D&D General Explain 5(.5)e to me

[GothmogIV]

D&D in the WotC era (and arguably in the late 2E era) has moved away from "boy, I hope I can survive sneaking into this sewer and stealing a few coppers from under the nose of the wererat beggar king," and rolling up a new character in a matter of seconds when it doesn't work out.

Modern D&D -- and fantasy more generally -- has shifted toward a more character-centric view, where players and audience members can generally rely on a character they're introduced to eventually becoming incredibly powerful and a master of their world (or plane). The challenges they face are generally not ones that threaten their lives, but their values or other goals. 5E helped create and now follows this trend. It also means that more cozy game play (popular in fantasy fiction and media nowadays) is also more doable than it was in the old school era, when PCs didn't really expect to live long enough to open a bookstore, or whatever.

5E also appeals to the more mechanically inclined folks who were onboarded with 3E and 4E (although a bunch of them also branched off to Pathfinder), who like the more detailed tactical and especially character-building options.

I think both old school and 5E-style games have their place, but they're each better at different things.

If I want a gritty dungeon crawler or horror game, I'll go with an OSR system, where characters are almost certainly weaker than all their foes, have fewer tools in their toolbox than their 5E counterparts and running away is always a good idea.

If I want to tell a story about characters solving problems, especially heroically, and growing as people over time, I don't want to use an OSR system where they're likely to be cut down, midway through their arc, but instead prefer a system like 5E. (Daggerheart also seems like it's aimed at this audience.)

The problem is that the Dungeons & Dragons brand has, at various times, embraced/originated both styles, so there's a mismatch of expectations. A 1E D&D adventure just works differently under the 5E ruleset and vice-versa, although people can and do make it work to their satisfaction.

Neither style of play is wrong -- I run multiple 5E campaigns as well as an ongoing Shadowdark campaign -- but they're serving different audiences looking for different things.

Very good observations. Thank you.

 

[Clint_L]

Liking new things takes effort, and the latest research shows that the cognitive reward (literally, the dopamine rush) we get from new learning declines with age. So liking new things takes even more effort as we age. Then I think it basically becomes a cost/benefit analysis to most people.

For example, if OP and his group are already happy with what they've got, there isn't much incentive to invest in the time, effort, and money to change.

So regardless of whether it is a good system or not, 5e will always be a tough sell to such a group. That's not good or bad, it is just the way our brains work.

Many of the things that OP mentions as flaws are, for me features, of 5e. I'm also in my 50s, but I work with teenagers and they keep demanding that I try new stuff.

 

[GothmogIV]

Liking new things takes effort, and the latest research shows that the cognitive reward (literally, the dopamine rush) we get from new learning declines with age. So liking new things takes even more effort as we age. Then I think it basically becomes a cost/benefit analysis to most people.

For example, if OP and his group are already happy with what they've got, there isn't much incentive to invest in the time, effort, and money to change.

So regardless of whether it is a good system or not, 5e will always be a tough sell to such a group. That's not good or bad, it is just the way our brains work.

Many of the things that OP mentions as flaws are, for me features, of 5e. I'm also in my 50s, but I work with teenagers and they keep demanding that I try new stuff.

I work with 12 year olds, and advise the D&D Club at my school (40+ kids!) They love this game. I've written grants to get them lots of books and dice. It's a blast to watch them play.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Currently DCC and Castles&Crusades, both of which I like. But I feel like I am missing out on something with WotC D&D.

Color art and decent editing?

 

[Mort]

Liking new things takes effort, and the latest research shows that the cognitive reward (literally, the dopamine rush) we get from new learning declines with age. So liking new things takes even more effort as we age. Then I think it basically becomes a cost/benefit analysis to most people.

For example, if OP and his group are already happy with what they've got, there isn't much incentive to invest in the time, effort, and money to change.

So regardless of whether it is a good system or not, 5e will always be a tough sell to such a group. That's not good or bad, it is just the way our brains work.

Many of the things that OP mentions as flaws are, for me features, of 5e. I'm also in my 50s, but I work with teenagers and they keep demanding that I try new stuff.

I'm 51 and the second youngest in my group (Youngest is a spry 49), they all REALLY love 5e. It seems to hit the 2e nostalgic vibe they remember playing in college quite well.

 

[Deset Gled]

My simple answer: 5e has the lowest barrier to entry of any version of D&D I've played.

For anyone who has never played a TTRPG before, it's not only relatively simple to pick up, but it's extremely hard to make a bad character at low levels. Bounded accuracy means even players making blatant mistakes will still have a reasonable amount of success.

For anyone who played TTRPGs before and wants to get back in, the basic mechanics are universal enough that a background in practically any other RPG will translate into at least a basic understanding of 5e. So your BECMI friend, your Vampire The Masquerade friend, and your 4e friend can all sit down and start playing at the first session.

Now, 10 levels later all of these people may have completely different complaints about why 5e isn't their ideal system. But it's the ideal system for getting everyone to that discussion. IMNSHO, of course.

