D&D 5E Complexity

[GX.Sigma]

Is the current playtest packet too complex, or too simple, for you?

For me, it's a little bit more complex than I'm comfortable with for new/casual players. I think part of it is that there's no simple option for the Specialty.

In the previous packet, you could take Survivor, have more hit points, and just not worry about it. Now, the same specialty lets you re-roll hit dice when you gain a level or use them to rest. Despite the fact that not everyone rolls HD when they gain levels (and some DMs may not use HD healing), it's one more thing you have to remember. The spellcasty ones, especially the higher Divine ones, are fine, because it just gives you another spell per day (increases a resource you already have), so you don't have to remember anything new. There should be one for expertise dice/maneuvers.

What are your thoughts? What complexity level do you favor?

 

[Grimmjow]

i want a complex game that can be easily simplified for new players. Not super complex or anything, but still a real game not a how-to guide for the new guy. I don't like how they simplified the clerics in this one (gods instead of domains). Its making it easier for new players yes, but it takes away from the possibility for two clerics of the same god to have different powers.

 

[howandwhy99]

In terms of both complexity of design and difficulty of running the game, it's not out of bounds yet. The big problem is:

It's tight where it's supposed to be loose and practically nonexistent where its supposed to be tight.

 

[Grimmjow]

In terms of both complexity of design and difficulty of running the game, it's not out of bounds yet. The big problem is:

It's tight where it's supposed to be loose and practically nonexistent where its supposed to be tight.

explain?

 

[howandwhy99]

explain?

Simply that, for me the majority of what count as the core rules have yet to be written. The vast amount of adventure and setting rules are absent. And what shouldn't be too well defined in order to keep them flexible and open play spaces for players are player characters. Though not NPCs as they still need a good bit more.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

I say it's a little too simple, but what I really mean is that it's too front-loaded. It's overly complex for first level, and then it's non-existent, particularly in regard to class features.

I'm beginning to think that characters shouldn't choose their specialty until third level.

Classes should provide one maneuver or spell every level, with the opportunity to learn more through play. They should also provide unique class features at levels other than first.

 

[GX.Sigma]

I'm surprised how many people think it's too simple (though I guess I shouldn't be).

 

[trancejeremy]

I'm surprised how many people think it's too simple (though I guess I shouldn't be).

People who liked simple rules in their RPGs quit playing D&D a long time ago.

 

[TerraDave]

I'm surprised how many people think it's too simple (though I guess I shouldn't be).

Take Pathfinder....for example...

Though I agree, I think the promise of 5E is too do something more straight forward, with the long promised modules there to put back in complexity for those that want it.

In that sense, while I know why a lot of changes have been made, I liked the approach of the first packet a little better.

 

[Blackbrrd]

I say it's a little too simple, but what I really mean is that it's too front-loaded. It's overly complex for first level, and then it's non-existent, particularly in regard to class features.

I'm beginning to think that characters shouldn't choose their specialty until third level.

Classes should provide one maneuver or spell every level, with the opportunity to learn more through play. They should also provide unique class features at levels other than first.

I tried making a couple of characters and I really disliked how specialities basically make you select the feats you want to take at level 3, 6 and 9 at level 1 (in addition to your 1st level feat). This makes character creation more complex and further leveling less complex. Completely the opposite of what I think should be the design goal.

If they want to keep the amount of maneuvers a character down to maybe 5-7, they could make upgradeable maneuvers. For instance by giving you maneuvers that modifies other manuvers (upgrades them). For instance a manuever that lets you move between cleave attacks.

I think it's a bit to early to say something about complexity though, because the current rules are a bit clunky, which can easily be seen as being too complex.