D&D General 5.5 and making the game easier for players and harder for DMs

[Chaosmancer]

Yes, it's called bloat. In this case whereas before rules from Tasha's were optional, now they are part of the base game, and the base game is growing bigger and more complex. Each new piece adds to the DM's stack of things to worry about, and hence to their cognitive load.

But for those of us who were using those optional rules... there is no or little change. Now, clearly WoTC can't tell who is using what, but the assertion is that WoTC is making the game worse for DMs (and some people are asserting that WoTC doesn't care or flatly hates DMs). But if you are a DM who has been using this material.. that is frankly not true. We've gotten martials adding status effects. That's it. And it is barely more to consider than if WotC had made some new subclasses and you were running all of them in the same party.

Teaching also adds to the DM's stack. Now they are not just playing a game with players but have to treat those players like students. And like students, some players will 'get it' right away, whereas I've seen other players struggle with knowing what bonuses to add to their attack even after years of playing.

Now, some groups certainly want more combat complexity in their game, and can handle it. Hence the popularity of PF2 or Level Up. But a lot of people prefer a simpler game; the reason I now prefer to run OSR games when I'm GM is not so much that they are deadly, though they are, but because they are rules lite. It makes them easier to teach and easier to run, IME.

Okay, if you as the DM don't want to teach a new player what prone means, then have a veteran player do it. If none of your player's know what prone is... then yeah, you are the only person who can teach them. Sorry. That's the additional challenge for running for newbie players who don't know anything.

But, even then, you likely have someone who does know the game well enough and can help the players keep track of things, to lighten your load. Really, if you are a player at the table, you should be helping your DM. It is just common courtesy.

 

[Chaosmancer]

and forego an actual attack, now it becomes part of every single one of your attacks...

So just like Walloping Arrows. Had those in a game for years. Never caused a problem. If it really does cause a slow-down, you can just have a chart of pre-rolled saves on a notepad so you don't need to roll a die.

 

[Chaosmancer]

from what Sly Flourish was referring to, this did not 'cost' an invisibility spell in addition to the feature

No, it doesn't. It is just a rider on the misty step the Feylock uses. But how is "my character can turn invisible" a problem? Did you ever have issues with Feylocks teleporting and turning invisible before?

 

[Chaltab]

I feel like prone is the easiest condition to keep track of. Just turn the token over or lay the mini on its side.

 

[Umbran]

But for those of us who were using those optional rules... there is no or little change. Now, clearly WoTC can't tell who is using what...

They can't know for sure, but they likely have several proxies for how accepted or commonly used the options are. Like, use of the options on D&D Beyond, how often they get mentioned in feedback, and so on.

 

[mamba]

No, it doesn't. It is just a rider on the misty step the Feylock uses. But how is "my character can turn invisible" a problem? Did you ever have issues with Feylocks teleporting and turning invisible before?

the case was them imposing disadvantage on the monster when it attacks anyone but the Warlock and the Warlock being invisible to the monster, so it has disadvantage against everyone

Not sure what feature this is, don’t think the video said so, but it is more than invisibility or a misty step

 

[haakon1]

As a DM I welcome the potion change.

How many times have enemies carried potions and drinking them was always a bad option, because it healed less than a round of incoming damage.

I don’t like it.

For pace of play, having more free actions slows each characters turn and more effects to manage is more of a tax on the DM’s attention.

For grindiness - interminable combats that make the game boring - 4e had long fights where damage was low compared to HP with so many conditions to track. More free actions and more potion use seems likely to slow things down, and have similar dullness.

But I think it’s verisimilitude that bothers me the most. It just seems like too much for an action. I like my D&D to about/simulating some broader reality, rather than simply being a game like any other. If combat rounds go back to a minute long that would be addressed.

That said, you’re not wrong about more potions being used. In BG3, it’s a free action, so I do it often, especially at higher levels. Since it’s a solo game, pace of play doesn’t matter; since it’s a computer game, more to track doesn’t matter either.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I don’t like it.

For pace of play, having more free actions slows each characters turn and more effects to manage is more of a tax on the DM’s attention.

For grindiness - interminable combats that make the game boring - 4e had long fights where damage was low compared to HP with so many conditions to track. More free actions and more potion use seems likely to slow things down, and have similar dullness.

But I think it’s verisimilitude that bothers me the most. It just seems like too much for an action. I like my D&D to about/simulating some broader reality, rather than simply being a game like any other. If combat rounds go back to a minute long that would be addressed.

I think you are right. But then movement rates make no sense anymore.

That said, you’re not wrong about more potions being used. In BG3, it’s a free action, so I do it often, especially at higher levels. Since it’s a solo game, pace of play doesn’t matter; since it’s a computer game, more to track doesn’t matter either.

Free action and bonus actions are not the same. And I guess in baldurs gate you just get more potions than we get in the TTRPG.

 

[Chaosmancer]

the case was them imposing disadvantage on the monster when it attacks anyone but the Warlock and the Warlock being invisible to the monster, so it has disadvantage against everyone

Not sure what feature this is, don’t think the video said so, but it is more than invisibility or a misty step

Okay, that isn't one feature, that is two features. Hence the confusion. Here is what is going to happen to make that happen, per the UA 7 playtest.

The Feylock at level 3 gets Steps of the Fey this gives them Cha mod free uses of Misty step. They get two abilities to go along with this, one of which is Taunting Step. Taunting Step says that when you use Misty Step, every creature within 5ft of you makes a Wisdom Saving throw, any creature that fails has disadvantage to hit any creature other than you until the start of your next turn.

Then, at level 6 you get Misty Escape, which allows you to cast Misty Step as a reaction when you take damage. You also get two more options that you can cast whenever you use Misty Step, one of which is Disappearing Step. Disappearing Step allows you to turn invisible until the start of your next turn, or until you cast a spell or make an attack roll.

So, what would need to happen for this combo to work is the Feylock would need to run into a group of enemies, then teleport out with Misty Step and hit them with Taunting Step. Then the enemy would need to rush the Warlock, deal damage to the warlock, who then uses their reaction to cast Misty Step and use Disappearing Step. And then at the start of the warlock's turn... all of these abilities go away. It can be an effective tanking mood, but since you likely only have four free Misty Steps, you've used half your stash and taken damage, all to protect your allies for 1 round of combat. Decent, to be sure, but not OMG amazing!! in my opinion.

 

[CapnZapp]

I also play 5E pf2 and am able to challenge my players just fine.

You come across as ignoring the numerous voices in this thread, and you focus only on small parts of my posts, almost as if all you're interested in is winning arguments. Not learning more about why people express dissatisfaction with D&Ds direction. And you say you're familiar with OSR, so why fight me when I offer it as the obvious counterpart to 5E?

Also, the obvious draw of challenge is that if the game coddles you, you don't need to play smart. This can be fine for some groups. For others, not so much. Again, as a self-professed OSR player, you would know this. 5E is simply going in a direction where you don't need to think, just charge.


All this combined makes me realize we should just stop having this discussion. Good bye.