D&D 5E E6 and 5e (Things I've noticed)

[Celebrim]

I never looked into E6 very closely, but I did spend a bunch of time trying to accomplish the same things on my own with 4E and especially 3E. A few months ago I checked back on the 5E playtest and just said, "Ah, **** it. This is so much better than what I was cobbling together."

I'm pleased to hear it. Sans the profanity, that was pretty much my response to 3e. I tossed all my house rules for 1e over my shoulder and didn't really look back.

Loving all the good reports I'm hearing about 5e. I don't have a need for a new edition at the moment, but it seems like D&D might actually be moving in a good direction again.

 

[Blackbrrd]

So after a full session of 5e, and reading through pretty much all new edition info that is out there, I've come to the determination that DMing 5e is pretty much the experience I was trying to capture with all the E6 variants I've attempted over the years.

Combat seems fast (much faster that mid level 3.5 or 4e), math is much easier to manage, the spells don't seem to blow the roof off a game (though more testing is needed). The classes seems balanced against each other to the point that optimization won't put one player to far ahead in terms of group contribution or leave players behind that aren't that interested in system mastery.

All-in-all, I'm happy with how things have turned out and look forward to the release of the hardcovers over the next few months. And thanks to everyone that playtested and provided feedback.

I thought about it and 5e really does remind me of E6. I do think the scaling damage muddies the water a bit though. Meteor Swarm does 2x20d6 damage in four 20' radius areas at a 1 mile range for instance.

If I was going to do something like E6 for 5e, it would probably be E10. That matches quite well with where the 2e stopped the hp scaling (you only got 1, 2 or 3hp instead of d4-d10+con mod per level).

 

[Tony Vargas]

If I was going to do something like E6 for 5e, it would probably be E10. That matches quite well with where the 2e stopped the hp scaling (you only got 1, 2 or 3hp instead of d4-d10+con mod per level).

At a glance, that sounds very reasonable.

It'll be interesting to see where 5e's 'sweet spot' is. It's obviously kicks in no earlier than 3rd. And some of the class comparisons I've seen floated around seem to indicate that it might be done by 11th....

An improvement over 3e and earlier editions.

 

[Blackbrrd]

At a glance, that sounds very reasonable.

It'll be interesting to see where 5e's 'sweet spot' is. It's obviously kicks in no earlier than 3rd. And some of the class comparisons I've seen floated around seem to indicate that it might be done by 11th....

An improvement over 3e and earlier editions.

Mearls has already mentioned there is a "break point" at level 11. That's the reason he gives for the xp table "break" as the game goes into a new tier.

 

[Ari Kanen]

I thought about it and 5e really does remind me of E6. I do think the scaling damage muddies the water a bit though. Meteor Swarm does 2x20d6 damage in four 20' radius areas at a 1 mile range for instance.

If I was going to do something like E6 for 5e, it would probably be E10. That matches quite well with where the 2e stopped the hp scaling (you only got 1, 2 or 3hp instead of d4-d10+con mod per level).

I think this sort of addresses the issue I had with converting 3.5/PF players to E6. Player's always looked at the book as all sorts of options they "couldn't have." I think this is one of the reasons it was hard for E6 to find wider adoption, formally. Informally, I think most campaign probably only get to 6th or 7th level anyways.

There needs to be an illusion of progress, or gaining imaginary power, even if typical monster encounters gain power at the same speed. I think 5e made the choice to have power represented by hit points, and have a really limited curve for everything else (saving throws, attack bonuses, magic item bonuses).

I just hope there's enough bread crumbs for players that are motivated by stat bonuses to keep it interesting. Or maybe, just maybe, they will start paying more attention to the story instead of their character sheet.

 

[rmcoen]

I cast "Raise Thread"!

Now that people have had years to play 5e, and get to high levels... What's the general feeling now? Do we need a "5e6"? Just tweak 5e [like "no more hp after 10th level"]? Or leave 5e as is, and leave E6 in the past?

 

[payn]

I went through a 5E 1-20 campaign and didnt feel the need for any E6 type adjustments. This is coming from a guy who prefers PF1 over most fantasy RPGs, loves E6, but usually just goes 1-12 in PF1.

 

[CleverNickName]

Eh, "need" is a strong word.

I've run a couple of campaigns with the E6 rules in 5E, and I can vouch that it works as intended. However, the issues that E6 was written to address (the power balance between martial characters and casters, the dependency on magic and magic items, the exponential power arc, etc.) just aren't as severe in 5th Edition as they were in the earlier editions. The E6 house-rule doesn't bring as much to the table as it used to.

Don't get me wrong; the bounded accuracy and power balance still unravels at higher levels. It just happens much later in the character progression than it did in 3.X.

 

[Umbran]

Don't get me wrong; the bounded accuracy and power balance still unravels at higher levels. It just happens much later in the character progression than it did in 3.X.

I could see someone wanting to do, in essence, E10, or E12, or something.

 

[Cadence]

One of my big reasons for liking E6 (or so) with 3.5/PF is some of the world building things - a lot less teleportation and scrying and reasons that castles and armies aren't particularly useful...