D&D 5E What is the appeal of the weird fantasy races?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have fun playing 5e, but i've had more fun playing other systems. I don't find 5e unfun, but there are things about it that could change to make it more fun. If I had to give it a score I would say I have 70% fun if I am forced to use 5e as a system (GM or player). Very few things in my life are so binary as to be labeled fun or unfun.
I find the system probably 90% fun to play and at this point, about 60% fun to DM. I just can't figure out a way around the encounters per game day balance they have going. When it's someone else's problem, I enjoy it a lot more. :P
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I find the system probably 90% fun to play and at this point, about 60% fun to DM. I just can't figure out a way around the encounters per game day balance they have going. When it's someone else's problem, I enjoy it a lot more. :P

I've given up on encounters per day thing. I can almost make it work in a dungeon crawl.
 


I've given up on encounters per day thing. I can almost make it work in a dungeon crawl.
That's encounters per day by another name. Lots of encounters in a dungeon crawl. :)

I just need to be able to have one or two encounter challenge the group, but not destroy them and I don't know how to make that work with 5e. Right now I'm playing as the players give me a break from DMing every so often. I let the them know, though, that if I can't make it work the next time I try 5e, I'm going back to 3e. That I KNOW I can make work.
 


That's encounters per day by another name. Lots of encounters in a dungeon crawl. :)

I just need to be able to have one or two encounter challenge the group, but not destroy them and I don't know how to make that work with 5e. Right now I'm playing as the players give me a break from DMing every so often. I let the them know, though, that if I can't make it work the next time I try 5e, I'm going back to 3e. That I KNOW I can make work.

I normally go with 1 baddie per PC plus another one or two.

Also use lots of AoE.

Think 3 of them took absorb elements when they leveled up.

Throw in hit and fade encounters.
 

I find the system probably 90% fun to play and at this point, about 60% fun to DM. I just can't figure out a way around the encounters per game day balance they have going. When it's someone else's problem, I enjoy it a lot more. :p
My fun bottleneck is the lack of new player content. I need a steady stream of things to explore as a PC because i'm limited to what's on my sheet when things devolve to combat. I'm guessing 70% of 6 years of player side gaming has been "I attack (roll d20), I attack (roll d20), I use my bonus action to attack (roll d20)" or "I cast CANTRIP(tm), make a DC 15 DEX save or take 14 fire damage."

As a GM I can do whatever I want and pretty much have ditched the books (except the monster collections) and gone full improv. I love the fact that 5e has basically told me as the GM to "do whatever you want, man" with the rules. I know that I can do that in ANY game, but I feel that 5e was left open to encourage you to do it more than previous editions did.

I do agree with you that the encounters per day balance is the biggest hurdle of the system. I don't remember what current thread we are discussing this, but I lean very heavily on assigning exhaustion, long term HP damage (like undead do), asking for spell slots, and the disease system to fill in some of the gaps where activity during the day substitutes for actual combats.

Example Encounter That Isn't Combat: When crossing some slippery rocks the player who rolls the lowest DEX save slips off a rock and twists their ankle. The party can either mark off two level 1 healing spells, short rest and spend 2 HD, or the warlock can take a level of exhaustion to represent the soreness.
 

Shocked the crap out of you though, right? Got your heart beating and got you all riled up, right? Got your ATTENTION, right?

Then, when you calmed yourself and read the other part, you saw my point that the whole paragraph that that reference was a small part of was trying to say. Shock value has, well, value. Try doing this when making points. It makes you the center of attention in almost any discussion. It's also alot of fun at parties.
This presumes that (1) the person will actually shift to looking at the other points, (b) actually think of the other points as the relevant ones, and (iii) not hold such behavior against you for later parts of the conversation.

I find that none of the three things above happens on the regular. That it's, in fact, exceedingly rare to see all three at the same time. Risking offense, dismissal, or others hounding you for points you don't actually care about, is not worth the potential of stealing the show.
 

Well, you are the only person I have ever conversed with that measures "fun" in percentage points! Every other human I have ever met measures it in a "fun" OR "not-fun" way. This is THE strangest conversation I have ever had!!!
I rather doubt that. Binary “fun” or “not fun” with no less or more fun in between is extremely abnormal.
 

Shocked the crap out of you though, right? Got your heart beating and got you all riled up, right? Got your ATTENTION, right?

Then, when you calmed yourself and read the other part, you saw my point that the whole paragraph that that reference was a small part of was trying to say. Shock value has, well, value. Try doing this when making points. It makes you the center of attention in almost any discussion. It's also alot of fun at parties.

I apologize again for making you angry. Sincerely!
This is completely unacceptable behavior.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top