D&D 5E What are the "True Issues" with 5e?

[doctorbadwolf]

You are not required to have 6 encounters a day. But the game easily becomes unbalanced, anticlimatic, and unfun if you have less than 4.

I’ve found that 2-3 deadly encounters works wonders, but yeah. The game wants some resource variance.

I’ve run a game for years that tended toward sessions with 1 or 2 smallish fights leading to a session with 1 fight worth more than a days XP budget, and it works, even when they got into the big throw down fresh. But it works better when they have to think about thier resources a bit.

Then again, when I did 4 sessions featuring 3 proper fights and a chase-fight, the half-casters did not love the feeling going into the last fight. I ended up allowing a “heroic rest” where they told me what they each did to catch thier breath and help eachother get that second wind, and I let them take a short rest+, that was basically half a long rest.

I think when I start a new full campaign (we have a stop on new ones until at least one ongoing campaign is finished) I am going to propose the “long rest requires safety” rule.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Since magic is make-believe, deciding what magic can and cannot do will always be completely arbitrary. It's only a compromise if you have a predetermined notion of what magic should be able to do, in which case that's not the game's problem but yours.

My "pre-determined notion" of what magic can do is based on what other games made by the same company (or previous holders of its IP) and called "Dungeons & Dragons" say magic can do. In that case, I'd say it's at least as much the game's problem as mine.

If you want magic to be weaker, play or design a game (including your own houserules) where it is.

 

[Fifth Element]

New players dont really know mechanics well enough to articulate things in a playtest.

On the other hand, they also don't have any preconceived notions about how aspects of the game "should be." New players aren't going to be offended if magic missile requires an attack roll, for example.

 

[Micah Sweet]

On the other hand, they also don't have any preconceived notions about how aspects of the game "should be." New players aren't going to be offended if magic.missile requires an attack roll, for example.

And that's a good thing right?

 

[jasper]

The passive perception going to being use occasionally to always on around late 2016 early 2017. Which gave rise multiple passives being on.
Adventure League modules generally not having fail states for long rests.
The spells and spell like abilities being unclear. This could be cleared up by using a different wording.
Counterspell.

 

[Minigiant]

I’ve found that 2-3 deadly encounters works wonders, but yeah. The game wants some resource variance.

I’ve run a game for years that tended toward sessions with 1 or 2 smallish fights leading to a session with 1 fight worth more than a days XP budget, and it works, even when they got into the big throw down fresh. But it works better when they have to think about thier resources a bit.

Then again, when I did 4 sessions featuring 3 proper fights and a chase-fight, the half-casters did not love the feeling going into the last fight. I ended up allowing a “heroic rest” where they told me what they each did to catch thier breath and help eachother get that second wind, and I let them take a short rest+, that was basically half a long rest.

I think when I start a new full campaign (we have a stop on new ones until at least one ongoing campaign is finished) I am going to propose the “long rest requires safety” rule.

If ever caster had a "Arcane/Bardic/Divine/Primal/Sorcerous Recovery" and every Short rest class had a Meditation and "Going Nova" Mode as optional class feature swaps, a DM could swap class features to match the pace the party enjoy.

 

[Lanefan]

One thing that I think is a flaw in all versions of dnd, at least from a game design standpoint, is the early level difficulty problem.

You say flaw, I say feature.

Generally in games you want to start players off on easy mode, adn then scale up the difficulty as they get used to the game. But in dnd, the first couple of levels are actually "brutal" in difficulty compared to later ones, its very easy to die when your a first level character, much harder when your 5th level.

Which means either a player gets to try out a variety of characters, or gives up; and if a player's going to give up better it be then than later.

 

[Lanefan]

Well, there's the problem, you aren't playing 5e. (See, 5e doesn't have different spell levels per class. Every spell is the same level for everyone who can cast it)

And that closes off a lot of useful design space for differentiating between classes. Why would they do that?

 

[Zardnaar]

Exactly my point.

I was referring to its popularity.

On the other hand, they also don't have any preconceived notions about how aspects of the game "should be." New players aren't going to be offended if magic missile requires an attack roll, for example.

You still need your core players around to draw in the newbies.

DMs if nothing else.

Whales are still your primary customers end of the day at least when the edition launches.

If it tanks then you're not getting the whales the newbie or anyone else. Some % of newbies will become new whales.


5E has trained a new generation of grogs deviate to far from 5E in one D&D guess what's gonna happen?

 

[cbwjm]

And that closes off a lot of useful design space for differentiating between classes. Why would they do that?

I think for ease of use, the combined spell table might also have something to do with it, probably also boosting the spell with a higher level spell slot. It means spells function the same way for anyone with access to that spell.