D&D 5E (2024) CoDzilla? Yeah Na Its CoDGFaW.

[EzekielRaiden]

In that specific instance forum goers reflected real life.

So they reflect real life when it's useful to you, and don't reflect real life when that would be useful to you.

I hope you can see why this argument looks like cherry-picking.

I would pick to play a game of 4E over 3.5bbevause I never got to play it.

While I am not surprised that you haven't played it, I genuinely am surprised to hear that you would give it a shot. That...is highly unexpected, given my experience of your prior posting history.

 

[Zardnaar]

So they reflect real life when it's useful to you, and don't reflect real life when that would be useful to you.

I hope you can see why this argument looks like cherry-picking.


While I am not surprised that you haven't played it, I genuinely am surprised to hear that you would give it a shot. That...is highly unexpected, given my experience of your prior posting history.

Forums dont have the power to sink an edition.

Social media might.

That old youtube video of WotC mocking 3E. First time a saw that it had 40k views. Last time 80k.

Thats less than a medium size D&D youtubers.

Mist online D&D things burn themselves out in a week or so.

It would have to be sustained, near universal, crossover into real life and be across multiple platforms (forums, facebook, youtube, reddit etc). Old D&D forums were an echo chamber, mod enforced blackout elsewhere. Sone peopke were genuinely shocked when 5E playtest was announced and with 1st packet (it wasnt a reversion to 3E).

4E DMed it to 7th, never got to play it as local scene basically died. Recruiting was kinda hard until Pathfinder blew up.

Around 2016 I noticed it became very easy to find players.

 

[FrogReaver]

Regardless if it is well-built or simply adequately built, it holds out. You get an average game where the players do not build with a mind toward overshadowing, and do not notice when it has happened by outlier incidence.

Being overshadowed is a subjective feeling. It only happens when it is felt to be the case, whether or not there are objective numbers to uphold it. That's not to belittle when it happens, that does matter and should be something a table works to resolve.

When it takes an extreme to be noticeable, it's an outlier experience at the average table. On average, what would be noticeable to us won't be for them. In the system as it is designed now, this is true. I'm not claiming the system is well-built, just adequately to this extent.

I think most people really weight a single outlier encounter way more than a slight advantage over time even if they average out to the same overall impact.

People just aren’t typically good at observing weighted averages in real time.

 

[FrogReaver]

Average player only plays around 3 years apparently. A lot dont find games.

I've suspected forum goers are not representative since around 2002/3.

You cant objectively min max as everyone's biased. Number crunching DPR maybe but you can't account for how useful that is.

I think forum goers are more representative now than they used to be, but still not very much.

 

[FrogReaver]

It's worth noting that, in the hands of a skilled player, one can make a Fighter that can outperform a mediocre spellcaster. Sure, the floor and ceiling are different, but let's not get too hung up on what could potentially happen. Anyone who frequented 3.5 boards back in the day are no doubt well acquainted with "Monkday", an event that occurred once a fortnight or so where a thread would appear with someone complaining about how busted/great Monks are, long after conventional wisdom had proved how terrible the class was.

Because what happens at a given table, with a given group, can vary wildly from expectations. Like the time I played an optimized Rogue in a PF1e game with a neophyte GM, and they complained about how busted Rogues were- all because I was dealing more damage than the other players in a fight where I could use Sneak Attack at low level.

One thing I always notice in optimization discussion is that the wizard never uses the wrong spell for a given situation. That’s not realistic, but it is the unstated assumption.

 

[CreamCloud0]

I think most people really weight a single outlier encounter way more than a slight advantage over time even if they average out to the same overall impact.

People just aren’t typically good at observing weighted averages in real time.

while true, however, if those slight advantages are enough to result in tangible extra small victories, an extra enemy here, another there, or getting knocked down less often, you might end up with lots of 'small outlier encounters' where they feel the other player does better than them.

 

[FrogReaver]

while true, however, if those slight advantages are enough to result in tangible extra small victories, an extra enemy here, another there, or getting knocked down less often, you might end up with lots of 'small outlier encounters' where they feel the other player does better than them.

Psychologically I don’t think that will register with most people. The variance is high enough between encounters that they won’t notice the pattern of being slightly worse. And that’s assuming that variance in their particular trial run didn’t actually have them being slightly better overall due to variance but not expected value.

IMO. Its usually us number crunchers that are most likely to feel that way due to comparing the numbers.

 

[Zardnaar]

Psychologically I don’t think that will register with most people. The variance is high enough between encounters that they won’t notice the pattern of being slightly worse. And that’s assuming that variance in their particular trial run didn’t actually have them being slightly better overall due to variance but not expected value.

IMO. Its usually us number crunchers that are most likely to feel that way due to comparing the numbers.

Not sure about that when I did Chromatic Orb threads. CO can't do that because of xyz assumption. Well yout assumption is wrong.

I've seen some crazy sorcerous bursts as well. 3d8+charisma critical hit, empower it d8s rolled 47 damage with a cantrip.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Not sure about that when I did Chromatic Orb threads. CO can't do that because of xyz assumption. Well yout assumption is wrong.

I've seen some crazy sorcerous bursts as well. 3d8+charisma critical hit, empower it d8s rolled 47 damage with a cantrip.

Sure, but you sunk a resource to get that value and had to crit to do it.

6d8 crit + 2x8 + 5 cha gives that output just fine, and that's actually kinda weak given Empowered Spell lets you reroll so much.

Admittedly, you can also stack on Innate Sorcery, and probably should at that level since you can turn SP into more uses. But that's still spending the equivalent of two SP and getting a crit.

Of course, by that same token, a Sorcerer can do this almost all day. Even a BM Fighter would struggle to keep up with that kind of resource expenditure.

 

[Zardnaar]

Sure, but you sunk a resource to get that value and had to crit to do it.

6d8 crit + 2x8 + 5 cha gives that output just fine, and that's actually kinda weak given Empowered Spell lets you reroll so much.

Admittedly, you can also stack on Innate Sorcery, and probably should at that level since you can turn SP into more uses. But that's still spending the equivalent of two SP and getting a crit.

Of course, by that same token, a Sorcerer can do this almost all day. Even a BM Fighter would struggle to keep up with that kind of resource expenditure.

More random death machine. Cant white room theory craft it.