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

[James Gasik]

I think that's a reach, honestly.



No, I think it well predated that, when it became obvious how much of the discussion of (what was it, D&D Now they called it? I've forgotten) was backing away from decisions in the 4e era. It didn't take much if you were paying attention to notice that what they were saying didn't add up (i.e. they were, in practice, lying to one group of fans or another, and people who'd payed attention toward the end of the 4e era probably could make an educated guess which one. Heck, I wasn't even involved in D&D during that period, and it looked pretty obvious to me).

Being someone who took part in every stage of the D&D Next playtest, it's my honest belief that the "crowdsourced playtest" was at least partly a scam to maintain interest in D&D as a product* while they were working on a new edition of the game, while paying only lip service to actual playtest data.

*Since by taking down the online tools and content, while the game wasn't dead, it's support was gone, and for many players, it became difficult to continue playing without easy access to content via the character builder, and there was therefore no new version of the game playable for two years.

 

[Bill Zebub]

What do you find "wrong" with 5E?

The other players.

Honestly, if other humans weren't so deeply and universally flawed, it would be a much better game.

 

[James Gasik]

Its going to be fundamentally difficult in a thread that's focused on mechanics to not bring up how prior versions of the game did things, and 4e being the most recent version prior to this its going to evoke the most comparisons (but I'll note there has been at least passing discussion of a number of editions in regard to how they handled individual things).

I'm well aware, but that's basically how it starts. And once it does, all the old debates spark up again. Even if you have a (theoretically) noble motive to fight against misinformation, any response seems to add fuel to the fire (I know this from personal experience, having made this mistake more than once).

 

[Scribe]

The other players.

Honestly, if other humans weren't so deeply and universally flawed, it would be a much better game.

This, but for literally all things, at all times. Have you seen what social media paints the world as?

I really should have just gone and lived in the woods with my wife...

 

[Helldritch]

Being someone who took part in every stage of the D&D Next playtest, it's my honest belief that the "crowdsourced playtest" was at least partly a scam to maintain interest in D&D as a product* while they were working on a new edition of the game, while paying only lip service to actual playtest data.

*Since by taking down the online tools and content, while the game wasn't dead, it's support was gone, and for many players, it became difficult to continue playing without easy access to content via the character builder, and there was therefore no new version of the game playable for two years.

So we are not the only ones that felt a bit betrayed by the turn up on 5ed. We were happy and it is still a good edition. But a lot of what had been in the playtests were... well these disappeared!

 

[Rogerd1]

The ruleset does exactly what its fans wants it to do.
Call it out of date for you only. I know a lot of people that love Palladium system, myself included.
When a system does exactly what it claims to do, strive for and perform as expected, why change it?

Because it utterly fails to do what it should. The rules are awful, magic terribad, and copy-pasta tables in different formats. All horrible. Mechanics don't match fluff. Magic etc should ge the first level of play, then when you do Heroes Unlimited, this should be dropped and all powers draw from the same source. And powers should be balanced.

This is not the case.

Truth be told, there have been threads over at rpg.net where people discussed getting new rules and new powers for heroes. The general agreement is that we would all play it to death.

I am not sure what you are trying to say here, but I think you are trying to mischaractrise my argument. To restate, if Palladium is finally winding down (I had not idea whether it was or not, but according to other posters apparently it isn't), it was most likely due to KS's advanced age rather than the lack of new editions. Because the lack of new editions has been the case for 17 years, so is unlikely to be a proximate cause to something happening now.

Ah I see, thanks for the clarity and explanation.
I understand your point now.

 

[Mind of tempest]

Well, as a Boss shutter, mage killer and incredible scout. The current monk is:
Top damage dealer.
A great scout.
The one to find trap and pick locks.
Can hold his own.
Can attack at range.
The monk uses both a short bow and a Kusarigama. A monk weapon consisting of a sickle with a dagger. A 10' chain links both of these together. So far, this monk is almost unkillable. Yeah, a weak class obviously. Ho and she is of the 4 elements. So when monsters make the mistakes of being to close to each other, a nice burning hand comes into play...

The monk's problem is at higher level when the fighter wins a third attack. But until level 11-12 no problems. And since most games ends before these levels, most people will never see any problem with the monk.
We often go higher than these levels. We are currently thinking of letting the monk gains a third attack instead of only two with flurry of blows at level 11. But we are still thinking about it as when the monk gets one on one with a boss or caster, the monk hose them like if there was nothing in front of him.

focused damage deal is not the fundamental fantasy of the martial artist, mages are rare enemy and boss are built or modified to solve the weakness, scout is also not the main goal of the monk.

aside from the monk's inability to use its cool stuff as much as it should they get really samey over time, they should have more options and lots of good options.

this is not coming from someone who wants the monk gone I want it to finally be all it can be.

 

[MoonSong]

I find it weird that anyone is calling the game that just put out a space fantasy setting to go alongside their magitech, horror, and Elminster settings 'single genre'. Single supergenre (Fantasy with a capital 'F' and even that's arguable considering how often it's veered wrecklessly into just plain Spec-Fic) maybe, but D&D has never been a single genre game.

Yes, D&D can do out-of-genre to a certain point, but all of them are still firmly grounded in a flavor of fantasy.

 

[MoonSong]

@James Gasik @Thomas Shey
Ok I'm codifying it and calling it.

The Gasik-Shay's Law:
"Given enough time every mechanical discussion thread will devolve into a 4e thread"

 

[Laurefindel]

Honestly, if other humans weren't so deeply and universally flawed, it would be a much better game.

Have you tried playing an elf instead, or perhaps a dwarf?