D&D 5E What (if anything) do you find "wrong" with 5E?

[Oofta]

sure, technically you can play a commoner with d4 HD and no features, and still have fun roleplaying.

but let see the monk;

skills: only 2, so worst amount you can get for a class, even a barbarian got a hotfix for that
HD: d8, next to worst. Monk needs d10 if not d12 for HPs
armor: next to worst again as you can get wis bonus to AC but you are seriously MAD as you need dex, con and wis, so with +1/+1/+1 floating racials you are looking at 8,16,16,8,16,8 so you can have any combat utility. Weak, dumb and ugly.

damage: this is good, as long as you got your short rests, wait this is not 4E and "short" rests are 1hr long. might get one in a day. might...

Skills? That's what backgrounds are for. AC? At level 6 it's 18* how is that suboptimal? I decided to bump up my HP by playing a hill dwarf. Okay, truth be told I had a dwarven monk mini I wanted to use.

I really don't have a clue what kind of baseline you're using here.

*Even if I didn't have a magic bonus +1, 17 is still decent.

 

[Rogerd1]

Stats: There are too many of them. It needs slimming down to maybe four. These same stats, and what they denote regarding lifting, running speed, healing rates are not good. They could take a cue from Shadow of the Demon Lord and Lords of Gossamer on this.

Magic: Everyone has it, and spell slots. Both need scrapping. Aetaltis uses power points, and allows players to cast above their level and risk damage etc.

Class Powers: Savage Worlds takes the lead here with the Mystic Powers category. In older Runequest these were called Legendary Abilities, which became Heroic Abilities.

Not all classes need powers, nor should they.

Classes: There only needs to be three core classes. Or even Nobel at all to allow each setting to be completely bespoke, instead of feeling compelled to insert nebulous power subsets, Barbarians with various paths.

Levels: Not required, just have tiers of play.

Magic-Users: We dont need three different versions. Each could be covered with an Edge / Feat.

Powers: It badly needs a low level supers game that works, as ALL of them shoehorn spells as powers which is utterly terrible. As such it would be better to run M&M 2e in order to covert with the least amount of fuss. Modern Age does this in their Companion.

Skills: Would be better importing from Doctor Whomrpg, 1e or 2e. Then have specialisations or Knowledges, which 5e already does.

I don't recall 5e listing what the +bonus in skill levels denote, whether Olympic, world class etc. M&M does though.

AC: This only really lends itself fantasy games, as soon as science fiction is added you get problems. No standard DnD character would survive laser weaponry. Plus science settings require high levels of damage, something obviously done with Savage Worlds Rifts and Savage Pathfinder. Also covered in a 3PP in Dark Matter with mega-damage, mega-creatures and mega-magic.

Cosmology: It is terrible. With some thought they could get it to work with any setting yet they constantly stick with the retarded current cosmology.

Before anyone says I must hate 5e, I just acknowledge the problems and fix them.

Also needs a narrative state of play too, like Lords of Gissamer.

 

[Emirikol]

5e is really done dirty by the spell section taking up so much of the PHB.

I could really do WITHOUT 9 levels of spells cluttering up the phb.

Id much rather have about 5 more non-spellcaster classes as well.

In order to do that,I believe we'd have to get away from hps being the only 'effective' form of damage in conflicts.

 

[Helldritch]

Again.

In the comics, cartoos, and movies I grew up with there had more superpowers than super toughness, regeneration, and magic spells.

the fact that 5e is still in playtesting for a barbarian that can punch foes through walls 8 years later a flaw.

Yeah... like you did not grew up with Captain America, The Skull, Batman, Punisher, Daredevil, Batwoman, Hawk eye, Green Arrow, The Joker, The Riddler and so on. Not all super heroes/villains are like Superman, Captain Marvel, Doom, Apocalypse or Supergirl. Some are more down to earth. But they all share one thing in common. They all heal overnight unless the plot requires otherwise. (In D&D terms, they rolled poorly on their HD recovery).
Hey, with eldritch knight, you could create a character able to prevent bullets to touch him with a simple thought (shield), Shoot fire rays (Fire bolt), Strike with a flaming sword (Green Flame Blade), Fire streaks of light (magic missile), Tactically Teleport (Misty Step), Create double of himself (Mirror Image), Fly (fly... ), Go super fast (Haste) and so many others that in a comic, people would call the character OP. Just change the name of the spells to super powers and here you go.

