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

[GameOgre]

Then it seems they were quite successful at their goal. Last time I checked, the designer's job was not to make you feel special because you could master a game in ways others could not but to actually make a game that is fun, popular and sells plenty of product. Since this is the most popular version ever I think they did a good job.

I like the inclusivity and it doesn't hurt me one bit that I can no longer build a PC that is by far more effective than other people's PCs.

Making a game easier to win doesn't always mean better. Also you can still make a character far more effective than someone else,it's just the less effective character is still going to win against the typical threat. Some people like to play games that are hard to win for the challenge. Knowing that their character is special and won despite the challenge being hard enough that most wouldn't have is a important aspect of the game at some tables.

5E doesn't do that without some heavy house ruling or a lot of options not normally used being turned on. The makers of the game wanted the vast majority of people learning and playing the game to Win. That isn't always a bad thing either! I feel like they should have added more things to make it easier to modify to make it balanced. They do have some ways as optional rules but it needed more.

 

[Son of the Serpent]

Why do i get the feeling that im about to get banned for not sugar coating an opinion of jeremy crawford's? One i would call him an oaf for in the first place. If i do get banned for this in particular im taking a screen shot of it because it will be a hilarious thing to look back on. Heck ill even post a pic of it so others can laugh. Well, unless there is a rule against that of course (wherever i might be).

 

[GameOgre]

Why do i get the feeling that im about to get banned for not sugar coating an opinion of jeremy crawford's? One i would call him an oaf for? If i do get banned for this in particular im taking a screen shot of it because it will be a hilarious thing to look back on. Heck ill even post a pic of it so others can laugh. Well, unless there is a rule against that of course (wherever i might be).

I don't think there is a issue. A disagreement in a thread is fine. It's just the human desire to become angry at disagreement that often leads people down the wrong road. Not saying that is what's happening here just ....its a message board....that sort of thing does tend to happen.

 

[Oofta]

Making a game easier to win doesn't always mean better. Also you can still make a character far more effective than someone else,it's just the less effective character is still going to win against the typical threat. Some people like to play games that are hard to win for the challenge. Knowing that their character is special and won despite the challenge being hard enough that most wouldn't have is a important aspect of the game at some tables.

5E doesn't do that without some heavy house ruling or a lot of options not normally used being turned on. The makers of the game wanted the vast majority of people learning and playing the game to Win. That isn't always a bad thing either! I feel like they should have added more things to make it easier to modify to make it balanced. They do have some ways as optional rules but it needed more.

In 3.5 I made a fighter that was far and beyond other PCs in capability with the exception of people that "bent" the rules*. At least until he could no longer keep up with the exponential power curve that casters had.

I can certainly make PCs in 5E that are a bit above the curve if I want (especially for a specific niche) but I think the difference is far less than previous editions.

As far as odds of success, that has always been and will always be in the hands of the DM. On the other hand it is easier for the DM to control the level of lethality than it was in older editions. It is more difficult to accidentally TPK a party - although I've come close in 5E as well.

There's no rule that says you can't throw a dozen ancient red dragons at a level 1 party even though they have no hope of winning. If a DM can't challenge a group, that's on the DM not the system.

*As in "I've got this dragon-like-creature-that-is-definitely-not-a-fellbeast, you guys get that one" and then killing mine a round quicker than it took 4 other PCs to kill theirs.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Why do i get the feeling that im about to get banned for not sugar coating an opinion of jeremy crawford's? One i would call him an oaf for in the first place. If i do get banned for this in particular im taking a screen shot of it because it will be a hilarious thing to look back on. Heck ill even post a pic of it so others can laugh. Well, unless there is a rule against that of course (wherever i might be).

I think questioning someone's decision or challenging their opinion is perfectly acceptable, but insulting them directly should be avoided. While I disagree with much of JC's ideas as a gamer designer, I am sure in other respects he is a good person, reasonably intelligent, etc. So, I would focus on his ideas/opinions than on his character/person and you should be fine IMO.

 

[Umbran]

One i would call him an oaf for in the first place.

Mod note:
It is fine to dislike his work. Making it personal is... more a reflection on you than on him.

And yes, you will not not be allowed to post in the thread any more - you clearly knew it was inappropriate, so you can find some topic that doesn't lead you to make bad choices.

 

[Morrus]

Why do i get the feeling that im about to get banned for not sugar coating an opinion of jeremy crawford's? One i would call him an oaf for in the first place. If i do get banned for this in particular im taking a screen shot of it because it will be a hilarious thing to look back on. Heck ill even post a pic of it so others can laugh. Well, unless there is a rule against that of course (wherever i might be).

You’re being a complete jerk. Taunting us to ban you? Wish granted. See you in a week. And no, it’s not because you criticised Crawford, it’s because you sneered at and taunted us moderators. Next time you do that it will be permanent. We don’t need that contempt from our guests.

 

[Helldritch]

Why do i get the feeling that im about to get banned for not sugar coating an opinion of jeremy crawford's? One i would call him an oaf for in the first place. If i do get banned for this in particular im taking a screen shot of it because it will be a hilarious thing to look back on. Heck ill even post a pic of it so others can laugh. Well, unless there is a rule against that of course (wherever i might be).

You have an opinion, you share it and it is fine. We have an other one. The challenge of any edition lies directly in the hands of the DM. If we were living close to each other, I'd invite you at my table to check how I play the game. TPK is a real possibility in my games and the only change I made in the rule is no full healing on long rest. You have to use HD for that. Strangely, all the other rules are as is and guess what? One mistake resulted in a TPK about three weeks ago. My second group almost got TPK the day after for about the same mistake. Now we're all in confinement so the games are stopped. But the challenge of any edition is solely on the DM's shoulders.

Where the 5ed made a mistake is in the guidelines they give to DM (young and old). They should've been clearer about the 6-8 encounters per day and how to enforce it without going into absurdity. Not enough encounters makes it too easy to go nova without consequences and thus the appearance that the 5ed is easy mode. The encounter guidelines are also a bit blurry when it comes to group higher than 4. The encounters becomes a lot more swingy when your players are 5 or 6 and you adjust the difficulty according to the guidelines ( in p.85? around?). But killing players with appropriate encounters (i.e. Not going overboard) is relatively easy once you get to think about it and do a bit of simulation by yourself.

The only real weakness of 5ed is about the solo BBEG. Especially for groups that are higher in numbers (mines are 6 players strong). They (BBEG) are not strong enough to challenge a group, if the group is fresh that is. You have to make some attrition before hand or the group will simply go nova and all will be ended in a few rounds (usually less than 5, sometimes even less). You either buff the BBEG or you give it some minions that the players will have to contend with as they attack the boss. I once shared my BBEG modification for a true solo challenge for high level characters. It works really well without too much modification to the BBEG stats themselves. I can always share it again if you will.

 

[Oofta]

The only real weakness of 5ed is about the solo BBEG.

Has any edition of D&D ever done solos well? Lair actions help, and I generally up their power level. One really simple thing is to make number of legendary resistance/actions number of PCs - 1. That and throw in an environment that's advantageous to the bad guy on top of all that.

I think it's another topic though.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Has any edition of D&D ever done solos well? Lair actions help, and I generally up their power level. One really simple thing is to make number of legendary resistance/actions number of PCs - 1. That and throw in an environment that's advantageous to the bad guy on top of all that.

I think it's another topic though.

LOL as you well know, it just depends on what solo BBEG the DM throws at the characters.

The only solo monsters I thought worked pretty well without environment, etc. were dragons in 2E, but YMMV.