D&D 5E D&D compared to Bespoke Genre TTRPGs

[Aldarc]

So, when someone says, Hey, instead of trying to use 5e for this, try, Game XYZ, that's offensive and bad.

But, if someone says, "Hey, I tried to do that. It didn't work for me. Try game XYZ" that's perfectly fine?

This also precludes the possibility of foreseeing a trainwreck and warning of impending danger. You have to experience the trainwreck firsthand for the advice to be valid.

Basically, this is just an exercise in self congratulations. You want all of us to give you a nice hearty pat on the head for telling off all those nasty folks that actually try other systems and have the temerity to suggest that they might be a better solution for you.

To answer the OP's original question:

So, for me, "you'd be better off playing a game that is made for that" usually rings hollow. What about you?

I don't mind this sort of advice at all, and I don't know why I should get worked up about it.

 

[Hussar]

I’m sorry. I have, however, at no point said that 5e can do everything, or that any failure is the DMs fault.

I disagree. Most other games are so purpose built that you have to essentially build a new game to get them to do other things. D&D is built to be modified without breaking.

If we were friends, I could directly change your mind via personal experience.

((On altering other games))You could, but it’s gonna be a lot more work, IMO, to get a satisfying result. It took me less than 1 hour to make D&D do heists.

@Hussar By the way, there are many easy ways to run big encounters, using mechanics that already exist in D&D...it’s worthwhile to look into 3pp solutions or to build a system for it that engages the players without slowing things down.

I also suspect that replacing D&Ds magic system would be pretty simple, as long as the new system is, itself, simple.

((On suggested changes)) Very easy to do in 5e. There are optional rules for it, and encounter design is easy to change to impact deadliness.

((Also on suggested changes)) Even if it requires adjustment, it’s likely going to be better at doing what we want than a game that was tightly designed for a related but different gameplay experience.

But making D&D do Lord of The Rings is easier than making the One Ring do Eberron.

((On blaming DM's for "not doing it right)) Either you or I used the ship combat rules incorrectly, because this is so far from my experience it reads like a critique of an entirely different system.

If you’re doing fantasy adventure, D&D is great. Fantasy adventure is very, very, broad, including everything from Lord of The Rings to Star Wars to David the Gnome and more.

((On how easy it is to modify 5e vs other games))It just doesn’t mean it’s hard to add, remove, or replace, mechanics in 5e D&D. The “ripple effects” are actually very small and mild, and have little effect on play. Most of the worries about balance in 5e are purely hypothetical, and come from hyper focusing on minutia in a white room.

I’d say GURPS is harder to hack than any edition of D&D (you can add skills and advantages or disadvantages easily, but actually changing how the game works is harder)

Ok, I got tired of rereading. Pretty much every single post you made in the first ten pages of this thread have been dismissive of any experiences which differ from your own. You've repeatedly stated how 5e is easier to hack than any other game, how any problems anyone has had with 5e are due to failures on the other person's part and how 5e is somehow The One True Game.

So, @doctorbadwolf, you, by your own words, have repeatedly stated, "that 5e can do everything, or that any failure is the DMs fault". I mean, the first two quotes I provided point to both - if I was just a better DM, like you, I would change my mind and "5e D&D is built to be modified without breaking." Would you like me to provide more quotes?

 

[Hussar]

Aside from Ghosts of Saltmarsh, how about the business running rules in Dragon Heist? These are the WotC approved rules after all. The module spends a considerable amount of time on introducing all the NPC's and complications related to the group getting their tavern in order and ready for opening day. All sorts of interesting stuff.

Then, you open. And, now, the mechanics are, "Roll once every week on this table. Here's half a dozen possible modifiers like advertising or whatnot. The results on the table range from you make a couple of GP profit to you lose a couple of GP." No connection whatsoever to the dozen or so NPC's you've JUST introduced to the party. No reason whatsoever, to ever interact with these NPC's again and the DM is left pretty much left high and dry.

And, because of the ridiculous PC economy, any inn simply doesn't matter. It could lose money every single day, and the amount of money a mid level PC has will cover it, basically for eternity. Whoopee? Yay, I'm so glad we spent four or five sessions getting the inn open for this?

And, again, the system fights you every step of the way. Making a small business actually matter to the PC's when they are buying 1000 gp magic items? I don't blame the players at all for taking one look at Trollskull manner and their sum total reaction was, "Hey, look, there's a sewer entrance nearby". They couldn't give a rat's petoot and I don't blame them one bit. The mechanics for this were awful.