 

[Marc17]

It's pretty much what others have said. People these days seem to like that quick leveling with lots of powers. Another thing I notice as somebody playing D&D for the 45 years is that it is just more gonzo because of all the new things that have been added.* Out of the last three games, I think only one person in the party has been a human, elf, dwarf, or halfling that was originally offered in basic. Everybody else are Drow, tieflings, Giff, Hadozee, Goliaths or something else added to the game in the in the last four decades. Character classes have also exploded, and now each one is actually at least three or four really. I came in from PF1 and it seemed fine to me. However, the more I play it, the more I find things that have to be house ruled to even make sense though, the one thing from AD&D I was glad to have seen go away.

*ETA: So much that for sake of my own sense of verisimilitude, I can't run in a home brew NOT-Europe or even NOT-Earth type setting any more. My default home brew setting now is a weird magic filled trade city with spell jammers, gates, and dimensional teleports similar to what you would have seen in Myth Adventures (I date myself there). PCs probably don't have access to that tech at low level, but the city is very cosmopolitan with everything that is in D&D, and with the gates that are common use can be in a variety of settings more favorable to adventures in a relatively short trip.

 

[TiQuinn]

But: my crew and I, a bunch of grogs in our 50s, played 5e a few times and didn't find it to our liking. Characters were too powerful too quickly, the action economy is... let's say busy (readied action, action, bonus action, reaction), and the character options just an endless parade of race, subrace, class, subclass, with an inexhaustible list of mechanical stuff PCs could do just by rolling a die (vs. role playing, or having to think about what they wanted to do). It all felt like a video game to us.
But, people love it. Just love it. So my question is...why? What is it about this particular rule set and edition that makes it so fun?

This feels like I have to state qualifications before stating my opinions so let's just say I've been playing D&D since 1989, not counting all the time before it where I was just basically playing solo as a kid because I couldn't find someone to play with.

I enjoy it for all the reasons that it turns you and your crew off. I wanted to be powerful. I want my character to feel heroic. I don't want to wait to fight the dragon or the beholders. I like the various options. I was having fun just building characters again, some that I'd never get to play probably, but just for the sake of building them.

I love 2e to death, but I remember I was ready for it to be over. I was tired of multi-classing my fighter with a thief or a mage just to get some sort of ability that could make the character feel fun. Kits felt like a band-aid approach with some solid entries, but others that did nothing to provide dynamism to the characters. There had to be something more to do with these characters. There had to be a better "way", i.e. system. We used Mayfair Games' Blood and Steel rules for martial characters, and that helped provide some variety to fighters. When Skills and Powers came out, we dropped Blood and Steel for it, and had a whole campaign with it. Our group loved it, though it crumpled under the weight of the rules. Staying power of the system became a thing to watch for. 3rd edition/3.5 did not solve that problem, though it was better than Skills and Powers, IMO. It was fine for early levels but we also realized that combats were taking forever and a day to resolve, people were forgetting bonuses and abilities, and it felt unmanageable. The point is, even as early as about 1992 - we were ready for a game that allowed PCs to do heroic things.

Fast forward to 5e...different group now, but I got the itch to play again after taking a good 12 years off from playing due to just normal life events. 5e solved those problems I had with 3e and Skills and Powers. The game feels balanced from a playability sense - not in terms of power curve or this class is balanced versus that class, but balanced in terms of how easily I could manage the character sheet in front of me.

I've actually gone back to OSR games for a bit, and the play is much different, but I also expect that. If I go back to 2e, I have it set in my head that one game is designed for a totally different play style than 5e. I don't have to fight with that edition any more to do things that it probably was never designed to do. I can let 2e (or 1e) do what it does best, because I have 5e now for the heroic part.

 

[GothmogIV]

We did play the Free League Lord of the Rings game, which is very stripped down 5e, and had a lot of fun. I also ran a 5e campaign with some modifications on my end (gritty realism, slow level progression, banned a few spells, etc.) and we had a good experience, so it hasn't been all bad by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[Umbran]

This is not a troll post. I am asking legitimately out of curiosity, and maybe a bit of wistfulness: why is 5e (and the newest iteration, 2024...5.5e) fun?

But, people love it. Just love it. So my question is...why?

I mean, I could take a whack at it point by point, or I can just go to...

Or is it because so many people play video games, and 5e is sort of analogous?

Nope.
I mean, lots of people play videogames. You're right there.
I play videogames. I have played D&D since 1982, and T&T before that. I play and run 5e gladly.
I don't find 5e to be like playing a videogame. I don't think many fans of 5e would say, "I like it because it is like a videogame, for me".

I love Dungeons&Dragons as a concept, and I have since I was 11 years old (a very long time ago!) I feel like I am missing out on something because I am either too set in my ways, or missing some critical concept(s) in 5e. Help a brother out, friends.

I can't say what's getting in your way - I don't really know you, or your experience with the current game. But, specifically since you are asking, I suppose I can speculate.

I can say that I have found, "Like a videogame" from many people turns out to be an emotional reaction, rather than a well-considered, thoughtful comparison of the play experience of videogames and any RPG. I don't know if it is with you, or not.

But, there may be some element of that in play. It is known that humans often react negatively to change, even when that change is beneficial. So, perhaps, you are letting a negative reaction to the fact that stuff changed get in the way of seeing the thing for what it actually is.