As I said, I can understand why many people like that simplicity. But it isn't an attraction for me.
D&D 5E My (Personal) Early Evaluation of the D&D 5thEd System – Wall of Text
As I said, I can understand why many people like that simplicity. But it isn't an attraction for me.
Parmandur
Book-Friend
The Adventure Skills can't be improved in downtime, but Tool Proficiency can be gained.
Believe it or not, I do understand and agree somewhat with what you are saying. However, to me, the build is usually a part of the role play. The personality, goals, and attitudes of the PC have to be influenced by what he can actually do or it just doesn't make sense. To me.
In PF I had a sorcerer that focused on buff spells. He wanted to be the silent helpful type. He was helping everyone else around him to become greater heroes rather than trying to be the hero himself.
I had a friend who's monk magus found it more challenging (and humiliating to the opposition) to take their weapons away and beat them up with them.
Neither of those character concepts would work in 5th Ed. Since (as far as I can tell) their aren't any rules allowing you to really do those things.
I can't come any where even close to about a third of my PF PC concepts in 5thEd.
I've been to 5 different game shops and 2 home groups in 3 different states. The PC builds have been practically cookie cutters.
Agreed. But an inexperienced or not so super great DM can benefit from more mechanics or details to fall back on when he doesn't know what to do about something.
Not just one store. I've been to AL in 4 different stores in 3 different states. All charged $5 and said they were 'supposed' to because of AL rules. None of them charge for a PFS or SW game at the same store. The only place that didn't charge was AL at a bar. But even they said they were told they were supposed to charge but didn't because we all came in and bought plenty of drinks and food.
Last edited:
I didn't know there was anything like that. I will look into it.
Hmm... I'm not sure how useful that will be since I've yet to see anyone use a tool. But I suppose it is something to do with my built up downtime. I will look into it.
Sword of Spirit
Legend
You'd probably like Xanathar's Guide to Everything. In addition to the dozens of new subclasses and spells and such, there is a whole chapter on tool proficiencies. It gives some optional crunchy benefits for having each of the listed tool proficiencies, including ones that are mechanically useful for adventuring for some of them. It also has new optional rules for training in tool proficiencies and languages that makes it significantly faster to do so.
It's by far the biggest mechanical expansion for 5e.
Pro
1. This was a design goal. IME it's actually easier to teach new players 5E than 3E/PF, because of the simplicity.
2. See Pro #1
3. More intentional design. Characters can take as long or short as desired to create & level.
4. Sadly, this isn't quite true IME, but a rules lawyer is going to find a way...
5. By allowing the DM the freedom to make the call, rather than a game designer, allows the DM to make what is (hopefully) the best rule for the group/table/game.
6. Everything in the game boils down to "what do you want to do?" which is very intuitive for most players. I think they had a better setup during the playtest (the DM never chose a skill, only an ability, and the players could try to justify a skill, encouraging imagination), but the current system is designed to appeal to the largest number of players.
7. If you think that's bad, you should have tried 4E. iME, the average combat took about an hour or two. An epic battle could easily stretch multiple sessions.
8. Combat is more deadly than some prior editions, but once you reach 3rd - 4th level, it becomes fairly uncommon. It's more deadly that 4E ever was, but less so than 3E, mostly because of the full overnight healing.
9. Numbers have almost always mattered, but because of bounded accuracy, hordes of creatures can be devastating unless area of effect spells can be brought into play.
10. While you don't automatically full heal after every fight, unfortunately you do full heal overnight. This can create the 5 minute work day, where the players have 1 combat, then find a place to take a Long Rest. It's obnoxious, and while it can be circumvented by a good DM, a bad one will have a very hard time with it.
11. Magic items now actually feel special, as their impact is significant due to bounded accuracy.
12. I remember that in 3E, cool abilities had a hidden cost of a +X bonus to the item. This made us have some odd situations, because items with abilities were often considered worse than items with abilities, because they could be sold for more.
13. I can't comment on AL, because I don't participate in any organized play anymore. When they started charging the DM to run events, I quit and never looked back.