And, frankly, I have no idea how to make it matter. Why on earth would a PC give the slightest damn about the money an inn could possibly make? It's chump change. All that effort for what? An imaginary doll house? And, I've LOOKED at DM's guild stuff here. Heck, I own most of the Dragonheist DM's Guild stuff. And nothing fixed this.

So, why wouldn't offering a different system, like Blades in the Dark, make a LOT more sense for this adventure path? It would work 100 times better than D&D did.

 

[dave2008]

"Some" options?

You're left with 2 classes - fighter and rogue. That's it. The half caster classes mean that the game features repeated spell casting every single combat. How do I know? Because when I ran my Thule campaign, I allowed 1/2 casters like Rangers and monks, and every single encounter featured magic. Social encounters featured magic. Exploration encounters featured magic. Just like standard 5e, even with 1/2 casters, the PC's have a MOUNTAIN of magic available to them.

So, basically, I would have to strip out so much of the game, that it's just not worth it anymore. Anyone who wants to play a more tactically interesting game being restricted to fighters and rogues and 5e's ruleset is bored out of their minds because fighters and rogues in 5e do the same thing over and over and over again. They're the "simple" classes. That's their attraction. I've been told that repeatedly enough.

You want to do anything other than straight up attack in 5e with a fighter? Ok, well, there's no rules for it, so, now we're back to playing Calvinball. I want to sweep my sword through the sand and blind the three bandits in front of me. How do I adjudicate that action? 4e would be simple. 5e? There's no "maneuver" system in 5e. Which means I'd have to bolt that on or constantly have to make stuff up.

Heck, I want to throw my sword at someone, Conan style isn't handled by the system. Never minding the aforementioned chase rules.

So, yeah, it failed utterly to do what I wanted it to do. The players hated it because they found it unrelentingly boring as soon as dice started dropping.

If I were to do it again, 5e would be the last system I would try to use to run that style of game.

But, apparently, this is offensive to talk about because 5e can do everything and any failure must be entirely my fault and nothing to do with the system. So, I guess I'm just not as good a DM as the OP. C'est la vie.

@Hussar , sorry to get back to you so late. First I want to clarify that I acknowledge that 5e hasn't worked for you. Clearly we have different play styles, desires, or tolerances, such that what doesn't work for you, does work for me and my group. That is to be expected. So, thank you for your response, it is all 100% correct for you and I will not try to dispute any of it. Instead, I will present a modified version of my low magic house rules that I think may get closer to your needs:

Low Magic D&D:
Race: No changes. You could ban or modify some races that have magical abilities if that fits your theme better.

Class: There are 4 non-magical classes in the PHB: barbarian, fighter, monk, and rogue. However, I personally restrict to just fighter and rouge so that is what I will discuss. With these two classes we get 13 archetypes that are non-magical. In my experience these can significantly change how the classes are played, but yours may vary.

Fighter:

• Banneret
• Battlemaster
• Brute (UA) - I include this one because we have used it and liked it quite a lot
• Cavalier
• Champion
• Monster Hunter (UA) - I included this one because I feel a variant will be showing up in a supplement soon
• Samurai

Rouge:

• Assassin
• Inquisitive
• Mastermind
• Scout
• Swashbuckler
• Thief

Optional Class Features (TCoE):
Fighter

• Fighting Style Options (5 new styles)
• Martial Versatility (4th level fighter feature)
• Maneuver Options (7 new maneuvers)

Rogue

• Steady Aim (3rd level rogue feature)

3PP Classes: There are many good non-magical classes from other creators. I have seen warlords, spell less rangers (we use the Rogue Scout for that), scholars, etc. It all depends on what works for you. The 13 subclasses of Fighter and Rogue work for my group, they may not for you. We find with feats and backgrounds and multiclassing there is more than enough variety and options to make the characters we want.

Backgrounds: All 53+ backgrounds are available and provide additional variety to characters.

Feats: Required (you cannot take an ASI). This is the big one for me. The fighter gets 7 feats and the rouge gets 6. If you are required to take a feat instead of an ASI you will have many more options, tactical and otherwise, and much more variety in your characters even with a limited number of classes. With 60+ feats (not included racial feats) there is a lot variety. This is also the only way (except racial abilities) to get magic.

