D&D 5E (2024) Is 5E better because of Crawford and Perkins leaving?

[Valetudo]

Do you 2 want to know how to accurately describe hitpoints? Its a game, that's it.

 

[tetrasodium]

Your players aren't concerned when they drop to 0? Mine are, but one thing I might be doing differently is that I roll their death saves in secret. I started that a while back and now all but 1 character in my main campaign have a periapt of wound closure which means the character automatically succeed on death saves at the cost of an attunement slot. On the other hand, it's a pretty significant investment as well as an indication of how often I drop characters to 0 in my game. If it really bothered me I'm only have it work X times of day or even 1/day but no attunement but I can still have enemies double tap of course because that causes 2 failed death saves. Having a monster run away with the unconscious character is still frequently a valid option.

As far as @tetrasodium's complaint about players deciding if their character dies, that's still optional and has been a widespread house rule for quite some time now. I think the lethality of the campaign should be up to the group as a whole, the game can still be as lethal as the people at the table want. If you're a DM that thinks the characters should face a high risk of death and the players want to decide whether their character dies that seems like a mismatch of what people want and I doubt removing the mention of the optional rule in the DMG is going to fix anything.

My "complaint" about that is not the fact that it exists... It's the fact that it's the only optional rule and 5.24 still designed the base for coziest of cozie death drying and recovery base rules. It's too easy for any other player to pop up a downed pc at jo opportunity cost to their action economies for blind death saves alone to make simply being at low HP feel risky because the risk doesn't show until eating death saves in a scenario where nobody can pull your yoyo string or eating a death save in a scenario where the gm has arranged an execution with multiple attackers stacked in the initiative cycle while arranged on the grid so no other players can take an action first.

 

[SkidAce]

This goes back to my earlier statement D&D "Fantasy Combat" is "nonsense" as is much of the game outside of combat. There is nothing realistic about big parts of the game and the fact it is not possible to slit a sleeping humans throat and instantly kill them is small potatoes in the big scheme of things.

My view is thus...*

A commoner has 4 hp. A sleeping commoner is Unconscious, attacks have advantage, and the person slitting the throat is within five feet, so its a crit.

1d4 dagger (could use a shortsword i supposse) average damage is 2.5, crit average 5.

So its 50/50 if the attack hits the commoner dies. So it is possible.

Attaack a high level sleeping adventurer? Much harder.


*I bring this up, cause a lot of problems go away if you look at the deadliness of things in relation to 99% of the population, IME.
** also....HOW did this become another hp thread?

 

[Maxperson]

Yes you did, right here (at the very bottom of the post):

D&D 5E (2024) Post in thread 'Is 5E better because of Crawford and Perkins leaving?'

Yesterday at 8:47 PM

If we are talking RAW laying down and letting someone stab you in the heart will not kill you.

Yes it will, because if they have hit points left, it does not strike the heart or even the body if they have enough hit points. The person rolls over in their sleep and the attack "misses" for the amount of damage the attack does, or some other luck, skill, divine intervention hp damage description. The only time you get struck for huge gory wounds like a stab in the heart is when you drop to 0.

It is disingenous to bring up RAW to defend part of your hypothesis and then ignore RAW...

• Maxperson

So I guess you admit you are wrong now?

Why? You didn't quote me saying it. You quoted me saying, "it does not strike the heart or even the body if they have enough hit points." which means over 50% hit points and, "The only time you get struck for huge gory wounds like a stab in the heart is when you drop to 0." which means dropped to 0 per RAW and does not eliminate the minor damage that happens in-between 50% and 0 hit points.

This is what I mean by you aren't trying to understand. You're just trying to respond to win the internetz!!!!!! and that won't work, because I won't let it work. You're easy to refute when you don't bother to understand an argument before you respond.

 

[SkidAce]

I'd pop smoke on this one @Maxperson

 

[FrogReaver]

Yes. What about them? Just like I said, people liked them and others disliked them. I'm really not sure why they haven't been put into 5e or 5.5e yet.

