I'm glad this thread is coming up again, because re-reading I'm not 100% sure I made my point. So at the risk of repeating myself:
First I really like 5e. It's an excellent edition of D&D, probably the best ever made, with the caveat that some people have different tastes, they might like something simpler (B/X then) or crunchier (Pathfinder it is!). And that's fine, different people with different tastes etc.
That being said, it is folly to think that 5e (or D&D in general) can do everything. Something D&D in general does poorly is the "everyman". Sure sure you could take a commoner, but that would SUUUCK. But in some systems (warhammer, troika) you can have a party with a rat catcher and a soldier, or a gremlin catcher and a champion of chaos, and it works.
Note here, I don't mean a fighter and a rogue who has the "rat catcher" background. I mean a rat catcher, period. So your party might have a thief and a mercenary (rogue, fighter), but also a servant, a monkey monger, a charcoal burner, a mathemologist, a peasant, a scribe... So this is what D&D doesn't do well, a party of mixed "adventurer" classes and people who just happen to be adventurers but without any special training.
If you want to do a game like that, then you have to use other systems. And you really should. I think playing other systems have increased my appreciation of D&D, along with me realizing its limits.