D&D (2024) 5.5e - What ONE section of the rules would you rewrite for clarity?

[ART!]

In my experience the character classes as presented in the PHB are intimidating for new players. They're front-loaded with a cluster of stuff about HP/Hit Dice, proficiencies, and equipment, and then a big table. And that before we even get to the pages of features. I honestly don't know what the solution is, but like I say, I've seen new players knock their heads up against that over and over.

 

[DEFCON 1]

given what he's saying i don't really know why you'd think he'd be referring to spell blocks printed by level. none of what he said makes any sense in that context.

The quote of mine they posted included both. So I was just looking to confirm which one they were talking about.

 

[Jer]

In my experience the character classes as presented in the PHB are intimidating for new players.

Agreed. That's why the Starter Set and the Essentials Kit are IMO a better, more manageable introduction to the game for new players than throwing a PHB at them right off the bat.

Giving the PHB to a new D&D player isn't as bad as handing over the Rifts Ultimate Edition to a player new to Rifts, but it isn't as unlike that feeling as it probably should be.

 

[MichaelSomething]

In my experience the character classes as presented in the PHB are intimidating for new players. They're front-loaded with a cluster of stuff about HP/Hit Dice, proficiencies, and equipment, and then a big table. And that before we even get to the pages of features. I honestly don't know what the solution is, but like I say, I've seen new players knock their heads up against that over and over.

Use the Dungeon Crawl Classics character generation method! The level zero characters are easier to make.

 

[Horwath]

In my experience the character classes as presented in the PHB are intimidating for new players. They're front-loaded with a cluster of stuff about HP/Hit Dice, proficiencies, and equipment, and then a big table. And that before we even get to the pages of features. I honestly don't know what the solution is, but like I say, I've seen new players knock their heads up against that over and over.

Solution is only one.

Learn2Play.

It is only little hard for spellcasters as they need to prepare up to 6 spells at 1st level and need to know what to do.

Also give option to (new)players to rework some parts of their characters after every session if they feel that they have made bad choice in character creation.
I.E. adjusting ability scores, skills, tools, feats,

There is much to learn so don't write their characters in stone.

Treat every session as a new game of complicated board game.
Every game played you learn more and you adjust your play accordingly.

 

[DrunkonDuty]

No. Surprising is ok, but I don´t like the rules.
We were asked, what should be different. I´d like the first round of combat to play differently.

Maybe I´d like the first turn of combat start with a surprise round, which only allows for a single action or move. A won initiative with surprise on top seems a bit too much for my tastes.

The playtest had a simple +20 to initiative on surprise, which was also ok.

My favourite however would be using all different kinds of modifiers for the first round of combat:

Surprised might be disadvantage on initiative. Using a ranged weapon might give advantage. And so on. Maybe +/- x modifiers.
I was tempted to use the modifiers in the DMG for round by round initative, but only for the first round and then cyclical initiative as normal.

I also don´t like the alert feat, and how you can´t be surprised, but maybe don´t even notice a threat.

But then, in most cases it works and my solutions are also wonky, so I stick to the normal rule and since we don´t have a character with alert anymore, most of my problems went away. I just like someone who gets paid for it to provide me rules I like more.

I generally think, stealth however has exactly as much rules as I need for theater of the mind. I think any rules that take the battlefield into account by default are a no go and usually cause more discussion than leaving it open to the DM. I would not mind some more defined stealth rules in the optional grid combat in the DMG.
But when we are at it, I´d think passive perception or passive checks as hey are used should go the way of the dodo. For all reactive actions, I´d like saving throws to be used. For passive perception, I´d probably stick to a class based value that might be modified by wisdom, but does not have to.

Ah! Got it. Sorry, I misunderstood.

 

[James Gasik]

I'm not sure which part you're referring to-- spell blocks printed by level, or re-writing the Stealth rules into one single section?

Sorry, just your theory about why the Stealth rules are the way that they are, because most DM's don't use them. To my mind that would only make sense if you think about experienced DM's. New DM's really do need more guidance than "just do whatever you think is best"- I know this because of the many times I've had new DM's come to me asking for advice the books don't give them (and should!).

 

[Hussar]

Sorry, just your theory about why the Stealth rules are the way that they are, because most DM's don't use them. To my mind that would only make sense if you think about experienced DM's. New DM's really do need more guidance than "just do whatever you think is best"- I know this because of the many times I've had new DM's come to me asking for advice the books don't give them (and should!).

Well, they might be able to get away with it this time around. Last time, there was absolutely no way that 5e was going to be written clearly and concisely with new players in mind. Not after the roasting WotC got over the 4e books. It was 100% back to AD&D style mixed bag books with flavor and mechanics all jumbled together so it was an interesting, rather than useful, read.

This time? Enough time has past and they've certainly built up a fair bank of good will, that they might be able to be somewhat less opaque in the books and start being clear about intent without people losing their poop that they are dictating playstyles and whatnot.

One can always hope anyway.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Well, they might be able to get away with it this time around. Last time, there was absolutely no way that 5e was going to be written clearly and concisely with new players in mind. Not after the roasting WotC got over the 4e books. It was 100% back to AD&D style mixed bag books with flavor and mechanics all jumbled together so it was an interesting, rather than useful, read.

This time? Enough time has past and they've certainly built up a fair bank of good will, that they might be able to be somewhat less opaque in the books and start being clear about intent without people losing their poop that they are dictating playstyles and whatnot.

One can always hope anyway.

I hope... but I fear they will still be skitish and we will have to wait for a full 6e in the years to come... but god I hope so

 

[DEFCON 1]

Sorry, just your theory about why the Stealth rules are the way that they are, because most DM's don't use them. To my mind that would only make sense if you think about experienced DM's. New DM's really do need more guidance than "just do whatever you think is best"- I know this because of the many times I've had new DM's come to me asking for advice the books don't give them (and should!).

Sure. Could they be clearer? Of course. I don't think anyone would try and argue that otherwise-- many different parts of the whole package that may or may not come up are found in different section of the book, there's no doubt about that. And you could absolutely edit the book so that the whole process of DEX (Stealth) checks and WIS (Perception) checks and Passive Perception and Cover and Concealment and Lightly/Heavily Obscured and acting against Unseen creatures, and the Hide action are all in one place. The positive of this is that all the rules for Stealth and Hiding are much easier and quicker to reference. The negative though is that you're probably going to end up just duplicating all this info elsewhere because you're still going to want to put Stealth and Perception in the Ability Score section, you're still going to want to indicate in the Environment section what all the different environments do in terms of Cover and Concealment and Obscurity, and so forth.

So the question then becomes does WotC think the benefit of having a "Hiding Ruleset" in one small package outweigh having to duplicate the same information in different sections of the book? That I can't really say. All I can do is speculate... and my impression would be they'd rather save the space and wordcount by not duplicating info, and just put it on all the players (new and old) to actually go through the effort to read the entirety of the book. Cause if you do that you will get all the information you need to run Hiding in a general way... you just won't get hyperspecific rules that close every potential loophole that comes out of the narrative, nor the information in one easy reference section.

Whether that's good or bad overall, who's to say?