Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 8651362" data-attributes="member: 71699">For sure it's good to discuss issues with the game. For me the comment above felt a bit too unequivocal to really be an issue. It read as flat characterisations of the game without any room for unpacking. I guess all you need to do is unpack them a bit and we're on solid ground.Issues I have with 5e positioning<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">I feel like the movement and range values are reasonable, but published adventure maps are always too small. Movement and range doesn't matter much when everyone can reach every point of the combat space.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">It's a shame to have lost the position-control of 4e. I get why, but it did add interest in play.</li> </ol>Issues I have with advantage<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">One issue I don't have is harrassing the DM. That's a group social agreement issue, not a 5e issue.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Advantage is a great mechanic, but like you say it is over-used. It either needs to be harder to get, or more nuanced. Level Up shows some of the options that could have been considered.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">I think circumstantial modifiers should have been retained (typically +/-2) so that one could have advantage and a circumstantial modifier.</li> </ol>Additionally I think the nuance available in the system is hard to implement in play because it uses what I describe as sliding indexes to results, e.g. the number for success-with-complication result moves depending on DC. I've converted it to a fixed index and am testing that in my current campaign (DCs convert to modifiers.) The conversion seems to improve the handling of passive checks considerably.</blockquote>

Verification