossed around here, though, it doesn't carry a lot of weight. Say you've "never heard ______" and someone will leap up and shout "______!" just because. Doesn't mean much.

Vagaries of the medium aside, yes, there's PF fans in my area, yes, I interact with them, and, no, they're not returning to D&D in droves. OTOH, they're not railing against it, either. That 5e didn't provoke another edition war, by itself, is a very real success. And, OTOOH, D&D is selling very without any hypothetical horde of 3.5 hold-outs crossing the aisle, PF isn't exactly contracting rapidly, either. Returning 2e fans, OTOH, not in short supply. Same with longtime fans continuing on with the current edition. FWIW.

But judging from your posts over the last couple years about 5e, it seems clear to me that you only like to cling to the negative commentary while ignoring the positive commentary (and objective facts) for anything that runs counter to your biases. So I can't say I'm all that surprised that you'd make a claim like the one you just did. Don't sit there and tell me that you'd like to say or hear positive things about 5e when your posting history clearly infers the opposite. You've largely been poopooing it since day 1, never giving it credit it deserves. At best, it's been "meh".

In this very thread, I'm defending 5e's MC system from some negativity. Check your own biases.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

It would seem that you and I are not the target audience. I would much rather have more content.

Don't know about all that. I like 5e, I just want to be able to fairly easily play 5e in 4e style, and all it would take is the amount of space that the classes chapter take sup in the phb, maybe 10-20 pages more. One book with that plus maybe some rules for more complex weapons, more common magic items, etc, and it's on.

 

[NotActuallyTim]

The highest praise I've heard from 3.5/PF fans for 5e is "nothing really bad about it."

Ugh. Now I have to say words. In coherent sentences, even.

Before 5th, my favorite edition of DnD was 3.5 I found it to be the easiest to read, understand, create content for, DM, and play.

When Pathfinder came out, I jumped ship with my group immediately. I loved it. It fixed so many little things about 3.5 that had bothered me, for even in my favorite edition, I had many, many complaints, most of which I can no longer remember.

Before 4th was even mentioned to the public, I read the original text for the Pathfinder Wall of Force spell, in the first, un-errated core rulebook for PF, early on in my experience with PF. I immediately read the text through my then optimization tuned glasses, and came to the conclusion that the spell permitted the caster to squeeze enemies into little bits of jello.

I just groaned, decided to ask for a house rule on that particular subject, and moved on, assured that so many other things would be better that it just wouldn't matter. By the end of the year, I reversed my position entirely, and came to conclusion that carefully spelled out, unambiguous TRPG systems were inherently flawed, and that PFs usage of the mechanics first apparent in 3.x would additionally always be flawed, because they were based on 3.x.

I then went on to play a number of other TRPGs, like Unknown Armies, Feng Shui, Deadlands, Warhammer Fantasy 2nd ed, Edge of the Empire and of course, good old StickGuy the RPG.

After trying and failing to create a working and fun TRPG with a friend of mine, I finally figured out what I was looking for in a TRPG: something I could make my it own, yet be simple enough to teach new people without immediately driving them off with far, far too much detail and complexity, but also capable of producing mechanically complex situations with little to no modification. 5th edition is more than just my favorite edition of Dungeons and Dragons, it's my second favorite TRPG ever. Right after Feng Shui 2nd edition.