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

[Oofta]

Citation needed on majority.

I assume WOTC purchased DDB to get some of those answers. The best numbers we've seen says they're played about as often as paladins, bards and sorcerers, just a single percentage behind barbarians, clerics and wizards. FWIW fighters are the most popular (another suboptimal class) while rogues are next.

My personal judgment is based on how many people I've seen in person play and have fun with monks.

Assuming, of course, you wanted a real answer.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I was outraged that the Playtest Ranger, despite being fairly popular (at least in my area) was never printed!

Both the playtest Ranger and Sorcerer were significantly better-designed than what we actually got in 5E. I don't think it's a coincidence that two of the classes that get the most flak over design issues are ones where they made pretty last-minute changes to do them to try and force them to look more like 3E.

 

[Nightfly]

Okay, I haven't read through the previous 30 pages of posts

But what could be better beach reading than thirty pages of edition sniping?

 

[DND_Reborn]

Seconded. Rolling initiative with advantage is a simple, beautiful rule that fits with the "rangers are always ready" trope and gives rangers something unique that other martial classes don't have. I was so disappointed that didn't make it into print.

Advantage on Initiative is one of the boosts Rangers get while in their favored terrains in our games. We like it for that, since it is where they are supposed to be their best in such surroundings.

 

[DND_Reborn]

But what could be better beach reading than thirty pages of edition sniping?

Fortunately, we've mostly stayed away from that... thankfully.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

FWIW fighters are the most popular (another suboptimal class)

Given that DDB data also shows most characters never make it past 5, which is where Fighters shine, this is perhaps unsurprising.

Re: Monks etc. I think part of the issue is that how much a class is played has relatively little bearing on whether class is particularly well-designed.

This is easily demonstrated with MMORPGs. Very often classes that are poor performers on metrics and have serious design flaws are actually extremely popular with people playing more casually (which is typically "the majority". That doesn't mean that the design flaws don't exist or don't matter though - just that they don't seriously and immediately impact play. What is notable is that if they do get improved, their numbers do go up - but only a little bit.

You seem to be trying to say "If people don't think they're flawed they're not flawed". That's obviously irrational and non-factual. Especially as you're going with "people play them" as proof they're not flawed. Again, easily demonstrated by MMORPGs and the like. Hell, I've seen MMORPGs where the most well-designed classes barely got played compared to some of the worse ones!

Hell, 2E is a great example. Thieves were a total disaster of a class in 2E, a real mother-may-I nightmare. But loads of people played them!

A better argument would be "It doesn't matter if they're inferior, people play them anyway!". I mean let's all be real, in 5E, below level 10, the difference between the most effective classes and least is like 40%, at most (barring serious optimization). That's amazing. Only 4E did better. Again this doesn't mean the flaws aren't real, shouldn't be addressed, just that their impact is limited.

(And with Monks btw I'd love to see how popular they became if they stopped them being Shaolin Monks and basically made the Mystical Martial Artists - they'd probably become the most popular class!)

 

[Malmuria]

re: classes that are unplayable, martial-caster disparity, or other similar problems

At what level do these show up for you all? Is there a level range where the game works fine, and then a point where it starts to break down? I ask because I've played 5e entirely in the level 1-7 range, and I've yet to see any class imbalance or things that were unplayable. The only thing I noticed were encounters that I made that were accidentally too difficult, but that was more due to lack of player tactics than anything else.

 

[James Gasik]

I fully relate to this. We are using the UA ranger of a few years ago and we do not want to go back.

This one too! Was in a public playtest, even allowed in AL, and....never printed.

 

[Helldritch]

This one too! Was in a public playtest, even allowed in AL, and....never printed.

I always thought that TCoE would simply reuse the UA ranger. It did not to my utter dismay.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Isn't that kind of the point of a mass market product? To be popular?

Do you let popularity and the lowest common denominator dominate all your decision-making though? Chasing favor is a losing game eventually, imo.