Optional: give each character a bonus feat at level 1 (like in MOoT)

List of Feats (includes some UA feats because the provide more options for martial characters and we use them and like them):

Spoiler

Actor
Alchemist (UA)
Alert
Athlete
Blade Mastery (UA)
Burglar (UA)
Charger
Chef
Crossbow Expert
Crusher
Defensive Duelist
Dual Wielder
Dungeon Delver
Durable
Elemental Adept (optional)
Everybody's Friend (UA – optional for all races)
Fell Handed (UA)
Fighting Initiate
Flail Mastery (UA)
Grappler
Great Weapon Master
Healer
Heavily Armored
Heavy Armor Master
Human Determination (UA – optional for all races)
Inspiring Leader
Keen Mind
Lightly Armored
Linguist
Lucky
Mage Slayer
Magic Initiate - this is the only way to cast non-ritual spells. (optional, limit cantrips to non-damage cantrips; option 2: limit cantrips to once per short or long rest)
Martial Adept
Master of Disguise (UA)
Medium Armor Master
Mobile
Moderately Armored
Mounted Combatant
Observant
Piercer
Poisoner
Polearm Master
Prodigy (Optional – allow to any race)
Resilient
Ritual Caster – the only method to cast spells over 1st level or cantrips
Savage Attacker
Sentinel
Sharpshooter
Shield Master
Skilled
Skill Expert
Skulker
Slasher
Spear Mastery (UA)
Spell Sniper
Tavern Brawler
Tough
War Caster
Weapon Master

Equipment: All non-magical equipment is allowed. No magic items or 1 per party / tier.

Magic: A player can only gain the ability to cast magic by taking the Magic Initiate and/or Ritual Caster feats. Magic can then be improved with other feats (as described in the feats). This limits general spellcasting to:

• One first level spell cast 1/ long rest and...
• Cantrips (Optional rule 1: limit cantrip cantrip casting to 1/ short rest; Optional Rule 2: replace cantrips with additional first level spells; Option rule 3: limit cantrips to non-damaging spells; chose options as needed to fit your idea of low magic), or...
• Rituals.

Additionally, the only method to cast a spell over 1st level is with rituals.

IMO, this gives you a variety of character options (thousands of potential combinations), while providing the limited magic casting you requested (1 per encounter), unless everyone jumps on the magic casting feats (but even then it should run out pretty quickly). Now will this make 5e fun for you? I imagine not, but I think it gets pretty close to the low magic game you described with very only a few rules changes. Now if you can stomach using only 2 classes (and 13 subclasses) and you will not look to 3PP, then I can't help you. It works for me, it doesn't have to work for you too.

EDIT: And whether or not this creates the low magic game you want, it does create a low magic game (and good one IMO) and it was achieved with only one or two changes to the core rules:

1. No ASIs, feats only
2. Optional revision to how the Magic Initiate feat works

That is pretty simple IMO.

 

[Krachek]

Ok, let me be more detailed again.

In this thread, which is complaining about people not being respectful, I said that I couldn't successfully run naval campaigns in D&D. Now, no one asked me for any details. I was just told I was wrong and that 5e will do naval campaigns perfectly fine. Ghosts of Saltmarsh was quoted. Let me elucidate in detail why 5e D&D (and 3e as well) doesn't do naval campaigns.

1. Ghosts of Saltmarsh.

Since this was pointed to, let's start here. GoH does have some rules for running ship combat. I'll get to that later. However, it has no guidance whatsoever for actually running a ship. How much are docking fees in Saltmarsh or Seaton? How much does a ton of salt cost and how much markup can I give it? There's a new dwarven silver mine here. They will likely need mining equipment. How much does a ton of mining equipment cost and what is the markup?

Oh, right. I have to make all that up entirely myself, all the while not breaking 5e's laughable economy system in a setting where you can, by the book, buy magic items at any time.

My players took one look at the book keeping required for running a ship, because there are no rules for abstracting it all away, and revolted to the point where the player whose character actually rightfully owned the Sea Maiden, dumped his character immediately and introduced his gnomish artificer.

Yeah, not a success.

Additionally, if you actually LOOK at the adventures in GoS, none of them actually feature anything between two ships. There are no pirate engagements, boarding actions (other than a very simple one in the very first module) or anything like that. Almost all the adventures occur on land - Sinister Secret, Danger at Dunwater, Isle of the Abbey, The Final Enemy, The Styes - six of the seven modules either feature no encounters or at most one encounter on a ship. Not really what I want from a naval campaign. And none of them feature combat between two ships.

2. Personal Experience

I've tried to run naval campaigns in D&D for a LOONG time. I tried in 3e with a homebrew campaign set in Scarred Lands and I ran the Savage Tide Adventure Path up to the seventh (?) module where you defend Farshore. I've run two campaigns in 5e - a homebrew set in Primeval Thule and Ghosts of Saltmarsh. The only reasonably successful one was Savage Tides and, again, like Ghosts of Saltmarsh, it features virtually no actual ship combat. One of the seven modules actually takes place on the ship in Savage Tides and even then, most of the module is about stopping in various locations and exploring. I have very, very extensive experience trying this.

