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

[Ruin Explorer]

From what little I know, some of those systems come at (a to me unacceptable) cost of handwaving what that equipment actually is. You're in the field and for some reason you need a crowbar right now? If you've got an equipment use or plot coupon left, then - poof - you've got a crowbar (and one less equipment use); which means you don't have to think/guess in advance as to what you're going to need and further, can't be stuck without that vital piece of equipment until-unless you run out of coupons.

To me this blows away the whole pre-planning and preparation aspect of play.

No thanks.

So it's acceptable for your character to know to pick a lock, fast-talk a king, climb a slippery vertical surface with no handholds, backflip over multiple armed orcs, roll out of a fireball or a thousand other things you could never, ever do or even really understand how to do, but it's completely and totally unacceptable that your character could remember to bring something that you, the player did not?

That seems like a very curious double-standard. The great thing with plot coupons and so on is that they make the characters seem more capable and realistic, and not like they're all as dumb or as smart as the players.

which means you don't have to think/guess in advance as to what you're going to need

Also that is not true and you are showing your ignorance of such systems by making this false claim.

On the direct contrary, the plot coupons and so on typically act to fill GAPS in your planning that expert thief you're playing would have thought of, whereas the slightly overweight 40-something lawyer you are would not.

 

[Vaalingrade]

TBH, I don't want to be locked into a tense game of wits with my DM as to whether I'll need the flat head screwdriver or the surgeon's scalpel today.

 

[Lanefan]

... 1st edition to 2nd edition was a pretty strong improvement, ...

Now there's a statement you don't see every day.

 

[Cadence]

You know what could have fixed this?

That modular design they definitely never promised.

Masters of the Wild 5e; nice thin, inexpensive to print book that would monetize the hell out of some of those delicious players better than not having rules for most things.

<< Goes to google modular tents... and is confused, because I don't remember being promised any, but there they are!!! >>

9 Best Connecting Tents for Camping in 2024

Need a Camping Shelter with a Capacity That Can Grow Indefinitely? Check These Best Connecting Tents for Camping with Truly Unique and Extraordinary Features.

familycamptents.com

<< Goes to see if they're in Masters of the Wild too. >>>

 

[Golroc]

Now there's a statement you don't see every day.

Now you've sent me on an investigative quest to uncover current and historical opinions on this. I was unaware of any prevailing opinion to the contrary. I mean 1st edition has a quirky charm, and not just from simply being the origin of it all, but at the time my local gaming scene really found 2nd edition a great improvement. I mean, you could play a Bard from level 1!

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Honestly the objection to plot coupons (together with the wild misunderstanding that they totally obviate the need for planning) reminds very much of one of my players from the 1990s.

He said he'd designed a better RPG and I very curious to see it.

Turns out, he'd basically taken D&D, removed mental stats entirely, and was going with the idea that player's characters should just reflect the intelligence, charm, and so on of the players, that only role-playing should impact social stuff (he thought out we should take out the reaction table, for example), and so on. I was mystified as to why he thought this was a good idea, and why only mental stats if so, and he couldn't really explain the latter, but the former was basically was that he thought it was "unfair" that someone as smart as him should have to sometimes have a PC who wasn't.

Whereas having physical stats just made sense, obviously PCs might be stronger than him (I could have wrestled him to the ground with one arm lol), and that was fine.

The logic on "oh but the game is ruined if my PC remembers something but I don't!" seems very similar.

Now there's a statement you don't see every day.

You for real want to restart an edition war from the 1980s lol? Talk about Cold Warriors...

 

[Baron Opal II]

So ... tents, shovels, baskets, cooking pots, any mundane item really needs to have detailed specs or it's a "true issue"?

No. I consider this part to be a tangent to the discussion. (Equipment / Encumbrance)

Lack of clarity and instruction in the DMG, rest mechanics, and a weak exploration or Man vs. Nature conflict support to be true issues.

