D&D 3E/3.5 Thoughts of a 3E/4E powergamer on starting to play 5E

[Shasarak]

Or heaven forbid you have a player optimize the Diplomacy skill in 3e/Pathfinder.... *shudder*

I was under the impression that it was the DM that calls for making checks?

 

[ExploderWizard]

It's been a few years since I last looked (I actually had it come up at a con game) but, though they managed to be pretty verbose, they really didn't add up to a lot more than that. I'm sure it seemed perfectly reasonable when approached strictly as a dungeon-crawling/treasure-hunting game where rations were a potential limit on how long you'd be able to stay in the dungeon collecting treasure, and treasure was the point (so dropping either in a P&EoP exercise was a valid tradeoff) - but even by the time the 1e DMG hit the shelves, the game was being used for more than that, and it never really caught up.

You are correct. Exploring & treasure hunting was what the game was written for. The further one moves away from that without compensating rules changes the more jarring and unsatisfying the experience will be.

 

[Tony Vargas]

The overall outcome is much the same though - one way is for it achieved by means of some arbitrarily limited 'daily' power which makes little narrative sense

So, like a traditional D&D 'Vancian' spell. You wouldn't be the first one with that complaint.

I agree with you, but I also appreciate that many players prefer the direct control of the first option. There is one player in our group who certainly misses playing his 4e wizard controller in many ways, though he still likes the classic feel of 5e

It's not like a 5e wizard lacks for "arbitrarily-limited 'daily' powers" with reasonably well-defined mechanical effects. Indeed, he has a lot more of them, and a lot more flexibility in deploying them.

 

[feartheminotaur]

I was under the impression that it was the DM that calls for making checks?

I've played in multiple systems in multiple formats over the last few years, and quite a few, a majority really, of players simply use "I roll Diplomacy" and throw the dice as their stated action. 4e was pretty bad about it (but not the worst) since the outcomes were more codified than in a lot of systems, so a player knew the DM had to give them a limited set of results when they rolled. So, roll they did.

Anecdote: I saw some player at the FLGS last month rage-quit a game. He wanted to lie to a guard about what he was doing, "what do you tell him?" the DM asked. He just rolled and said "I rolled a 17, so something he believes me". When the DM tried to get him to make up something, anything, he threw his dice and said "I rolled a f***ing 17! That totally beats his best possible score! If you're going to railroad me, I'm done!". And he left.

Some players just want to roll. Some DMs don't want them to roll well. Player agency is one thing; but the DM is a 'player' too, so the two 'agencies' should be in balance. Sadly, I see a lot of imbalance, and most of it boils down to "the Dice Rules All"

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I remember them being fairly pointless - again, when used as directed. And very little has been done to improve upon them over the (many) years. It's often as simple as players noticing that the monsters are faster than their slowest party members, and not being willing to play out the old "don't have to outrun the lion" joke... so they don't run as a group.

I can understand this criticism when applied to AD&D (your best run-away option was to use the optional sprinting rules) but it doesn't apply in 5E, which has a ton of viable "run away" options, from build-time options like "Multiclass to Rogue/take the Mobile feat" to between-adventure options like "Memorize Expeditious Retreat/Rope Trick" to pre-encounter options like "Make sure the horses are posted right outside the entrance, and then just eat opportunity attacks until you can reach them and then spend half your movement to mount, then ride away" to completely spur-of-the-moment options like "Hide in a barrel".

I assume you are well-aware Tony that running away works great in 5E, but I post the above for newbies' sake.

 

[Shasarak]

I've played in multiple systems in multiple formats over the last few years, and quite a few, a majority really, of players simply use "I roll Diplomacy" and throw the dice as their stated action. 4e was pretty bad about it (but not the worst) since the outcomes were more codified than in a lot of systems, so a player knew the DM had to give them a limited set of results when they rolled. So, roll they did.

Anecdote: I saw some player at the FLGS last month rage-quit a game. He wanted to lie to a guard about what he was doing, "what do you tell him?" the DM asked. He just rolled and said "I rolled a 17, so something he believes me". When the DM tried to get him to make up something, anything, he threw his dice and said "I rolled a f***ing 17! That totally beats his best possible score! If you're going to railroad me, I'm done!". And he left.

Some players just want to roll. Some DMs don't want them to roll well. Player agency is one thing; but the DM is a 'player' too, so the two 'agencies' should be in balance. Sadly, I see a lot of imbalance, and most of it boils down to "the Dice Rules All"

Sounds like fun and games at the local store, eh? At least he did not do a table flip.

 

[Shasarak]

Imagine, if you will, a certain player who prefers PvP games (aka player killing). He joins a group where everyone else is not into player killing. However, he keeps insisting that:
1. Player killing is not against the rules (true!).
2. Really, aren't we all just player killers under certain definitions of "player," and "killer?"

I like iserths rules on inter party conflict where the player who is being PVPd gets to decide how effective the PVPer is. That would quickly drive a PVPer crazy.

 

[feartheminotaur]

Sounds like fun and games at the local store, eh? At least he did not do a table flip.

A couple of us put our hands on the table expecting just that. So, he could have, but to overcome our +2 to table stabilizing, it'd have taken a heck of roll...

 

[Shasarak]

A couple of us put our hands on the table expecting just that. So, he could have, but to overcome our +2 to table stabilizing, it'd have taken a heck of roll...

Yeah, with disadvantage on his check a Powergamer would not have even tried.

 

[Eric V]

The players are definitely more empowered to control the situation than in 5e. For me, as a DM it got quite frustrating. The players tend to like it though

I actually loved it as a DM too, to tell you the truth. I like my players taking a lot of ownership over the world; I wish they did more of it.

4e reminded me that as the DM I'm not the solo storyteller; I am crafting a story with the players...and mechanics that were used in the game let them influence the world while also taking luck into account. I've seen all sorts of optimizers: Some were combat oriented, some were super-stealth, some were walking encylopedias, and some were irresistable. I think this was [MENTION=93444]shidaku[/MENTION]'s point above. Lots of options for lots of different types of optimization. Too many? Yeah, probably.