3. DM's Guild and 3rd party Supplements

I own probably about two dozen 3e and 5e ship supplements. None of them actually work. They are either too complicated or too simple. And they all break down in use for one reason or another.

4. Platoon Scale Combat (See, I did get back to it)

The D&D combat ruleset will fight you every single step of the way if you try. The scale is entirely wrong - 5 foot squares? When encounters start at 1/2 a mile away? 6 second rounds? Yeah, that doesn't work. So, you add in 10 minute rounds. Only thing is, the wizard player then very rightly points out that in 10 minutes, he could vaporize that pirate ship before it even got into bow range with his extended range wand of fireballs (3e). Or, well, same in 5e really. The casters just have so many spells that it really doesn't work and it doesn't make sense that every pirate ship has a high level caster on it too. But, hey, we'll ignore that and just make it cinematic right?

So, we get into boarding actions. Your ship has 30 combatants plus the PC's, and the pirate ship has 60. Oh, hang on, each of those combatants take up 5 foot squares and your ship deck isn't anywhere near big enough to hold that many combatants. Where do we put them? Oh well, we'll go theater of the mind and ignore that bit too. So, dividing up the allied combatants, each PC is running his or her own character with sets of actions, and then six or so NPC's, each with their own sets of actions, HP and whatnot. The DM, meanwhile, is trying to track 60 NPC's, each with actions, and, let's be honest, they aren't all the same because some might be standard bandits, while others are scouts, and at least a bandit leader, who has reactions, never minding different AC's, HP's and whatnot.

Yeah, I want to grind through a combat in the next six hours. No thanks.

So, this has been MY experience (I'm not talking about anyone else, just me) trying to do naval campaigns. There are additional issues, but, these four have all been deal breakers. When someone comes up and says, "Hey, I want to do a naval campaign in 5e", then Hell yes, I'm going to tell them it's a really bad idea and to use another system. I'm not doing it because of some white room theory crafting. I'm doing it because I literally have hundreds of play hours banging my head on this issue and failing time and again and I'd like to save someone the pain of trying the same.

Trying to run naval campaigns in 5e D&D will not work. It just won't. Not unless you pretty much sweep under the table virtually every element of actually being on a ship anyway. Why do I say that? Because I've tried it. Repeatedly.

So, just to ask, how is this offensive to anyone?

This is not offensive, but I feel sorry for your dissatisfactions.
I have been in several ship encounter as players in 5ed, and it work perfectly fine.
Ship movement, combat, hab been condensed into some skill checks, crew combat have focus on immediate PC surround, skill check have been used to evaluate impact of spell use against ship or crew, mostly in theater of the mind. A true war game would have cry and yell at such imprecision and light heart solutions, but overall it gives very satisfying encounters.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I just accidentally put a cig in my mouth the wrong way, and it did hurt like all the nine hells, but I thought of something I didn't think of before.

Sure, when you're running a long-long damn campaign and want to have a bunch of heists, switching to Blades, or switching to GUMSHOE when you have a short detective episode are both stupid ideas, like, no one questions that.

But there's another thing worth questioning. Is running a long-long damn campaign, longer than Long Dick Johnson's, with an OCEAN'S 11-style HEISTS arc, then a MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS DETECTIVE arc, then WILDERNESS EXPLORATION arc, then, idk, TEENAGE DRAMA arc actually a good or sane idea?

IMO, hell yeah! My current Eberron game features investigation, research challenges, challenges to create on the fly rituals, fairy tale sequence, murder mystery/terrorist thriller in a very 3D city, wilderness exploration, city exploration, and I’m planning a serial killer thriller arc, and my wife’s Paladin is working toward creating a new order and revolutionizing her faith, and I’ve got some Zelda-style stuff building involving visiting several manifest zones and completing challenges to bind another PCs sword to the land and find a new home for his people.

It’s not for everyone, but I would be bored in a game that only ever had one theme and gameplay style. Different strokes.

Fair enough.

Two things missing. One is the book itself: I don't own it, and nor does anyone else in our crew that I know of, and thus I haven't read it. The other is time: I did my naval combat system up about 15 years ago, long before Saltmarsh - or 5e, for that matter - was produced.

If-when I ever get my mucky mitts on a copy I'll certainly be interested in seeing what they came up with.

Makes sense!

IOW, you insist that people somehow "prove" their experience to you.

Nope. I expect people to provide reasoning, when giving advice that is generally dismissive of the premise.

