D&D 5E Is 5e the Least-Challenging Edition of D&D?

[CleverNickName]

I don't buy the "It depends on the DM" argument. Let's look at the same situation in three different editions of the game. Your character is Gruff Strongjaw, a 3rd level human Fighter, and he was just bitten by a common viper.

Spoiler: Save Throws and Stuff

In B/X Rules:
Gruff makes a save throw vs. poison, and for a 3rd level Fighter, the target is 12. If he fails the save throw (55% chance), he dies. So in the Basic/Expert rules, he has a 55% chance of immediate death.

In 3.5E Rules:
Gruff makes a Fortitude save. For a tiny viper the DC is 10, and for a 3rd level Fighter the Fort save is made at +3. If he fails the save throw (40% chance), he takes an additional 1d6 poison damage. Then he makes a second save throw, at the same DC. If he fails that save throw also (same 40% chance of failing), he takes another 1d6 poison damage.

So under the 3rd Edition rules, he has a 40% chance of taking +1d6 damage, followed by another 40% chance of another 1d6 damage.

In 5E Rules:
Gruff makes a Constitution save. For a tiny viper the DC is 10, and for a 3rd level Fighter the Con bonus is +2. If he fails the save throw (40% chance) he takes +2d4 poison damage. Otherwise, he takes +1d4 poison damage.

So with the 5th Edition rules, he takes +1d4 damage, and has a 40% chance of taking another +1d4 damage.

I mean, sure, the DM could just not use poisonous snakes in his campaign and decree that the adventure takes place in Ireland. He could also say that poison isn't poisonous, fire isn't hot, and death isn't possible. And that's true in any edition. So I get what folks are trying to say.

But if we're just examining the rules as-written and making comparisons? Some are definitely more challenging than others. Not just challenging in how deadly they are, but also challenging in their rules complexity and amount of math involved.

 

[oreofox]

Is 5e the least challenging edition? Quite possibly. At least, that I have played. In the game I play, we have a rather large party. With the two new people, there are around 8 PCs. We were in an encounter to introduce the two new people. Everyone is level 10. The DM put us up against 8 cr 6 undead and 6 cr 8 demons. I checked on a site for encounter building, and said demons should have been impossible for us (even halving the numbers was still higher than deadly). We breezed through without much of any damage. I am not much into the whole minmax powergaming type stuff, but I have a feeling that even powergamed characters (8 at level 10) would have been hard pressed to breeze through such an encounter (undead were cr 8, demons cr 11 in 3e).

 

[Bawylie]

I don't buy the "It depends on the DM" argument. Let's look at the same situation in three different editions of the game. Your character is Gruff Strongjaw, a 3rd level human Fighter, and he was just bitten by a common viper.

Spoiler: Save Throws and Stuff

In B/X Rules:
Gruff makes a save throw vs. poison, and for a 3rd level Fighter, the target is 12. If he fails the save throw (55% chance), he dies. So in the Basic/Expert rules, he has a 55% chance of immediate death.

In 3.5E Rules:
Gruff makes a Fortitude save. For a tiny viper the DC is 10, and for a 3rd level Fighter the Fort save is made at +3. If he fails the save throw (40% chance), he takes an additional 1d6 poison damage. Then he makes a second save throw, at the same DC. If he fails that save throw also (same 40% chance of failing), he takes another 1d6 poison damage.

So under the 3rd Edition rules, he has a 40% chance of taking +1d6 damage, followed by another 40% chance of another 1d6 damage.

In 5E Rules:
Gruff makes a Constitution save. For a tiny viper the DC is 10, and for a 3rd level Fighter the Con bonus is +2. If he fails the save throw (40% chance) he takes +2d4 poison damage. Otherwise, he takes +1d4 poison damage.

So with the 5th Edition rules, he takes +1d4 damage, and has a 40% chance of taking another +1d4 damage.

I mean, sure, the DM could just not use poisonous snakes in his campaign and decree that the adventure takes place in Ireland. He could also say that poison isn't poisonous, fire isn't hot, and death isn't possible. And that's true in any edition. So I get what folks are trying to say.

But if we're just examining the rules as-written and making comparisons? Some are definitely more challenging than others. Not just challenging in how deadly they are, but also challenging in their rules complexity and amount of math involved.

That’s not a challenge. Nobody made any kind of decision that might have impacted the outcome of the situation.

You can definitely claim that 5E has lower difficulty than some prior editions. But challenge isn’t difficulty - and it DOES depend on the DM writing the scenario/adventure “properly” (for some definition of properly).

 

[ccs]

That’s not a challenge. Nobody made any kind of decision that might have impacted the outcome of the situation.

How can you possibly tell that by only observing the moment Gruff gets bit & needs a Save?

 

[ccs]

I don't buy the "It depends on the DM" argument.

Tell you what, you stop on down to the shop, hop into my game, & we'll see if you change your mind. We play 6:30pm - 9:50pm on Thur.

 

[CleverNickName]

That’s not a challenge. Nobody made any kind of decision that might have impacted the outcome of the situation.