Cons:
A. The best that a DM can do is be consistent. If they say something is easy, they should set an according DC (I actually drop the DCs by 5 when using their chart, since an easy thing should be better than a 50% chance IMO). The biggest downside of this is when dealing with multiple DMs, such as with AL. The best suggestion I can give is to ask how hard you think something would be, and when he says something (like hard), reply with "so, about an 20?" This can help you gauge how the DM is likely to run things, but remember that some DMs are going to suck (by your standards of how the game should be run).
B. Unfortunately, this isn't due to lack of options, but a set number of "optimal" options. If feats are allowed, most martial characters are likely to employ either Great Weapon Master or Sharpshooter, because they are two of the best combat feats. Most players don't mind playing "sub-optimal" characters, so you will get some variety, but the majority are going to fall into those two molds. Also, damage spells are always going to be the most commonly used for two reasons: they're simple to use and they don't require DM judgement. Illusions, charms, and summons all require some level of DM participation, and unfortunately there are many lazy DMs that will shut down ideas that don't have clear rules.
C. The character build ‘sub-game’ was a flaw that hurt the game. If you give people an option, but punish them for choosing it, it makes new players leave and not come back. Conversely, if you create choices that are better options than others, experienced players will choose those options exclusively.
D. Unlike 3E and 4E, which tried to make it easy for DMs by providing rules for everything, now they have to be just as imaginative as the players are. When I learned to become a DM (about 26-27 years ago), my DM mentored me, showing me HOW to properly DM, not just the mechanics involved. While anyone can just pickup the DMG and start running a game, DMs really need to learn HOW to run a good game. Fortunately, there are a ton of videos and blogs on the subject, but unfortunately they can also be bad advice (or advice not suited for your group).
E. In 5E, players all hit at about the same frequency, with the difference usually being made up in the damage output. Players should hit regularly, but the damage output will vary. Conversely, Monsters tend to hit less frequently, but usually for greater damage. In the example of the fighter vs. rogue, the fighter will hit just as often, dealing slightly less damage (due to sneak attack), but should have better HP and slightly higher AC.
F. They provide a chart, but DMs often forget it exists and are not consistent with their DCs. Additionally, dice are only supposed to be rolled if their is a consequence for failure. Assuming you have an axe, even the weakest of characters will eventually break down a door.
G. I agree with you about skills. They had other options during the playtest, but this was found the be the best for the largest pool of players. I've seen several house-rules designed to fix this, but that doesn't help if you primarily do AL.
H. Adventurer’s League. Again, not in a position to comment about AL, but I will say that it has been the most consistently available organized play for D&D IME.
1. This was a design goal. IME it's actually easier to teach new players 5E than 3E/PF, because of the simplicity.
2. See Pro #1
3. More intentional design. Characters can take as long or short as desired to create & level.
4. Sadly, this isn't quite true IME, but a rules lawyer is going to find a way...
5. By allowing the DM the freedom to make the call, rather than a game designer, allows the DM to make what is (hopefully) the best rule for the group/table/game.
6. Everything in the game boils down to "what do you want to do?" which is very intuitive for most players. I think they had a better setup during the playtest (the DM never chose a skill, only an ability, and the players could try to justify a skill, encouraging imagination), but the current system is designed to appeal to the largest number of players.
7. If you think that's bad, you should have tried 4E. iME, the average combat took about an hour or two. An epic battle could easily stretch multiple sessions.
8. Combat is more deadly than some prior editions, but once you reach 3rd - 4th level, it becomes fairly uncommon. It's more deadly that 4E ever was, but less so than 3E, mostly because of the full overnight healing.
9. Numbers have almost always mattered, but because of bounded accuracy, hordes of creatures can be devastating unless area of effect spells can be brought into play.
10. While you don't automatically full heal after every fight, unfortunately you do full heal overnight. This can create the 5 minute work day, where the players have 1 combat, then find a place to take a Long Rest. It's obnoxious, and while it can be circumvented by a good DM, a bad one will have a very hard time with it.
11. Magic items now actually feel special, as their impact is significant due to bounded accuracy.
12. I remember that in 3E, cool abilities had a hidden cost of a +X bonus to the item. This made us have some odd situations, because items with abilities were often considered worse than items with abilities, because they could be sold for more.
13. I can't comment on AL, because I don't participate in any organized play anymore. When they started charging the DM to run events, I quit and never looked back.
