D&D General D&D Evolutions You Like and Dislike [+]

[payn]

Listen, I like other games, too...but none of the games you mentioned is doing quite the same thing. Daggerheart does seem neat, and the Cosmere RPG is doing something new and exciting that D&D can't offer...but nobody is really living in that exact space in the exact same way as 5E, and I doubt anyone will try.

Nor should they. Alternatives are good!

 

[Parmandur]

Nor should they. Alternatives are good!

Yeah, for one it would be silly to come directly at the market leader like that...but I also note that pretty much no other game desifners on the market making their own gamrs are actually interested in the thing that 5E does well: the high-action, low-tactics heroic Dungeon clearing game of resource attrition. At least, none that aren't just using the Creative Commons rules that have been tested throughly over the past 13 years.

The Cosmere game is Encounter based, and mostly handwaves any longterm resources, for instance.

 

[Reynard]

Listen, I like other games, too...but none of the games you mentioned is doing quite the same thing. Daggerheart does seem neat, and the Cosmere RPG is doing something new and exciting that D&D can't offer...but nobody is really living in that exact space in the exact same way as 5E, and I doubt anyone will try.

I thin k that is because D&D (especially 5E 2024) is trying to be too many things at once. It is a tactical turn based combat game, but not a very good one and is outclassed in that regard by Pathfinder 2E. It is a neo-trad story forward game, but not a very good one and is outclassed by Daggerheart in that regard. And so on.

 

[Parmandur]

I thin k that is because D&D (especially 5E 2024) is trying to be too many things at once. It is a tactical turn based combat game, but not a very good one and is outclassed in that regard by Pathfinder 2E. It is a neo-trad story forward game, but not a very good one and is outclassed by Daggerheart in that regard. And so on.

The low tactics element is a plus. Helps with running large, fully stocked Dungeons without being a slog.

 

[payn]

I thin k that is because D&D (especially 5E 2024) is trying to be too many things at once. It is a tactical turn based combat game, but not a very good one and is outclassed in that regard by Pathfinder 2E. It is a neo-trad story forward game, but not a very good one and is outclassed by Daggerheart in that regard. And so on.

I don’t think it’s a bad thing that 5E does a lot of things ok as opposed to doing one thing well. It’s the entry and folks get to taste a lot of styles before deciding it’s enough or they need to move on to more specific.

 

[Reynard]

The low tactics element is a plus. Helps with running large, fully stocked Dungeons without being a slog.

But if you WANT a good tactical engine, 5E is going to disappoint.

 

[Reynard]

I don’t think it’s a bad thing that 5E does a lot of things ok as opposed to doing one thing well. It’s the entry and folks get to taste a lot of styles before deciding it’s enough or they need to move on to more specific.

I wonder what percentage of folks do that, as opposed to sticking with D&D forever or just leaving the hobby altogether.

 

[Parmandur]

But if you WANT a good tactical engine, 5E is going to disappoint.

Sure, I guess. But I don't...? AND I would wager it is about the Goldilocks level of tactics for most folks.

 

[Marandahir]

I really like the development of subclasses that defy original class stereotype tropes but still fit into the broader narrative of the class. Examples – Path of the Zealot Barbarian gives a largely Cleric/Paladin style Divine flavor while Barbarians normally have more in common with Rangers and Druids. And there's also room for the explicitely non-magical Barbarian with more in common with Fighters than anything else.

We see similar developments like the Oath of the Ancients, Oath of the Noble Genies, and Oath of the Spellguard Paladin, which take the idea of the Paladin – defending/fighting for a noble cause specifically attached to their personal belief system – but show how this idea doesn't have to be explicitely "Fighter+Cleric." They're still Divine Spellcasters, but enough of a flavor splash from other power sources and theming tropes allows us to build characters that Smite in the name of an Archfey or Genie Prince or in the name of the Aes Sedai wizard they're bound to.

I also really like that despite these broad-tent classes, they still maintain a singular class identity. I can clearly tell the difference between an Artificer (of any stripe), a Path of Wild Magic Barbarian, a College of Valor Bard, an Arcana Domain Protector Cleric, a Knowledge Domain Protector Cleric, an Arcane Archer Fighter, an Eldritch Knight Fighter, a Rune Knight Fighter, a Tattooed Warrior Monk, a Warrior of the Mystic Arts Monk, a Spellguard Paladin, an Arcane Trickster Rogue, a Hexblade Warlock, a non-Hexblade Pact of the Blade Warlock, and a Bladesinger Wizard. And yes, the Arcane Archer, Eldritch Knight, and Rune Knight all feel distinctly Fightery too while distinct in their own ways from each other.

--

I'd note that the Magic Stealer Rogue is an outlier to this pattern for me, and why I dislike it for essentially being a revised Arcane Trickster.

One other thing I dislike is the lack of robust systems built into the core rules to replace non-subclass features. This especially goes for spellcasting, and especially as the game becomes increasingly reliant on spellcasting to provide most features that might have been called a "spell-like ability" in past editions.

I do think I can adequately create a Martial Ranger through background, feat, and subclass choice for either Fighter or Rogue, but this closes off this concept from having its own proliferation of subclasses, let alone from accessing the on-brand subclasses that already exist for Ranger. Example – Monster Slayer Ranger archetype would work great for an Abraham Van Hellsing esque Vamprie Hunter without spellcasting but using magical-themed esotheric abilities to defeat Dracula.

I think the 5e system is flexible enough to create such a class through homebrew (Level Up is proof of that), but I find that sacrifices the distinct flavor of the separate classes that I love in the earlier part of my post here.

 

[payn]

I wonder what percentage of folks do that, as opposed to sticking with D&D forever or just leaving the hobby altogether.

More folks are playing then ever before so probably all of those answers have increased percentages. My gut says in the past it was probably an 85% play D&D with a healthy amount just stopping after college. Today I’m guessing it’s more like 75% D&D with more folks sticking with it since online tools make it much easier.