There were no decisions to be made because I'm examining the same, single game mechanic (poison) in three different rules editions. I suppose I could role-play Gruff's motivation for getting bitten, and consider the danger-noodle's desire to bite him, but the poison mechanics wouldn't change. And we could really muddy things up with THAC0 and BAT vs. AC, piercing damage, racial modifiers and feats.

But why? A single snakebite was enough to illustrate the point.

You can definitely claim that 5E has lower difficulty than some prior editions. But challenge isn’t difficulty - and it DOES depend on the DM writing the scenario/adventure “properly” (for some definition of properly).

My thesaurus is in the other room with my dictionary. I'll have to get back to you.

Tell you what, you stop on down to the shop, hop into my game, & we'll see if you change your mind. We play 6:30pm - 9:50pm on Thur.

Sounds fun, but the commute might be difficult. Which edition do you run?

 

[Krachek]

In 5ed tables for encounters XP are quite approximative, and I read somewhere that designer don’t even take account for feat, MC or magic items. Those simply make characters stronger and thus standard encounter more easy if the Dm don’t adjust them.

 

[Bawylie]

How can you possibly tell that by only observing the moment Gruff gets bit & needs a Save?

Because that’s the only information offered in the comparison.

 

[Stoutstien]

Randomly dying from a blown save or die effect is practically gone in 5e which is a good thing but if how deadly the game is as the only measurement of challenge sounds awful.

 

[tetrasodium]

Yes. I've done things to make it more gritty like persistent death saves, healing kit dependency for hit dice, once even tried8hr short rests & week long long rests. None succeeded & all had severe problems or were immediately proven pointless.

• dmg267 gritty rests (8hr short 7 day long) was a disaster. On top of the need to find a balance between long & short rest classes you had the effect that magic items suddenly got back all of their charges on any long rest & could be spammed pretty heavily. That part was a disaster, but there was also the fact that it screwed up pacing, made a lot of spells & abilities useless, and/or ran into tons of things still tied to day/night cycles like each day/night at $time
• Healers kit dependency (dg267) between a paladin & divine soul sorcerer it just turned into burn every spell slot & take a long rest to get all spell slots back unless there was a doom clock 24/7.
• Slow natural healing(dmg267) see the last point
• combat isn't very dangerous & characters are never forced to consider "I should burn some spell slots to speed this up" unless it's a lethal combat. Compare a Wight's life drain
  
  Spoiler: 5e

  [*]Multiattack. The wight makes two longsword attacks or two longbow attacks. It can use its Life Drain in place of one longsword attack.
  Life Drain. Melee Weapon Attack: +4 to hit, reach 5 ft., one creature. Hit: 5 (1d6 + 2) necrotic damage. The target must succeed on a DC 13 Constitution saving throw or its hit point maximum is reduced by an amount equal to the damage taken. This reduction lasts until the target finishes a long rest. The target dies if this effect reduces its hit point maximum to 0. A humanoid slain by this attack rises 24 hours later as a zombie under the wight's control, unless the humanoid is restored to life or its body is destroyed. The wight can have no more than twelve zombies under its control at one time.
  [*]
  to the same in 5e
  Spoiler: 3.5

  [*]Create Spawn (Su)
  Any humanoid slain by a wight becomes a wight in 1d4 rounds. Spawn are under the command of the wight that created them and remain enslaved until its death. They do not possess any of the abilities they had in life.
  
  Energy Drain (Su)
  Living creatures hit by a wight’s slam attack gain one negative level. The DC is 14 for the Fortitude save to remove a negative level. The save DC is Charisma-based. For each such negative level bestowed, the wight gains 5 temporary hit points.
  
  
  [*]Negative Levels
  An affected opponent takes a –1 penalty on all skill checks and ability checks, attack rolls, and saving throws, and loses 5 hit points and one effective level or Hit Die (whenever level is used in a die roll or calculation) for each negative level. A spellcaster loses one spell slot of the highest level of spells she can cast and (if applicable) one prepared spell of that level. If she has more than one spell at her highest level, she chooses which she loses. A psionic character loses access to one power per negative level from the highest level of power he can manifest; he also loses a number of power points equal to the cost of that power. If two or more powers fit these criteria, the manifester decides which one becomes inaccessible. This loss persists until the negative level is removed. Negative levels remain until 24 hours have passed or until they are removed with a spell, such as restoration. If a negative level is not removed before 24 hours have passed, the affected creature must attempt a Fortitude save (DC 10 + 1/2 draining creature’s racial HD + draining creature’s Cha modifier; the exact DC is given in the creature’s descriptive text). On a success, the negative level goes away with no harm to the creature. On a failure, the negative level goes away, but the creature’s level is also reduced by one. A separate saving throw is required for each negative level.
  
  A character with negative levels at least equal to her current level, or drained below 1st level, is instantly slain. Depending on the creature that killed her, she may rise the next night as a monster of that kind. If not, she rises as a wight.
  One of those is freaking scary at any level & a serious problem... The other needs to hit, fail a save, an take a long rest.. eventually.... conveniently that cures both the max hp lost from the energy drain and the missing hp.Past editions were loaded with creatures that were always scary but the only time they are scary in 5e is when they have a save or die attack like beholders or are massively inappropriate for the party like an adult or ancient dragon vrs a party of level 2 PCs.