D&D 5E First experience with 5th edition and Lost Mines of Phandelver (no spoilers)

[ChrisCarlson]

Because, for better or worse, I have made a long term commitment to a 5E campaign and enjoy discussing my experiences in it, be they positive or negative.

You sound like someone trapped in a bad marriage. As for "positive or negative", do you anticipate there will ever be positive parts to report?

The short answer is fun, dynamic combat, better character options, player empowerment, and a more modern and high powered aesthetic

I've been playing 5e for going on two years. If I didn't know any better (about your opinions) I'd say you were describing 5e as it plays in practice at my tables.

Everything I like about D&D, some other edition does it better. It also bears saying that I'm not a fan of D&D "tradition", and preferred the modern bits of 3E and 4E.

That's fine. So go play them. I really find it fascinating that people force themselves, not only to go online and religiously complain about a pastime they don't like, but to go so far as to engage in same said pastime. If you prefer one of those other editions, by all means, go enjoy them. But why torture yourself?

 

[ChrisCarlson]

A minor point would be that when I say "veterans of previous edition" I give equal weight(possibly greater weight since they are a greater proportion of the veterans I know) to veterans of 3E/4E as to veterans of OSR/1E/2E, while there is a minor implication in the above quote of the opposite,

Nope. Cuz I'm still of [/i]that[/i] category as well. As are countless 5e players I know personally who are as well. I played, and enjoyed, 3.x and 4e through the entirety of their runs.

Your "minor point" does nothing to change my belief that you are wrong.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

I disagree. Off the top of my head:

• It may not be obvious at first, but bounded accuracy has a huge impact.
• Wizards no longer become superstars that outshine every other class at higher levels.
• Clerics can shine in their own right, not just as support characters.
• Backgrounds give interesting flexibility in character design without layers of endless class variations.
• Minor variations in rulings are encouraged and help shape the feel of a campaign.

I'm sure there are other things, but I need to get something done today.

Is it a revolutionary change? No. They tried that with 4E, and while I enjoyed it at lower levels it was a different type of game with a different feel than other versions of the game.

Opinions are a funny thing

Bounded Accuracy--I'm kind of ambivalent leaning towards mildly positive about low level monsters being useful longer, and I find Bounded Accuracy makes the game more random than I'd like for a net negative overall

Caster Supremacy--sheer domination seems to be gone, but casters still seem to outpace other classes at higher levels as nothing really matches the power of high level magic

Clerics--A major step backwards from 4E IMO in this regard.

Backgrounds--aren't really much by the standards of somebody who loved the endless variations of 3E and 4E, and they don't scale past level 1 beyond the proficiency bonus

Rulings--I'm more of a system/RAW sort of player, so I'm ambivalent towards this leaning towards negative given the lack of player options in 5E to affect the story without involving the DM.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[thecasualoblivion]

I've been playing 5e for going on two years. If I didn't know any better (about your opinions) I'd say you were describing 5e as it plays in practice at my tables.

I'm playing 4E and 5E more or less side by side at the moment in separate campaigns, so I can make a pretty much direct comparison.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

I'm playing 4E and 5E more or less side by side at the moment in separate campaigns, so I can make a pretty much direct comparison.

<shrug> I cannot speak for anyone but myself, by my functional memory allows me to likewise make direct comparisons. Especially given that I played 4e so extensively, for so many years, before eventually making the switch to 5e...

 

[happyhermit]

I'm playing 4E and 5E more or less side by side at the moment in separate campaigns, so I can make a pretty much direct comparison.

So the fact that one is a low level AL game that you didn't actually want to be a part of, and the other is a home game with your established group in your favorite system, that you have worked to "master" for years allows for a "pretty much direct comparison"?

 

[thecasualoblivion]

So the fact that one is a low level AL game that you didn't actually want to be a part of, and the other is a home game with your established group in your favorite system, that you have worked to "master" for years allows for a "pretty much direct comparison"?

In terms of:

fun, dynamic combat, better character options, player empowerment, and a more modern and high powered aesthetic

Absolutely

 

[happyhermit]

In terms of:

fun, dynamic combat, better character options, player empowerment, and a more modern and high powered aesthetic

Absolutely

Do you really not see how each and every one of those things might be effected by the factors I pointed out? Really?


I will also add to the list the fact that you are comparing a system that is still developing versus one that has been "fully developed", or are you playing 4e core without errata?

 

[ChrisCarlson]

Since we are expressing our opinions of particular editions, I'll take my crack at your list:

fun, dynamic combat

As much as I loved the deeply satisfying mechanical crunchiness of 4e combat, I would not attribute that description to it, myself. I found many combats became very similar to each other. With characters using the same small handful of powers on predictable schedule fight after fight. How are cookie-cutter tactics day-after-day in any way considered "dynamic"? Fun, sure. Sometimes. But once grind kicks in, there goes even that. [See? I can make sweeping generalizations, too.]

better character options

It has been argued (successfully, IMO) here before that 5e has actually more character options than 3.0/4e had starting. Between the numerous subraces, subclasses, and backgrounds, 5e came out of the gate with unprecedented variation in character creation options.

player empowerment

DMs are players too. Just sayin'...

But regardless of that fact, players are as empowered as the table's social contract allows. I've played 4e games with draconian DMs who stripped away a great deal of 4e's so=-called player empowerment. [Look, more counter anecdotes...]

and a more modern and high powered aesthetic

This one I admit I have very little to respond to without more info. What about 5e's core mechanics aren't "modern" to you? What do you consider qualifies a game as having a "high powered aesthetic"? Because, short of examples, I think 5e handles both complaints in spades.