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

[Vaalingrade]

I could have done without daily powers and prefer encounter based design, but there is no such thing as 'too many options' to me, as long as there's good, varied and interesting options. Which was trues in 4e powers, classes and even weapons, but not for 4e feats as for some god forsaken reason WotC and later Paizo decided good and varied feats is morally wrong, and 4e magic items for reasons I am unable to fathom.

It's like D&D wishes on a monkey's paw whenever it fixes something. Better classes? Feats got to go. Better system design? Magic items must suffer. Feats get better? Now there's less of them and they're 'optional'. Lost fear of flying with races? classes get worse.

I'm honestly scared what's going to be lost if 5.50 goes all the way and integrates Tasha's species rules. Wait, no I do: short rests becomes proficiency per long rest.

 

[Rogerd1]

the monk doesn't match the fantastical martial artist of media very well.

The fighter essentially needs a martial artist sub-class. The monk then needs to essentially mirror wuxia stuff, similar to the monks from Into the Badlands..

 

[Lanefan]

It's like D&D wishes on a monkey's paw whenever it fixes something. Better classes? Feats got to go. Better system design? Magic items must suffer. Feats get better? Now there's less of them and they're 'optional'. Lost fear of flying with races? classes get worse.

IMO the intention to keep the overall power level about the same is a very good underlying design philosophy - if something gets more powerful here something else over there has to be reined in.

That the implementation hasn't always been great - in any edition! - doesn't change this.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I could have done without daily powers and prefer encounter based design, but there is no such thing as 'too many options' to me, as long as there's good, varied and interesting options. Which was trues in 4e powers, classes and even weapons, but not for 4e feats as for some god forsaken reason WotC and later Paizo decided good and varied feats is morally wrong, and 4e magic items for reasons I am unable to fathom.

I think there's an argument that at higher levels you just had too damn many different attack options available; I'm not the only person I know of who had problems keeping track at the upper levels.

(This is not an objection to options per se, but having too many available at one time tactically).

 

[James Gasik]

That was a bad and dismissive argument then ("oh, you'll eventually come around" like we were a bunch of wayward, willful teenagers), it's a bad one now. If Paizo hadn't put out Pathfinder, people would probably just have continued playing 3.5 like my Thursday group did. In that group, we never made the shift to Pathfinder, we just went back to a D&D version we found more acceptable than 4e - 3.5.

I have no doubt Pathfinder hurt 4e in the sense that it ruptured the idea that 4e, no matter how well it did on release day and that it was profitable, could keep D&D as the flagship RPG in the market and thus hastened it being shelved in favor of 5e. But the argument that we'd have eventually accepted 4e is insulting.

It wasn't my intent to insult, I didn't say everyone would, just that I thought more people might have given 4e a chance in time. I initially rejected 4e myself, but a few years later, gave it another chance and was pleasantly surprised- surely I wasn't alone.

 

[James Gasik]

I still shudder at the mention of traits....

Were they that bad? I thought the initial concept, get a skill proficiency and a minor bonus were ok. Some were a little strong, but it was way better than the mess they made of Feats.

I'm more talking about things like Dirty Trickery (use Dirty Trick Master to impose the Nauseated condition, preventing standard actions, while also requiring a standard action to remove it), nerfs to Crane Wing and the Jingasa of the Fortunate Soldier for being "too good for public play", and how almost every class Paizo designs has to have a limited resource to juggle and was overly complex (contrast and compare the level 7 Eldritch Knight subclass feature to the Spell Combat of the Magus).

 

[glass]

You indicated they didn't feel betrayed until the 4e style support didn't materialize. I think the people paying attention figured out that was never going to happen well before even the end of the "playtest".

I indicated nothing of the sort. It was obvious to any 4e fan paying attention to the Legends & Lore articles that they were being thrown under the bus, and that was the "betrayal" I was referring to.

_
glass.

 

[Eric V]

It wasn't my intent to insult, I didn't say everyone would, just that I thought more people might have given 4e a chance in time. I initially rejected 4e myself, but a few years later, gave it another chance and was pleasantly surprised- surely I wasn't alone.

Of course, it only makes sense; it's certainly not Stockholm Syndrome!

 

[Helldritch]

The monks no AC and mitigation of it costs the same bonus action and resources as their offense. And since they have limited options for upgrades, they then to grow slower. This hurts the monk at tanking and best down.

And that's the issue. The monk fantasy for many are is being good at offense and defense with the limitation of their style being the core balancing factor as a weakness.

So the monk sorta works as a tank, damage dealer, scout, or utility. But really only if better classes aren't doing it as well. It is very easy to step on the monks toes. And even if someone doesn't, the monk doesn't match the fantastical martial artist of media very well.

The monk works great as a tank.
A ki point and a bonus action to dodge while still having one action is quite good in my book. I would have liked that the monk would not rely so much on its bonus action but it is understandable from a balance perspective.

I can see that you would really like the monk to be what you imagined it to be from your favorite anime but D&D is not derived from an anime and the monk we currently have is the monk from the 70s. I am still amazed that the design team successfully recreated the four elements monk. It may not be as powerful as what the anime can be but the concept works out quite fine. At least in my games where 2 short rests are assured and where I gave wisdom bonus to ki.

Hey be like me and houserule the monk as you want it to be. Test it and share your discoveries. Tell us what worked out and what did not.

And why not give the monk a parry with its reaction at the cost of a Ki? A +4 bonus to AC until the end of its next turn would be quite fine.

Come to think of it, I should try it out in my games right now. I'll discuss about it at the beginning of our next session.

 

[Minigiant]

The monk works great as a tank.
A ki point and a bonus action to dodge while still having one action is quite good in my book. I would have liked that the monk would not rely so much on its bonus action but it is understandable from a balance perspective

The monk is a terrible tank.

Monk only gets a d8 HD
Monk AC is 10+Dex mod +Wis mod which is almost always under Medium and heavy armor.
Monk's Defenses boost, costs 1 ki AND a bonus action per turn

An armor wearing warrior will get 15+ AC early and reach 18 AC way better the monk. And have more magical option.

I can see that you would really like the monk to be what you imagined it to be from your favorite anime but D&D is not derived from an anime and the monk we currently have is the monk from the 70s. I am still amazed that the design team successfully recreated the four elements monk. It may not be as powerful as what the anime can be but the concept works out quite fine. At least in my games where 2 short rests are assured and where I gave wisdom bonus to ki

Nah.

I wanna be Jacki Chan and accidentally walk into a room of thugs, say "I don't want any trouble.", tank all their attacks, and redirect their attack, and smack them with vases and ladders.

But Patience Defense and Redirect the Attack but cost 1 ki and a bonus action.

So Offense, Defense, and Flavor compete directly in 2 ways.

AND you don't have a lot of Ki.