• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

D&D 5E Historical Problems and 5E

I like the way clerics had more options to heal in 4e and 5e over older editions. Bonus action spells are good and things like the fighters second wind help make the cleric be able to do other things. A protection from evil cast on the fighter nearly allowed him to solo a demon 5 levels higher than the fighter. Add the thief and it became an easy fight instead of hard.

I wish potions were not penalized to use your standard action, or just action in 5e. Players may use them more in situations, especially in healing, if they could use them easier. I would think bonus action, but can see using your movement action if you need to fetch it out of a pouch or something.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Both not needing a cleric to heal, and balance between classes across each level was fixed in 4e, and stays fixed in 5e.

Though I disagree that 5e clerics need to spend all their spells on healing. Sacred flame to kill a kobold who does 1d4+3 damage, is better than spending a spell slot to heal for 1d4+3. Next time you see a girl about to be smashed, don't think "oh crap, I need to save my slots to heal", instead cast sanctuary, command (flee), or silence. You get more milage out of it.
Life cleric being an exception.


The biggest fix of 5e (IMO) is that it's not dependent on magic items.
This is the biggest thing I have noticed. Though, I am not entirely sure if it's a great thing. I am DMing a small party currently and by no means would I say they required magical weapons to keep up with even challenging encounters. Even creatures that take half damage from non magical items or resistance to damage that the party produces (one of the biggest hitters currently is the moon druid) simply last a few more rounds than other creatures of equivalent CR. I feel as if my players still expect magical gear from prev edition experiences but honestly with their power level and strategic fighting (they barely ever fight a fair fight) then I inclined to be really stingy.

With that being said I think your typical group of murder hobos would do just fine against challenging encounters with no magical items.

So, I suppose it's not really relevant to OP really but yeah I feel as if 5e took magical weapons from being a necessity.
 

Oh that reminds me. It may have started in 3e, but I was fed up back then about monsters having resistance/DR to non-magical weapons.

It wound up just becoming a mechanical, unfun thing that was overdone and thus failed for me.

I'd rather see it only used as special material (silver for werewolves) and in very rare cases.
 

One of my long-ago players used to swear up and down that spell had been mis-named, thus he always referred to it as "Magic Hittile".

Lanefan

WHAT. DO. YOU. THINK. YOU. ARE. DOING?!

That's not a signature Lanefan signature. :P
 

I strongly disagree with the OP about healing. But that's not the point of the thread. So moving on and dumping the pointless argument.

Okay, multi-edition problems with D&D.
So many of these are sacred cows. So they'll never be removed, being too iconic to D&D.

Stuff like how armour makes you harder to hit rather than harder to damage, or hit points and how gaining a level makes you more resistant to falling off a cliff or swimming in lava.

Ability scores are a big one. How half the time the numbers don't matter. A +1 bonus to a stat is typically irrelevant. Going for 10 (average) to 11 (5% better than average) confers zero numerical bonus.
 


In general, I've found that most problems in an edition are corrected in the next edition (3.5 being an exception, since it kept the base system). There were a few holdover issues between 1E & 2E (such as AC going down to get better), but nothing that was a serious problem. The problem is that those fixes usually reveal other flaws and problems :D

I think that 5E has done a good job taking the best aspects of prior editions. It's not perfect, but that's because it's meant to work for the largest group of people possible, and we all have a variety of things that we like/hate. As for the two issues I read clerics (plus druids and bards), generally don't use healing in combat unless they have to (an ally is at 0 and has a failed Death Save). A lot of times, they use Healing Word, saving Cure Wounds for later. Magic Missile always hitting isn't great enough for my group's feeling that it doesn't do enough damage overall, so they generally avoid it.
 

Okay, multi-edition problems with D&D.

Ability scores are a big one. How half the time the numbers don't matter. A +1 bonus to a stat is typically irrelevant. Going for 10 (average) to 11 (5% better than average) confers zero numerical bonus.
This is just a multi-recent-edition issue.

In the 2e era with roll-under being a thing, that extra stat point became relevant.
 

Oh that reminds me. It may have started in 3e, but I was fed up back then about monsters having resistance/DR to non-magical weapons.

It wound up just becoming a mechanical, unfun thing that was overdone and thus failed for me.

I'd rather see it only used as special material (silver for werewolves) and in very rare cases.
Sometimes I enjoy the resistance because it gives non traditional classes to really shine. Well in earlier additions at least. Take 3.5 against a ghost, a lower level magic user was a god send whereas traditionally melee classes carry the team in low end dungeons.
 

Through 3rd edition, the cleric often found that the best thing they could do for the party in almost all rounds of combat was to heal. My AD&D cleric reared healing spells in most of their slots.

Another example, at high levels, in older editions, the only powerful classes were spellcasters. Melee combatants became nothing more than buffers to protect the spellcasters

Thoughts?

In my experience, both issues are fixed.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top