D&D 5E What rule(s) is 5e missing?

[Garthanos]

Who decides what a 0-level character is? 1-2 levels have little to no abilities or options and contrary to many corpse-thirsty DMs, squishy as hell. The only thing not making them 0-level is the fact that they call it 1-2, chopping two useful levels off the 20 level game to do so.

personally for fighters anything below level 5 looks partially trained to me.
ie the lowest tier looks like an apprentice tier.

 

[Minigiant]

I am from farm country, and looks at the level 1 fighter.... hmmmm kind of looks like a talented farm boy handed a weapon and armor to me (a medieval conscript) I myself was handed a bow in highschool and hit plenty solid and I didnt have the hunting training and weapons or trapping training some of my farmer neighbors did.

The medieval knight would not be a farmboy though at an adult age he has had focused training for on the order of 8 to 12 years ie he was educated enough to make the D&D fighter look kind of meh.

The 1st level fighter is a bit more trained than a farm boy. They are proficient in every single weapon and armor and have knowledge of a fighting style that paladins and rangers don't have and barbarians and monks never get. XGTE implies that a fighter either had a full on instructor, spent their whole background fighting or is an untapped mental savant prodigy in weapons art.

1st level PCs are rookies fresh out of training. There are no rules in 5e to play a half-trained novice nor an untrained pledge.

 

[Hriston]

The 1st level fighter is a bit more trained than a farm boy. They are proficient in every single weapon and armor and have knowledge of a fighting style that paladins and rangers don't have and barbarians and monks never get. XGTE implies that a fighter either had a full on instructor, spent their whole background fighting or is an untapped mental savant prodigy in weapons art.

1st level PCs are rookies fresh out of training. There are no rules in 5e to play a half-trained novice nor an untrained pledge.

Until now...
Masters of None: 0th-Level Characters - Dungeon Masters Guild | Dungeon Masters Guild

 

[Garthanos]

The 1st level fighter is a bit more trained than a farm boy. They are proficient in every single weapon and armor and have knowledge of a fighting style that paladins and rangers don't have and barbarians and monks never get.

For the most part those weapon/armor proficiencies are useless form of versatility. The Knights and Thanes and Samurai of real world had a complement of weapons they needed and no more for a reason and then skills in athletics and animal handling and skills in hunting and skills in diplomacy, history, intimidation, insight and perception (for the guard types) some times art and similar cultural skills and you could say in general they had skills that made them versatile in ways they might need up the wazoo... not oooh I know how to use a blow gun and a pick and a shuriken, even though my home culture has none of those, just looks lame to me.

And arguably I had the archery weapon style in high school.... I am just not impressed.

 

[Garthanos]

Weapon Training versatility in D&D is a way to pretend they are special... when it really contributes nearly nothing.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Until now...
Masters of None: 0th-Level Characters - Dungeon Masters Guild | Dungeon Masters Guild

I got this myself, and found it very interesting.

 

[Minigiant]

For the most part those weapon/armor proficiencies are useless form of versatility. The Knights and Thanes and Samurai of real world had a complement of weapons they needed and no more for a reason and then skills in athletics and animal handling and skills in hunting and skills in diplomacy, history, intimidation, insight and perception (for the guard types) some times art and similar cultural skills and you could say in general they had skills that made them versatile in ways they might need up the wazoo... not oooh I know how to use a blow gun and a pick and a shuriken, even though my home culture has none of those, just looks lame to me.

The mechanics being weak doesn't negate the sheer number gained between commoner to fighter.

And arguably I had the archery weapon style in high school.... I am just not impressed.

I disagree.
Fighting styles are more like semi-pro/college level at least
Unless you were on a team, I would consider it just proficiency. Not prof + fighting style.

 

[Garthanos]

The mechanics being weak doesn't negate the sheer number gained between commoner to fighter.

I am talking about feel as much as anything and weak mechanics make the character feel weak to me.

 

[Lanefan]

I am talking about feel as much as anything and weak mechanics make the character feel weak to me.

If you're weak in relation to the other PCs that's likely a problem.

If you're about the same as the other PCs but weak in relation to the rest of the setting, well, that's what adventuring is all about!