D&D 5E (2024) This Feels Like 4E

[Distracted DM]

Care to place your bets on how long before this thread devolves into edition warring?

I don't know, player vs gm agency (not sure what else to call it) has been going strong recently. Edition wars are evergreen, though. Actually maybe they're more like annuals.

edit: nevermind I just saw page 2, you win.

 

[Zardnaar]

Yeah. And, to me, this sounds like, "My players are thinking tactically, this feels like 4e."

And my thought is then, "What, your players didn't think tactically in 3e? What game were you playing that I wasn't?"

3E was dearh=best strategy. Death/incapacitated is the best debuff.

You might stack spell DC, damage etc to do that.

5E has bloated HP by comparison, save or dies dont really exist and you cant stack buffs/spell DC as much.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

3E was dearh=best strategy. Death/incapacitated is the best debuff.

You might stack spell DC, damage etc to do that.

5E has bloated HP by comparison, save or dies dont really exist and you cant stack buffs/spell DC as much.

5e has more than enough save or dies.
And I literally mean it so.

I wish they had been more consistently removing one fail and you are out spells.
5e has all the tools it needs. I think I will sit down and write my own 5e at some point.

Agenda:

• balancing skills and proficiencies.
• balancing spells and saving throws. Changing every suck spell to have more than one save. At least 2 like sleep (a really good change) or 3 (like flesh to stone or contagion)
• Spells that damage or have a one time effect assume full damage on a hit or I will introduce fort/ref/will defense, which requires a spell attack vs. 10+str+con, 10+int+dex or 10+wis+cha respectively or something like that.

4e had the fantastic idea of using a saving throw as a duration mechanism. 5e should do the same for suck spells.

Regarding tactical thinking. Of course most people were tactical in 3.5e.
4e just gave way more tools to manipulate the battlefield by shift, push, pull and slide effects basically attached to everything.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

If a system does not account for common human behavior I’d consider the system at fault

Is doing something that isn't fun, is unnecessary, and is clearly against the design intent a common human behaviour? We need to get ourselves some better humans!

 

[Zardnaar]

5e has more than enough save or dies.
And I literally mean it so.

I wish they had been more consistently removing one fail and you are out spells.
5e has all the tools it needs. I think I will sit down and write my own 5e at some point.

Agenda:

• balancing skills and proficiencies.
• balancing spells and saving throws. Changing every suck spell to have more than one save. At least 2 like sleep (a really good change) or 3 (like flesh to stone or contagion)

Spells that damage assume full damage on a hit. If there is a secondary effect, it will be handled as above.

4e had the fantastic idea of using a saving throw as a duration mechanism. 5e should do the same for suck spells.

Regarding tactical thinking. Of course most people were tactical in 3.5e.
4e just gave way more tools to manipulate the battlefield by shift, push, pull and slide effects basically attached to everything.

5E has save or suck spells. Spellcasters often struggle at the kill part.

5.5 meta imho is use those save or sucks to let the martials do their thing.

Best party 1-20 is probably cleric, druid, fighter, monk, paladin something like that.

 

[tetrasodium]

Is doing something that isn't fun, is unnecessary, and is clearly against the design intent a common human behaviour? We need to get ourselves some better humans!

You know we aren't discussing a single player game right?

It's mind numbing when player after player after player is wasting time weapon juggling and wandering around making every combat turn into a drawn out slog of three stooges square dancing

 

[Paul Farquhar]

You know we aren't discussing a single player game right?

Sure. But not playing against each other.

It's mind numbing when player after player after player is wasting time weapon juggling and wandering around making every combat turn into a drawn out slog of three stooges square dancing

Then suggest to you players that they don't do it. I find a hard stare effective if players think about cheesing rules-bending exploits. You might want to explain that the 2024 rules are written to be played RAI, not RAW (which is a key difference from 4e). It's notable that WotC have basically forgotten about AL.

If you insist on ignoring RAI, then you will need to make house rules. I suggest restricting the free weapon swap to be only usable before the player makes any attack on their turn.

 

[tetrasodium]

Sure. But not playing against each other.

You don't get it. Everyone else is sitting around twiddling their thumbs bulking up their dice tower skills. It's mind numbing & made worse because the whole as slapstick routine is largely the top damage dealers in the party wasting a lot of table time trying to badly perform the control/debuff party role

Then suggest to you players that they don't do it. I find a hard stare effective if players think about cheesing rules-bending exploits. You might want to explain that the 2024 rules are written to be played RAI, not RAW (which is a key difference from 4e). It's notable that WotC have basically forgotten about AL.

If you insist on ignoring RAI, then you will need to make house rules. I suggest restricting the free weapon swap to be only usable before the player makes any attack on their turn.

Read post 22 more closely. It's stupid for the gm sitting through it and mind numbing for the players having to watch it. That experience occurs because the design incentivizes that stupid behavior with no opportunity cost to the PC engaging in it

 

[Paul Farquhar]

You don't get it. Everyone else is sitting around twiddling their thumbs bulking up their dice tower skills. It's mind numbing & made worse because the whole as slapstick routine is largely the top damage dealers in the party wasting a lot of table time trying to badly perform the control/debuff party role

You don't get it. My players don't behave that way. And if any player is taking too long to take their turn (usually a spellcaster trying to decide what spell to cast) the hard stare works for that too.

Read post 22 more closely. It's stupid for the gm sitting through it and mind numbing for the players having to watch it.

I have read it. If the experience is so mind numbing then it's quite ridiculous that anyone would choose to do it. The problem is the person.

That experience occurs because the design incentivizes that stupid behavior with no opportunity cost to the PC engaging in it

No it does not. The "opportunity cost" is that it is making people unhappy. If a player doesn't care about how their actions affect the enjoyment of the group, they are a problem player and need to be removed from the game if their behaviour does not change.

If it was a problem with the rules, everyone would have the same problem. Everyone does not have the same problem - I certainly don’t for a start. Ergo the problem cannot lie with the rules.