D&D 5E Advanced D&D or "what to minimally fix in 5E?"

[Minigiant]

Disagreed. 2014 doesn't assume 2 feats to start with, and the power of race is inconsistent across the edition. This exact formula is htus unnecessary.

It's about 2.5 feats in power for race plus background. A bout +2, a +1, 3 skills, 2 tools/languages, and feat.

The point is if you made some new species of 4 feats of power. It would be OP and require DM having a new gauge of power.

 

[Distracted DM]

I can see @W'rkncacnter 's point- first-party content is a good reference, it's available to everyone, and it sets the baseline. Ofc A5e's baseline can be all over the place, but if you say "dragonborn heritage with tyrannized culture" everyone can look that up and since it's in the core books that, again, a good baseline to reference from. 3pp can be pretty wild, including some of the rougher A5e stuff that my players have come to me with.

 

[Distracted DM]

It's about 2.5 feats in power for race plus background. A bout +2, a +1, 3 skills, 2 tools/languages, and feat.

The point is if you made some new species of 4 feats of power. It would be OP and require DM having a new gauge of power.

So, assuming "4 feats of power," would it not be a 5e game? I think that's the original intent of this exercise- defining a game as 5e or not. Shadowdark is not. But A5e characters' baseline is higher than 5e's. Is it not a 5e game?

 

[Minigiant]

So, assuming "4 feats of power," would it not be a 5e game? I think that's the original intent of this exercise- defining a game as 5e or not. Shadowdark is not. But A5e characters' baseline is higher than 5e's. Is it not a 5e game?

A5e is higher but not that much higher than the 2014 or 2024 standard.

4 feat of power makes you stronger than a regular optimize character.

 

[Distracted DM]

A5e is higher but not that much higher than the 2014 or 2024 standard.

4 feat of power makes you stronger than a regular optimize character.

That's just the origin feature of a character- the majority of classes, especially fighter and berserker, handily outperform their 5e counterparts.

It's about 2.5 feats in power for race plus background. A bout +2, a +1, 3 skills, 2 tools/languages, and feat.

The point is if you made some new species of 4 feats of power. It would be OP and require DM having a new gauge of power.

Where is the line? Having A5e characters in the game DOES require the DM having a new gauge of power. You can't challenge a party of A5E characters the same stuff that you would a 5e party.

 

[Minigiant]

That's just the origin feature of a character- the majority of classes, especially fighter and berserker, handily outperform their 5e counterparts.



Where is the line? Having A5e characters in the game DOES require the DM having a new gauge of power. You can't challenge a party of A5E characters the same stuff that you would a 5e party.

IME A5e PCs are just more flexible.. They aren't that much more powerful that you have to gauge then more differently that a decently optimized Official 5e PC.

More horizontal than vertical.

 

[Corinnguard]

I can see @W'rkncacnter 's point- first-party content is a good reference, it's available to everyone, and it sets the baseline. Ofc A5e's baseline can be all over the place, but if you say "dragonborn heritage with tyrannized culture" everyone can look that up and since it's in the core books that, again, a good baseline to reference from. 3pp can be pretty wild, including some of the rougher A5e stuff that my players have come to me with.

Whereas with third party material, it depends on whether or not another person knows about said material. Not everyone who knows about Level Up collects or has read its' 3pp material. So, I can now see where @W'rkncacnter is coming from.

However, having first person content such as the core books doesn't always mean a person is going to remember a particular fact such as the Tyrannized culture providing resistance as well. When you brought up how you can get a resistance from your heritage and another resistance from your culture, I made a Knowledge check and remembered the Desert Hierarch culture from MoAR: Complete. It didn't occur to me to look elsewhere after that. Nor did I know that I was going to start a discussion about first-party content vs. third-party content. For Level Up, I consider the works of @Steampunkette, @PJ Coffey and @Timespike to be just as good as first-party content. They did work to help produce Level Up after all, and their work does appear in the Gate Pass Gazette.

 

[CreamCloud0]

Call me cynical, and maybe I view the game differently. But aren't rules like this just giving players tools to beat DMs over the head with?

What is the difference, from a game play perspective, between a party using the downtime in some way of their choice, and the DM rewarding that downtime in some way of the DM's choice. And the party using the downtime in a way prescribed by the rules, and the DM rewarding that downtime as prescribed by the rules?

In my mind, the only difference is consistency between games, and the restriction on the DM. As an example, if I am a DM, and you role play the learning of a skill during downtime over 15 sessions. I can award you proficiency in that skill. If the rules outline a different outcome, is that a net positive? In theory, the DM could no longer award what they felt was the proper reward, but instead has to reward what the designers designate as the reward. If the DM doesn't, the player may say "but sir, the rules on page 691 of the PHB say I get this."

So these rules are perplexing in their purpose. Is the purpose to force consistancy? Is it to make DMing easier? What is the net gain of limiting options by rule? And if the rules are so vague as to not limit options, what purpose do they serve at all?

i'd prefer rules to exist if only because:
1) it provides a baseline framework as a measuring stick for this sort of thing
2) rules can be ignored or altered by the GM is so desired, this isn't set in stone

this removes most elements of Mother May I to downtime learning in an area of the game that is fairly light on real rules and focus, it removes the personal judgement aspect where some players might be left hanging by a GM who's expectations of what it takes to learn a skill are way overblown.

 

[Shardstone]

It's about 2.5 feats in power for race plus background. A bout +2, a +1, 3 skills, 2 tools/languages, and feat.

The point is if you made some new species of 4 feats of power. It would be OP and require DM having a new gauge of power.

There are plenty of species like that though. You think Mountain Dwarf and Yuan-Ti are comparable? Not at all. Wood Elf and Aasimar? Or my favorite: PHB Dragonborn vs Fizban's Dragonborn vs Wildemont Dragonborn. Three different degrees of power here. Most races don't get skills in Mordenkainen's either.

 

[Minigiant]

There are plenty of species like that though. You think Mountain Dwarf and Yuan-Ti are comparable? Not at all. Wood Elf and Aasimar? Or my favorite: PHB Dragonborn vs Fizban's Dragonborn vs Wildemont Dragonborn. Three different degrees of power here. Most races don't get skills in Mordenkainen's either.

I'm not saying 5e races are all balanced perfectly.

What I am saying 5e doesn't support a race with +8 Strength +4 Con or gets 4 feats. That isn't 5e.