Cons:
A. The best that a DM can do is be consistent. If they say something is easy, they should set an according DC (I actually drop the DCs by 5 when using their chart, since an easy thing should be better than a 50% chance IMO). The biggest downside of this is when dealing with multiple DMs, such as with AL. The best suggestion I can give is to ask how hard you think something would be, and when he says something (like hard), reply with "so, about an 20?" This can help you gauge how the DM is likely to run things, but remember that some DMs are going to suck (by your standards of how the game should be run).
B. Unfortunately, this isn't due to lack of options, but a set number of "optimal" options. If feats are allowed, most martial characters are likely to employ either Great Weapon Master or Sharpshooter, because they are two of the best combat feats. Most players don't mind playing "sub-optimal" characters, so you will get some variety, but the majority are going to fall into those two molds. Also, damage spells are always going to be the most commonly used for two reasons: they're simple to use and they don't require DM judgement. Illusions, charms, and summons all require some level of DM participation, and unfortunately there are many lazy DMs that will shut down ideas that don't have clear rules.
C. The character build ‘sub-game’ was a flaw that hurt the game. If you give people an option, but punish them for choosing it, it makes new players leave and not come back. Conversely, if you create choices that are better options than others, experienced players will choose those options exclusively.
D. Unlike 3E and 4E, which tried to make it easy for DMs by providing rules for everything, now they have to be just as imaginative as the players are. When I learned to become a DM (about 26-27 years ago), my DM mentored me, showing me HOW to properly DM, not just the mechanics involved. While anyone can just pickup the DMG and start running a game, DMs really need to learn HOW to run a good game. Fortunately, there are a ton of videos and blogs on the subject, but unfortunately they can also be bad advice (or advice not suited for your group).
E. In 5E, players all hit at about the same frequency, with the difference usually being made up in the damage output. Players should hit regularly, but the damage output will vary. Conversely, Monsters tend to hit less frequently, but usually for greater damage. In the example of the fighter vs. rogue, the fighter will hit just as often, dealing slightly less damage (due to sneak attack), but should have better HP and slightly higher AC.
F. They provide a chart, but DMs often forget it exists and are not consistent with their DCs. Additionally, dice are only supposed to be rolled if their is a consequence for failure. Assuming you have an axe, even the weakest of characters will eventually break down a door.
G. I agree with you about skills. They had other options during the playtest, but this was found the be the best for the largest pool of players. I've seen several house-rules designed to fix this, but that doesn't help if you primarily do AL.
H. Adventurer’s League. Again, not in a position to comment about AL, but I will say that it has been the most consistently available organized play for D&D IME.
pukunui
Legend
For the latter, there are rules for disarming opponents in the DMG (in the additional action options section).
For the former, you could try a Divine Soul sorcerer, as that would give you access to both the cleric and sorcerer spell lists, which would make you better at buffing others. The only real limitation is the concentration mechanic, which is purposely designed to limit the amount of buffing that can be done.
G
Guest 6801328
Guest
Yeah I'm currently loving my Divine Soul sorcerer. Twinned concentration spells are a gas. Twinned Suggestion: "Your friend here has been plotting against you and is going to kill you unless you kill him first." /popcorn
ad_hoc
(they/them)
Looks like the vast majority of your complaints are about Adventurer's League and not the game itself.
No game can fix a bad DM. DMs from any game can ignore the rules. Your DM having you do hard ability checks for what should just be automatic success isn't a fault of the game, it' s just the DM ignoring the rules. The exact same thing can and will happen in PF or whatever.
As far as:
Time has shown that it is very easy for new players to both play and DM.
5e has the most active players of any RPG ever. Most of them are brand new to RPGs.
In my experience the players who have the hardest time learning it are ones coming from 3.x/PF.
No game can fix a bad DM. DMs from any game can ignore the rules. Your DM having you do hard ability checks for what should just be automatic success isn't a fault of the game, it' s just the DM ignoring the rules. The exact same thing can and will happen in PF or whatever.
As far as:
Time has shown that it is very easy for new players to both play and DM.
5e has the most active players of any RPG ever. Most of them are brand new to RPGs.
In my experience the players who have the hardest time learning it are ones coming from 3.x/PF.
Similar Threads
- Poll
