D&D (2024) Command is the Perfect Encapsulation of Everything I Don't Like About 5.5e

[KYRON45]

No. It was far, far worse, especially once 3.5 and the rise of tactical, grid-based combat.

The amount of time players and DMs spent arguing over the tiny bits of movement, effects, etc was enormous. Combat would take hours!

Rules lawyers were rampant. This continued with Pathfinder and 4e.

It was no where near that bad in 2e or 5e. In a game where rules are king, the players will argue, interpret, and bog down play using rules to “get” the DM.

Toxic behavior is not predicated on edition. If the players are out to get the dm and vice versa….the whole group is broken.

 

[TiQuinn]

I don't know much.....but i do know that there are bad players. It is the job of the DM to bend them to their will.

 

[Belen]

WOTC designed 5e to attract 1e, 2e, and 3e fans. They failed. So 5e DMs had to teach themselves.

This why 5e has a rep of being terrible to DM.

Massive success. I had quit playing D&D and 5e brought me back and I have been DMing over 30 years.

You cannot say that 5e massively expanded the hobby and old DMs refused to teach. I DM’d for an entire group of people new to the game.

If the hobby expands, then the supply of DMs have to expand and older ones cannot serve the expanded audience.

Your argument makes no sense. There was not sufficient supply of experienced DMs because most experienced players refuse to do it.

 

[Hussar]

No. It was far, far worse, especially once 3.5 and the rise of tactical, grid-based combat.

The amount of time players and DMs spent arguing over the tiny bits of movement, effects, etc was enormous. Combat would take hours!

Rules lawyers were rampant. This continued with Pathfinder and 4e.

It was no where near that bad in 2e or 5e. In a game where rules are king, the players will argue, interpret, and bog down play using rules to “get” the DM.

This was so much not my experience. 3e was a huge breath of fresh air where we could just play without constantly having to have rules discussions. The rules just worked. 4e was perhaps a step too far, fair enough. And, frankly, 5e was a step too far back the other way. Again, IME and all that.

 

[Not a Decepticon]

In my experience that kind of bathos is what D&D does best: On Bathos

It is just plain easier to run bathos than pathos in D&D and faaaaaaaaaaaaaaar easier to run D&D with a Swords and Sorcery tone than an Epic Fantasy tone.

I've always found that if you want more pathos and narrative structure in a game, it's far easier to do that with an Indie/Story game in which narrative structure and pathos are build directly into the rules. That sort of thing is hard to cultivate in D&D with how incredibly random it can be and requires the players and party to stay focused and put in the effort. On the other hand if you want the tone of the Dying Earth books by Jack Vance you can get them by just pouring some beer, rolling some dice, and letting loose even if none of the players have ever heard of Cugel the Clever.

Now if you're sick and tired of that sort of mood then how I like to play is not the best fit for you, but it's what goes with the grain of how the basic assumptions of D&D were originally set up. Mike Mornard (the youngest of Gygax's original players) described Gary Gygax's games as Daffy Duck crossed with Conan. And that still works for me 50 years later.

Although with all of this humor it's important to draw a distinction between stuff happening in the game being funny in and off itself vs. things in the game being funny because of our metagame perspective on it. I like the first and don't like the second, I hate things like pop culture references in D&D games and that kind of metagame humor stuff.

Not every humor needs to be bathos, and personally I'm sick of seeing bathos everywhere, to the point it is outright poisoning people's perspective and they report struggling to get immersed into sincere works, due to enforced expectation at any point they will be laughed at for taking things seriously. Honor Among Thieves is not the only way to do d&d (hell, I don't even run in the same setting as it right now). And if I am trying to get immersed into a game, often letting my guard down after having to be strict and serious among toxic enviroments of day to day life, and then other player decides to mock me and rest of the table for it, it feels extremely disrespectful.

 

[Oofta]

5e is VERY popular with players,

But it is well known to suck to DM until you learn tricks, drop hard restrictions, or have previous DM knowledge.

Do you have any broad based surveys or information you'd care to share to back that statement up? Because as far as I can tell it's not significantly worse than any other edition, it's probably better than others. Millions of people have started playing D&D with 5E, that doesn't happen without DMs. Including a high percentage of DMs that didn't have a mentor. The DMG isn't great but there are vastly more resources available than I ever had growing up.

