D&D 5E For the 1st time: I am the D&D target Audience!

[Urriak Uruk]

I'm not a new player so maybe those comments have less of an impact on me. I don't think the mechanics back up your fears, but my fears and experience are not yours so I see things differently I;m sure.

So what your afraid of is magic vs martial balance? It is not an issue for my group as we have very little magic, but this has definitely been discussed before. From a DPR perspective they classes are pretty balanced. So I assume the issue you see is one or both of the following:

I'm a new player! Definitely LOVE this edition. Seriously, when hearing things like how armor class used to be calculated, I wonder how people could ever play something else.

I definitely think there can be imbalances, but it has less to do with classes and more to do with player styles. I have three players in my group who are pretty casual (D&D is just a small piece of their headspace) and another two where they try to powergame. The difference in their abilities is wide, and has nothing to do with class but entirely to do with how much research they've done when choosing their various subclasses, spells, feats, etc.

 

[Blackrat]

Back when I got over the disappointment of 4e, and went back to 3.5, I said that I’d never give into the hype again, and that the next D&D edition I’d buy, would be the one I could play on holodeck... And, last year I switched to 5e, purchased the physical core books, purchased bunch of supplements digitally, and am thoroughly enjoying it... I nearly gave up on wotc, but I too am again on target audience, as much as it surprises me...

And the best part is, as a dm I can still easily use most of my 3.5 collection with minimal effort.

 

[cbwjm]

Nah, real RPGers never die. They just roll up a new character!

Or pick one from the stock of characters they already have written up.

 

[Garthanos]

I'm not a new player so maybe those comments have less of an impact on me. I don't think the mechanics back up your fears, but my fears and experience are not yours so I see things differently I;m sure.

I feel like they rely on a DM attempting to balance what they left hanging and the hints they left new DMs and player are exactly opposed to my POV

So what your afraid of is magic vs martial balance?

If I cannot trust that balance I am really not interested in the game as a whole SO sure.

However that is only part of it (I am aware he dps works out) but also sense of scale the characters do not feel "heroic" in scale that comment about harming more enemies with a low level hunter or monk daily or moderate level fighter one than a 5e fighter can do using all of its resources at high level was about characters being awesome and larger than life.

Note if martial types are insufficiently awesome in combat then I think if they are actually balanced casters are too although looking at the 5e fireball ummm sheesh.

It is not an issue for my group as we have very little magic, but this has definitely been discussed before. From a DPR perspective they classes are pretty balanced.

DPR is a necessary evil - lol.
I want the tactical choice feel. I do not get much out of a battlemasters once in a while ability to do something interesting when I could have taken any of the 4 phb, 4e martial classes and unless it was a simple ranger build (which definitely could work) and get more interesting options. Depleting HP is kind of boring. And tiny fights should remain inconsequential... and have to if the Hero character in Paragon is to be the one man army of Chainmail.

So I assume the issue you see is one or both of the following:

1) Too few non-magical options/too many magical class options. Definitely more magical options than I will ever use. However, I don't need a lot more than the fighter and the rogue for my martial options.

The 5e martial classes in function I find hard to be excited about. Its like they took the least interesting of 4e martial classes the twin striking ranger and went double down on it.

Personally I see no adequate Tactical Warlord nor a Defender Swordmage and till much later they didnt even have a valid Defender fighter in other words the things I liked most they removed.

I did have to homebrew a spell-less ranger though.

If skill use were more empowered you wouldn't need to an adaptable rogue or fighter actually should do the trick. But I really do not find 5e classes adaptable

You have to over write and build your own.

 

[dave2008]

I feel like they rely on a DM attempting to balance what they left hanging and the hints they left new DMs and player are exactly opposed to my POV

If I cannot trust that balance I am really not interested in the game as a whole SO sure.

However that is only part of it (I am aware he dps works out) but also sense of scale the characters do not feel "heroic" in scale that comment about harming more enemies with a low level hunter or monk daily or moderate level fighter one than a 5e fighter can do using all of its resources at high level was about characters being awesome and larger than life.

Note if martial types are insufficiently awesome in combat then I think if they are actually balanced casters are too although looking at the 5e fireball ummm sheesh.


DPR is a necessary evil - lol.
I want the tactical choice feel. I do not get much out of a battlemasters once in a while ability to do something interesting when I could have taken any of the 4 phb, 4e martial classes and unless it was a simple ranger build (which definitely could work) and get more interesting options. Depleting HP is kind of boring. And tiny fights should remain inconsequential... and have to if the Hero character in Paragon is to be the one man army of Chainmail.


The 5e martial classes in function I find hard to be excited about. Its like they took the least interesting of 4e martial classes the twin striking ranger and went double down on it.

Personally I see no adequate Tactical Warlord nor a Defender Swordmage and till much later they didnt even have a valid Defender fighter in other words the things I liked most they removed.


If skill use were more empowered you wouldn't need to an adaptable rogue or fighter actually should do the trick. But I really do not find 5e classes adaptable

You have to over write and build your own.

We are just in different places. Like I mentioned, my current group is almost entirely martial characters. Well actually all martial characters and one with magic initiate. And we have a blast. That being said, I ran a 4e adventure without powers once, where everyone just improvised and I adjudicated everything with DMG 42. So, I can run our 5e martials pretty free-form as well. I just have never put much stock in classes in any edition. I put stock in how we play.

 

[Garthanos]

We are just in different places. Like I mentioned, my current group is almost entirely martial characters. Well actually all martial characters and one with magic initiate. And we have a blast. That being said, I ran a 4e adventure without powers once, where everyone just improvised and I adjudicated everything with DMG 42. So, I can run our 5e martials pretty free-form as well. I just have never put much stock in classes in any edition. I put stock in how we play.

Oh that explains it... I think I have been a similar place after I stopped played AD&D and was introduced to Amber Diceless. We, my brother and his buddy from highschool went free form almost completely sometimes in post apocalyptic world and sometimes back in the world that grew out of our AD&D play. I did not actually care what system anyone designed their characters in to be honest if it helped them create context and perceptual foundations for the abilities of their characters that was fine. GURPS and HERO were dabbled with for that purpose but when it came to playing it was not even using dice.