D&D 5E Is 5e "Easy Mode?"

[doctorbadwolf]

Apologies, didn't mean to ignore/miss your post.
How do any of these base assumptions make 5e not an easy mode of D&D?

5e can’t be any particular difficulty, because the difficulty is left up to the dm. If the dm just coasts without putting any thought into challenge, the game is gonna be “easy” in any edition that is fairly well balanced and thought out.

In older games, a thoughtless dm blows up their own campaign. So, I guess 5e is easy more for DMs.

 

[Garthanos]

It is a little easier in 5E if you compare a 1st level fighter to a Guard NPC character. In such a comparison 1st level 5E characters start at more capable than a typical town guard or soldier.

A level 1 4e pc will be facing a level +2 to +3 I think challenge depending mildly vs a guardsman if I recall. Which can be beaten but it isn't trivial so it sounds similar.

 

[Garthanos]

I don't understand the idea of OSR characters being barely trained newbies.

die with one round of fighting.... the games own designers skipped a few levels to avoid that happening. There are more reasons the characters felt incompetent to me.

 

[Monayuris]

I agree that "Easy Mode" is a loaded term.

I would say that 5E was intentionally designed to appeal to casual game play. Which is a positive in that it has made the game much more accessible to a larger number of people (who would otherwise dismiss RPG's as being complex and intimidating).

The game was built to be easier in terms of the in game consequences to actions and this facilitates this casual approach. This doesn't mean the challenge and difficulty can't be ramped up by an experienced DM and group, but the baseline assumption is a casual game.

5E is designed such that failure consequences to your actions in the game have less impact. Debilitating effects that keep you from playing the game are minimized or more easily recovered from. Character death and elimination is more difficult. The consequences to making choices in the game are less severe.

It also makes positive consequences more common and likely... It is easier to hit with attacks (bounded accuracy) which results in less 'whiff factor' and reduces player turns where they don't achieve something. Players have more special character abilities which provide clearly defined rules packages to use to introduce their agency in the game.

This casual approach gives the appearance of an easy mode game to those who are more comfortable or experienced with higher stakes games.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I agree that "Easy Mode" is a loaded term.

I would say that 5E was intentionally designed to appeal to casual game play. Which is a positive in that it has made the game much more accessible to a larger number of people (who would otherwise dismiss RPG's as being complex and intimidating).

The game was built to be easier in terms of the in game consequences to actions and this facilitates this casual approach. This doesn't mean the challenge and difficulty can't be ramped up by an experienced DM and group, but the baseline assumption is a casual game.

5E is designed such that failure consequences to your actions in the game have less impact. Debilitating effects that keep you from playing the game are minimized or more easily recovered from. Character death and elimination is more difficult. The consequences to making choices in the game are less severe.

It also makes positive consequences more common and likely... It is easier to hit with attacks (bounded accuracy) which results in less 'whiff factor' and reduces player turns where they don't achieve something. Players have more special character abilities which provide clearly defined rules packages to use to introduce their agency in the game.

This casual approach gives the appearance of an easy mode game to those who are more comfortable or experienced with higher stakes games.

Well put! Haa-zaa!!

And that is why I said to others when I speak of 5E being easier I am strictly speaking about character survivability. More is "baked" into the design than in earlier editions, especially AD&D (which is the edition I am most familiar with). That being said, we still have a player at our table who speaks about how he is stressed out by out hard/exciting our regular game is. "Easy" (i.e. comfortable) or "hard" (high stakes) is entirely in the eye of the beholder.

Hence, from the beginning, my vote is that 5E is the easiest concerning player survivability as designed.

 

[Minigiant]

Your comparisons are out of context.

It is difficult to make a comparison with 4E and 5E because their systems don't utilize the same rules between player characters and NPCs.

It is a little easier in 5E if you compare a 1st level fighter to a Guard NPC character. In such a comparison 1st level 5E characters start at more capable than a typical town guard or soldier.

3rd edition 1st level characters are similar due to comparing a player character class to the npc classes (which were lower in power to PC classes). So a 1st level fighter would be superior to a 1st level warrior by that nature.

OSR games, 1st level characters are Veterans. There is a reason they fighter class has a level title. If you compare a 1st level fighter in B/X or similar to a typical mercenary or 'Normal Man' type, they have superior hit points, better attack and saving throw progressions. A 1st level OSR fighter is a veteran soldier who has lived through several battles and is hand above a typical soldier.

I don't understand the idea of OSR characters being barely trained newbies. The farmboy with a sword would be an unclassed "Normal Man", not an actual player character.

Your error is that you are comparing the capabilities of a 1st level OSR character to the capabilities of a 1st level 4E character (or any other edition), which are different games based on different power levels.

I was basing them vs a enemy. Like goblins.

A 5e guard has the same overall stats as a 5e 1st level fighter. But the fighter can second wind. So a goblin might kill a guard in 2 hits. A fighter can take 3.

a 4e fighter can easily have 30 HP at level 1. And Second wind. Good luck gobbo and your 6 damage.

In 3e the fighter is just 1 HP and 1 feat over a 4-8 hp guard. Still can be one shotted.

In 2e, 1e, and many OSR games, 1st level fighters can be even weaker. Rarely do they start tough.

 

[Garthanos]

It also makes positive consequences more common and likely... It is easier to hit with attacks (bounded accuracy) which results in less 'whiff factor' and reduces player turns where they don't achieve something.

And means they fail to outclass enemies in anything approaching the time they would have in any of the earlier editions.... so which is easier?

 

[DND_Reborn]

And means they fail to outclass enemies in anything approaching the time they would have in any of the earlier editions.... so which is easier?

That isn't a factor IME. 5E is low AC, high HP. AD&D was high AC, low HP. It is just different philosophies.

 

[Eric V]

I agree that "Easy Mode" is a loaded term.

I would say that 5E was intentionally designed to appeal to casual game play. Which is a positive in that it has made the game much more accessible to a larger number of people (who would otherwise dismiss RPG's as being complex and intimidating).

The game was built to be easier in terms of the in game consequences to actions and this facilitates this casual approach. This doesn't mean the challenge and difficulty can't be ramped up by an experienced DM and group, but the baseline assumption is a casual game.

One sees this philosophy in more recent board game design, too. Relatively few games these days have players eliminated with nothing to do before the game is over for everyone. This means that when people host a "game night" everyone remains involved. 5e seems built around the same principles, which makes sense considering its evergreen-goal.

 

[Garthanos]

That isn't a factor IME. 5E is low AC, high HP. AD&D was high AC, low HP. It is just different philosophies.

Does any 1e DMs bother to use D-1 monsters against level 9 10th or 11 level pcs...in AD&D.. you are not even being touched because of the absolute of AC and your hit points are still massively more than the adversaries too. 5e intentionally wanted to make lower level enemies viable threats able to endanger you able to chip away its one of the impacts of bounded accuracy....

I do not see that as easier than the super armor classes with somewhat fewer hit points