 

[Minigiant]

Do you have any broad based surveys or information you'd care to share to back that statement up? Because as far as I can tell it's not significantly worse than any other edition, it's probably better than others. Millions of people have started playing D&D with 5E, that doesn't happen without DMs. Including a high percentage of DMs that didn't have a mentor. The DMG isn't great but there are vastly more resources available than I ever had growing up.

The designers themselves.

They themselves said the DMG was crappy organized so new DMs couldn't use it and asked for stuff already in the book.

 

[Oofta]

If it is a controlled mount I would think that would dismount while the mount is stopped. Given the way movement works in 5E that will always be that way technically at the start of the turn.

Here are some creative attempts I've seen in play:

Daydream - to stop concentration
Surrender - used against a leader during a standoff/negotiation after she asked for the party to surrender
Swim - got an enemy to jump in a moat taking him essentially out of the fight
Lie - This was used interrogating a prisoner to make an enemy being interrogated lie, thereby knowing the truth. (failed due to a save)
Breathe - Attempted to force a Dragon to use his breath weapon in a location near no allies (failed due to save .... but he breathed anyway)
Regurgitate - attempted to be used to make a purple worm throw up a party member. Failed because of the language requirement (failed)

Meanwhile none of these would work in my game. Which is part of the issue.

Daydream: You can do a lot of things while concentrating including casting spells, talking to people, doing things like make a knowledge check. You can go hours while maintaining concentration. You are not totally focused on only concentrating. Besides they only daydream for a few seconds, not enough to get lost in thought.. Wouldn't stop concentration if I were running the game..
Surrender: only lasts for a moment and then they change their mind. Only denies action for a round.
Swim:- Getting a confused look they try to swim where they are. After all you did not tell them to move over to the moat, dive in and then swim. It's too much for a single word. Also too powerful if, for example, someone was on a boat at sea.
Lie: "The sky is purple"
Breathe: The dragon breaths fire.
Regurgitate: I wouldn't know how to do this on command.

 

[Oofta]

The designers themselves.

They themselves said the DMG was crappy organized so new DMs couldn't use it and asked for stuff already in the book.

I agree the DMG needs improvement. A lot of the older DMGs were also poorly organized. Fortunately there are live streams, blogs and podcasts galore to help people out if they need it.

A poorly organized book, which still has valid information, does not make the game difficult to DM.

 

[SableWyvern]

Your players do not grasp for every advantage they can find?

They absolutely don't call on authorities outside our group in order to try and browbeat me into making rulings in their characters' favour, no. Nor would they stop the game to argue a point until they get their way. Or any other, similar, immature, antisocial behaviour.

They may genuinely just be wanting to use their spells powerfully, coming up with off the wall ideas, and being quite confident that their interpretation is correct.

Yes, my players do that.

Being told "no"--especially a flat "no" with zero discussion allowed--comes across as quite draconian in that context.

My players don't get upset and throw tantrums or feel the need to argue until they get their way when I say, "no". If they feel particularly strongly, they'll speak up (no one is prevented from voicing an opinion), I'll hear them out, and I'll make a ruling. If I'm on the fence at all, and I can see they feel strongly, I will most likely rule in their favour, just to keep the game moving. On the other hand, if I'm certain about my position, I'll stick to my initial "No." Then the game moves on. If necessary, we will discuss in more detail later, but we are not likely to have an extended discussion on minutiae in the middle of the game.

My players have stated, quite clearly, that they're happy to abide by decisions I make even when they feel I'm wrong, because they know that I regularly rule in their favour, that I'm not out to get them, that I'm fair and reasonable overall, that the game is fun, that it's not the end of the world when they don't get their way and that, most likely, I actually have a good reason for the decision I've made.

We're reasonable, mature adults who understand how to compromise and who don't see any value in stupid arguments over a game. We recognise that in the event of a dispute that can't be resolved immediately, someone needs to make the decision and, for us, that authority rests with the GM (ie, me 99.9% of the time).

If you don't want your game being stopped by rule arguments, agree that you won't let your game be stopped by rule arguments, work out how you will come to rulings, and abide by the decision. It's really that simple. On the other hand, if you think someone saying "no" is draconian, you most likely won't last long at our table (well, in reality, I doubt very much you'd make it to our table in the first place, but if you did, you'd learn to play nice, or you'd be gone pretty quick).