And IF you absolutely want super strength. Easy to do. Alchemy and create potions of Storm Giant strength. Use Enlarge/Reduce and voilà! Or better, use a belt.

The difference between fantasy and super heroes, is exactly down to one thing. Healing. This is the only reason people on this forums and many others are saying that 5ed by default, is a super hero game.

 

[Helldritch]

Well I mean, first, we'd have to calculate the difficulty in destroying the wall in the first place, then decide how much damage being punted through a wall would do, and somehow also not infuriate the people who would say such activity is "too cartoonish" or "too anime" for their sensibilities.

D&D players have very refined and specific tastes in fantasy you know.

A wooden door is AC 15 and has 18 hp. A wooden wall should have about 27 for the same AC. So after a few tries, the Barbarian using the hobgoblin's head as a Ram will eventually get through the wall. The hobgoblin I mean... Well, with the hole thus made, the Barbarian will go through too, but at least it will be a willing thing...

 

[Micah Sweet]

Stats: There are too many of them. It needs slimming down to maybe four. These same stats, and what they denote regarding lifting, running speed, healing rates are not good. They could take a cue from Shadow of the Demon Lord and Lords of Gossamer on this.

Magic: Everyone has it, and spell slots. Both need scrapping. Aetaltis uses power points, and allows players to cast above their level and risk damage etc.

Class Powers: Savage Worlds takes the lead here with the Mystic Powers category. In older Runequest these were called Legendary Abilities, which became Heroic Abilities.

Not all classes need powers, nor should they.

Classes: There only needs to be three core classes. Or even Nobel at all to allow each setting to be completely bespoke, instead of feeling compelled to insert nebulous power subsets, Barbarians with various paths.

Levels: Not required, just have tiers of play.

Magic-Users: We dont need three different versions. Each could be covered with an Edge / Feat.

Powers: It badly needs a low level supers game that works, as ALL of them shoehorn spells as powers which is utterly terrible. As such it would be better to run M&M 2e in order to covert with the least amount of fuss. Modern Age does this in their Companion.

Skills: Would be better importing from Doctor Whomrpg, 1e or 2e. Then have specialisations or Knowledges, which 5e already does.

I don't recall 5e listing what the +bonus in skill levels denote, whether Olympic, world class etc. M&M does though.

AC: This only really lends itself fantasy games, as soon as science fiction is added you get problems. No standard DnD character would survive laser weaponry. Plus science settings require high levels of damage, something obviously done with Savage Worlds Rifts and Savage Pathfinder. Also covered in a 3PP in Dark Matter with mega-damage, mega-creatures and mega-magic.

Cosmology: It is terrible. With some thought they could get it to work with any setting yet they constantly stick with the retarded current cosmology.

Before anyone says I must hate 5e, I just acknowledge the problems and fix them.

Also needs a narrative state of play too, like Lords of Gissamer.

I'm curious as to how you would fix all those "problems" while still making use of any 5e game material. Including the core books.

 

[Oofta]

Monks are super fun.

But the class also sucks.

I used to play MTG. All my decks were very fun trash but the one tourney deck I'd run.

Is there anything in 5e you do like? If you like some parts, why do you think you personally need to like all aspects even though many others do enjoy things you do not?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Is there anything in 5e you do like? If you like some parts, why do you think you personally need to like all aspects even though many others do enjoy things you do not?

Perhaps he simply thinks monks should be better.

 

[overgeeked]

Perhaps he simply thinks monks should be better.

Probably. I'd agree with that. Monks could be better. All the classes could be better, but not all of them need to be better. Some of them do need to be better as they're woefully behind the rest. But "they suck!" isn't really a great, constructive, or even accurate way to talk about things. It mostly just causes arguments and makes people tune you out or put you on ignore.

 

[Oofta]

Perhaps he simply thinks monks should be better.

Sure. But one person's "better" is another person's overpowered or a different genre.

One game can only stretch so far.