Besides healing allies is there anything they could really do that a 2024 Battlemaster Fighter cannot?

 

[Maxperson]

Besides healing allies is there anything they could really do that a 2024 Battlemaster Fighter cannot?

Honestly, I have no idea. I never liked the Marshall, but I know others do. That's why I've said over and over that I'd love to see it made for 5e. I THINK it's thematically different enough to warrant it's own class/subclass, but I'm not sure.

 

[AlViking]

My "complaint" about that is not the fact that it exists... It's the fact that it's the only optional rule and 5.24 still designed the base for coziest of cozie death drying and recovery base rules. It's too easy for any other player to pop up a downed pc at jo opportunity cost to their action economies for blind death saves alone to make simply being at low HP feel risky because the risk doesn't show until eating death saves in a scenario where nobody can pull your yoyo string or eating a death save in a scenario where the gm has arranged an execution with multiple attackers stacked in the initiative cycle while arranged on the grid so no other players can take an action first.

Many monsters have multi-attack and like most DMs I've ever had I group initiative so that monsters of the same type go at the same time. If I want to kill off characters on a regular basis it's not hard. It wasn't long ago that I would have had a TPK with that main group because they stupidly ran into combat unprepared if they had not surrendered. The game is and always has been as deadly as the people at the table want it. It just takes a bit of effort now instead of "Sorry Bob, you rolled poorly so your otherwise completely healthy character is now dead". But I also remember a cartoon from long ago during the 2e days where a group was mourning the death of one of the characters until someone remembered they just had to get back to town to have him raised.

If I wanted to kill characters left and right it wouldn't be hard. While character death is never off the table I don't do it because it's not what my players want out of the game. If you want a high risk of death for the characters and the players don't that's a mismatch of expectations.

 

[tetrasodium]

Many monsters have multi-attack and like most DMs I've ever had I group initiative so that monsters of the same type go at the same time. If I want to kill off characters on a regular basis it's not hard. It wasn't long ago that I would have had a TPK with that main group because they stupidly ran into combat unprepared if they had not surrendered. The game is and always has been as deadly as the people at the table want it. It just takes a bit of effort now instead of "Sorry Bob, you rolled poorly so your otherwise completely healthy character is now dead". But I also remember a cartoon from long ago during the 2e days where a group was mourning the death of one of the characters until someone remembered they just had to get back to town to have him raised.

If I wanted to kill characters left and right it wouldn't be hard. While character death is never off the table I don't do it because it's not what my players want out of the game. If you want a high risk of death for the characters and the players don't that's a mismatch of expectations.

Wow... you are demonstrating the problem of how the default invites players to poison the social dynamic and can't even discuss it without twisting the point into something that paints the gm as some kind of monster killer gm.



I ran 2e and 3.x. even PC's died it was a neutral thing because everyone could accept that it was the monsters not the gm putting in "a bit of effort" to execute their pc. Back then there was always something that the party could have done different and after recap discussion wil likely do better at in the future, that's no longer the case when a pc is killed due to the bar being raised to one that looks like the same execution as the gm deciding "I want to kill off characters on a regular basis'. You aren't even responding the topic being discussed in either of my previous posts.

 

[Zardnaar]

Wow... you are demonstrating the problem of how the default invites players to poison the social dynamic and can't even discuss it without twisting the point into something that paints the gm as some kind of monster killer gm.



I ran 2e and 3.x. even PC's died it was a neutral thing because everyone could accept that it was the monsters not the gm putting in "a bit of effort" to execute their pc. Back then there was always something that the party could have done different and after recap discussion wil likely do better at in the future, that's no longer the case when a pc is killed due to the bar being raised to one that looks like the same execution as the gm deciding "I want to kill off characters on a regular basis'. You aren't even responding the topic being discussed in either of my previous posts.

RAW its kind of hard to kill PCs off. Outside level 1-3 and crits.
Unless you cheese the encounter rules.