Basically, this is just an exercise in self congratulations. You want all of us to give you a nice hearty pat on the head for telling off all those nasty folks that actually try other systems and have the temerity to suggest that they might be a better solution for you.

Yeah, you and I are done interacting for a while.

Ok, I got tired of rereading. Pretty much every single post you made in the first ten pages of this thread have been dismissive of any experiences which differ from your own. You've repeatedly stated how 5e is easier to hack than any other game, how any problems anyone has had with 5e are due to failures on the other person's part and how 5e is somehow The One True Game.

So, @doctorbadwolf, you, by your own words, have repeatedly stated, "that 5e can do everything, or that any failure is the DMs fault". I mean, the first two quotes I provided point to both - if I was just a better DM, like you, I would change my mind and "5e D&D is built to be modified without breaking." Would you like me to provide more quotes?

None of those say what you claim.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Show me the quote.

I quoted it in the same post. Here it is again:

Now that I know what you mean, I agree that 5e has light exploration and social rules. I don’t agree with your statements that this means D&D 5e doesn’t do social or exploration gameplay as well as games with very codified mechanics for those gameplay aspects.

But you claim this isn’t you saying that D&D, with its “weak” or “light” exploration and social rules, does exploration and social gameplay as well as games that have stronger mechanics in these areas.

I don’t see what other interpretation could be made from this, but go ahead and clarify if you were trying to make a different point.

That is not at all what the text you quoted says. I don’t know why you’re here with an axe to grind, but I’m tired of it. Stop blatantly saying that I’m saying things that I am not saying.

I have no axe to grind. I’m here to compare D&D to other games, per the stated purpose of the thread. I think that other games can very often do things better than 5E D&D. I think that D&D is a bit flexible, but I think you’re overstating how flexible, and the ease with which it can be changed to deliver different experiences effectively.

Sorry if my comments aren’t to your liking, but the topic caught my eye. If you want to discuss how awesome D&D is and how it can do everything, then next time name the thread “How Awesome is 5E AmIrite?!?!” or something and I’ll happily ignore it.

But if you frame it as comparing D&D to other games, then you should probably expect people to talk about the benefits of other games.

 

[Ovinomancer]

The crux of the disagreement in this thread seems to be twofold. First, and most contentious, if the personal identification with 5e such that criticisms of 5e are offensive. This is something that cannot be overcome in discussion because it's now personal. I once geld this point of view and was offended by comments that D&D might not be the best system, ir could be easily modified to do anything another system could do, I came around to realizing this was my problem and had nothing at all to do with the systems involved. 5e is a good game, but it's got a core focus that is very much totally baked in and that is combat solves things. You have to do quite a lot to step on this, and can't do it for long because characters are all built on this core. If you want to do anything longterm where combat doesn't solve anything, 5e is probably not a good choice. Short term you can step on it.

This leads into the second point, which is the difference between a codified set of mechanics and an ad hoc one. This is a complete matter of preference. Some people will thrive on ad hoc solutions (essentially GM says) and view them as even more effective that codified rules. For them, 5e is easily moddable because it has such a large area of play that requires GMs to ad hoc things. This means it's easier because you don't have to step around rules, you just do your thing. What many of the people that prefer this approach fail to see is that it xan be deeply dissatisfying to others, and not always for the reasons they assume. I dislike it because it reduces my ability to judge the risks of asn action, which means it's actually harder for ne to inhabit my character -- I feel more as if I'm playing the GM rather than the situation. It also requires a lot of simpatico between players and with the GM. Many if the issues I see complained about here on ENW comes down to GM ad hocs at a tabke with issues with simpatico.

Mostly this thread is a collection of bad takes. Recommeding another game should never be offensive. At best, it's not immediately useful. This is quickly solved. The real desire I pick up is that some posters feel they shouldn't ever have to even hear about other games unless specifically asked for. It's why the original complaint morphed from a general ask for help receiving answers suggesting ither systems to the much more dubious claim that tge ask is for running a heist session in an existing 5e game receiving the same responses. I call shenanigans.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

First, and most contentious, if the personal identification with 5e such that criticisms of 5e are offensive.

Completely false. I have literally criticized 5e in this thread.

much more dubious claim that tge ask is for running a heist session in an existing 5e game receiving the same responses. I call shenanigans.

Calling people liars because you disagree with them is pretty low. The heist adventure is an example because I’ve seen it happen multiple times since Dragon Heist came out and folks were bummed that it isn’t a heist.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

….this thread is going well!

So, uh, other than that, how was the play, Mrs. Lincoln?