 

[Lanefan]

Yes, but what I'm getting at is:

(1) To the best of my knowledge, the outstanding majority of D&D fans seem to find D&D spellcasting to be a mechanic that produces interesting, enjoyable, and engaging gameplay - or at least that produces satisfactory gameplay as regards compelling-ness, enjoyment, etc. - in a way that counting up encumbrance of gear by pounds simply does not.

Fact of life: players generally welcome and enjoy mechanics that make the game easier and-or less challenging for them and-or their characters and would rather eschew mechanics that make the game harder and-or more challenging.

Magic makes things easier and less challenging Every. Single. Time. Of course players like it and want more of it.

Encumbrance and mundane gear/ammo tracking is there to make the game more challenging. Which means, obviously, players don't like it.

Listening to players is sometimes the worst thng a designer can do for the health of the game.

To my mind, D&D would be better served with:

1. An encumbrance mechanic that supports heroic adventure gameplay (mostly by getting out of the way of such gameplay);
2. An encumbrance mechanic that robustly supports survival gameplay and mundane resource management;
3. One of (1) or (2) is the core/standard rule and the other is an optional/variant rule - probably (1) if my guess about how most tables are playing the game is correct;
4. Eschewing pound-weight as the encumbrance mechanic.

I completely agree with (2) above but don't think (1) and-or (4) are the best way to achieve such. What I'd prefer (and, I suppose, might have to design on my own someday) is an encumbrance mechanic that somehow takes all three of bulk, size, and weight into consideration, along with the size of the bearer. The challenge in design (and it's a biggie!) would be to somehow make this system simple enough to use without giving the ability to produce ridiculous results.

A Strength-12 Hobbit, for example, should have a measurably harder time carrying three longswords than a Strength-12 Human just because of the size of the swords relative to the size of the bearer.

 

[Oofta]

Yes absolutely you should explain what medieval clothes are!

Absolutely you should! There's an extremely good reason people still talk about Aurora's Whole Realms guide.

Basically your attitude seems to be "Well I know so I didn't give two shake's of a lamb's tail whether a kid who isn't familiar with medieval equipment know!", which is just not a good attitude.

It's actually counter-productive to precisely the kind of D&D you seem to like too, because it excludes people who don't have that knowledge independently of D&D from engaging with that.

D&D used to be full of wonderful tables and descriptions and so on, but you apparently want it to be just dashed-off stuff that barely even acknowledges equipment exists? I'm really surprised to hear that.

TSR pushed out a bunch of questionable value. Things that if people really want to understand they can either get the PDF or do a quick lookup.

I had Aurora's catalog and thought it was cool. Unless it disappeared like some of my books seem to have done over the years it's still gathering dust on a bookshelf somewhere. Did I use it? Nah. I could literally count the number of times I used it on one hand and still likely have fingers left over to do a Scout's Honor. If you really want that kind of thing, it's still available over on dmsguild.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I didn't know of Anti-Hammerspace, but it is pretty well the kind of thing I was envisioning. I just didn't have a clear throughline to present it, so I spoke in generalities. (Though I have to agree with the description in that link, that this method is quite harsh in its own ways and, at least in this form, not really appropriate for the kinds of adventuring D&D purports to offer.)

Oh, indeed. My own rules are considerably less punitive. And among other things allow you to have "enough" ammunition for an extra slot and concealed for an extra slot. (Which, yes, means that a rogue can have "enough concealed daggers" for the comedy disarming scene for three slots).

Capacity is a very different way to handle the question of "how much can I bring with me?", which can in fact be rewarding, not just non-punitive. Especially if there are bonuses for choosing to carry fewer containers than your maximum/leaving containers fully empty.

The Blades rule can be summarised as "light encumbrance = limited clothes or otherwise couldn't obviously be carrying stuff, medium = baggy clothes, heavy = a backpack". Which is its own type of plot coupons in a heist game.