D&D 5E 5e...too safe?

[SilentBoba]

Tying powers to the natural value of the attack roll is not done to randomize them. It's to take the load off the DM trying to figure out if they are allowed to use the monster's 'limited use' powers. It's exactly the same as when you had to roll a d6 to see if a 4e monster regained its limited use power, but it is simpler. The DM still has to make lots of tactical decisions - who to attack, where to move, whether to retreat, etc.

Yep, that's the intent of the mechanic, but it's not "exactly the same" by any means, except perhaps over a long battle if you look at how often the monster can use the ability. The crucial difference is in 5E they get the abilities up front, so the first use is on demand. That's a pretty big distinction. I realize randomization wasn't the goal of 13th Age's critter powers, but it's the effect. I'm a chronically bad die roller, but also an open die roller, and often entire battles would go by without a particular marquee ability triggering because I'd miss the trigger value--even if the roll itself hit. That's very frustrating. I'd rather only have the ability work once than not at all.

The problem with 5E abilities is they lack the creative flair in the names and described effects. I even checked to see if Owlbears can tear off arms

 

[Nilbog]

Yep, that's the intent of the mechanic, but it's not "exactly the same" by any means, except perhaps over a long battle if you look at how often the monster can use the ability. The crucial difference is in 5E they get the abilities up front, so the first use is on demand. That's a pretty big distinction. I realize randomization wasn't the goal of 13th Age's critter powers, but it's the effect. I'm a chronically bad die roller, but also an open die roller, and often entire battles would go by without a particular marquee ability triggering because I'd miss the trigger value--even if the roll itself hit. That's very frustrating. I'd rather only have the ability work once than not at all.

The problem with 5E abilities is they lack the creative flair in the names and described effects. I even checked to see if Owlbears can tear off arms

I do agree with the point you make around 13th age, a lot of the abilities are in the hands of the gods, so to speak and indeed that is what turned my group off the system (plus the background/skills system, they prefer a hard and fast list of what there characters can do). They often felt, particularly the fighter that he didn't really have control over what happened. However the combat encounters I ran in 13th age very rarely were dull, whether this was the unpredictability of the system or design, I couldn't say, but as a DM it worked for me

Fairplay to 13th ages bestiary, it was hands down the most inspirational Monster Manual I've ever read, I wanted to use every monster in it! Maybe like you say it was the flavour text and presentation that has raised my concerns, I will wait until I've read and used a few critters from the 5e MM before being too critical!

 

[TrippyHippy]

The main body of criticism for D&D5E has mainly come from Pathfinder fans and 4E fans. Pathfinder fans have an immediate outlet to play, but 4E fans may be a little caught between two editions currently, although there is 13th Age.

For me, I don’t want 5E to be any more elaborate in mechanics. For me, the elaboration in this editions comes from the narrative and background details for each character. I admire and enjoy the simplicity of play.

 

[rastus_burne]

The main body of criticism for D&D5E has mainly come from Pathfinder fans and 4E fans. Pathfinder fans have an immediate outlet to play, but 4E fans may be a little caught between two editions currently, although there is 13th Age.

For me, I don’t want 5E to be any more elaborate in mechanics. For me, the elaboration in this editions comes from the narrative and background details for each character. I admire and enjoy the simplicity of play.

The simplicity is a welcome reprieve from Pathfinder.