D&D 5E Is 5e "Easy Mode?"

[Garthanos]

Your group not being able to do similar is not a failing of the system.

The books damn near preached a form of adversarialism and judgemental DMing.

My first D&D death was from walking into the room (cave) i think it was room 3? and having a sentient stalactite fall on my head... boom done.

 

[Garthanos]

* I honestly can't remember many notable console/crpg's that far back well enough to name in any meaningful way

Pac man... seriously (not seriously) running around in a maze and picking up gold and levelling up to fight the monsters... then running around a deeper level maze and picking up more...

 

[Essafah]

I'm not a fan of amatuer acting classes either.

I was referring to the power level of the characters in GoT vis a vis combat capability and physical capability, not anything to do about the politics of the books. Last time I checked, when Jon Snow had to fight the white walkers, he didn't sprout luminescent wings, fly into the air, and shoot fire beams out of his eyes.

Fair enough. You like mundane fantasy with Joe average characters. That sounds staid and not fun at all but if you have a group of players that has buy-in on that (and I mean actual buy-in not assumed or forced buy-in) then that means you and your group are having fun. This is good. It is not the baseline of D&D since 2E but one thing that is good about RPGs: they can be customized to taste.

This confirms my point relating to the fundamental differences in expectations I often have with 5E.

I don't want a play a D&D game where the default is to make the PCs the heroes via their abilities. That sounds like there is a expectation of the PCs should always win and never fail. It also seems to state an expectation where the character's abilities are what is important.

My character isn't a hero just because I created it. My character might become a hero if it does heroic acts in the face of adversity in challenging environment. My character might also die in a pit trap in the dark dungeon and be forgotten.

How well I play the game will determine which fate will come to pass.

Yes. You are correct the average encounter of standard difficulty is not meant to kill the PCs barring really stupid decisions or uniquely ill luck. Instead they are designed to use resources, move the story along, and have the PCs feel like they matter and are accomplishing something in a cinematic fashion like larger than heroes.

The choices the characters make and how they play the game still matters very much. Even if the PCs accomplish their goal for example how they go about it and the choices they make as well as other factors like the length of time it took to reach a certain point can have interesting consequences.

Yes. The character's abilities are important because again not since 2E is the default that the PCs are Danny Devito who just decided one day to adventure. They are a cut above the average person in terms of stats by default. Also, let's be clear; this is not unique to 5E. This has been the default since 3rd edition and people seem to like it despite the very vocal OSR protests.

PBR, really?!? I thought they all moved on to Carling Black Label.

The beer analogy is silly and your dig at nostalgia and that it is a hipster fad is also silly.

No. Nostalgia is not a hipster fade. Clearly, the OSR who look at back at 1E/2E style games with rose colored glasses are nostalgic. In their nostalgia they forget the numerous house rules and outright ignoring of the rules that a lot of groups (I would dare say the majority) had to make the game playable and enjoyable.

It's all about preference. You prefer heroic larger than life cinematic action. I don't.

I prefer a more realistic approach to the game. I don't want superheroes in D&D, I want mortal level characters. I want to have my success at the game be based more on the choices I make as a player as opposed to the powers my character has on the character sheet.

You call that survival horror and akin to playing Call of Cthuhlu, I call that playing D&D.

Cool. You like what you like. I would say survival horror is pretty accurate description however. Have you ever tried games like Warhammer Fantasy Role-play, Zweihander, Hackmaster, and so forth? I honestly think they would be more to your taste.

 

[Essafah]

The books damn near preached a form of adversarialism and judgemental DMing.

My first D&D death was from walking into the room (cave) i think it was room 3? and having a sentient stalactite fall on my head... boom done.

I absolutely agree. In a lot of old school modules and games I often felt it was an adversarial approach of the DM vs. The Players (which is automatically a slanted combat in favor of the DM) as opposed to a collaborative effort where the players and DMs are coming together to weave an exciting adventure story of mythic heroism, where everyone at the table is their to enjoy themselves and escape the pressures and responsibilities of the real world. Some unique people may find it pleasurable to play a character that is an average Joe that tries their best only to have an uphill battle with minimal rewards and maximum effort. To those people I say more power to them. I think however the reason for the reason 3E and 5E are so popular is because it actually is fun and allows players to be cinematic heroes whose abilities actually work and accomplish things and they can actually see the power level of their PCs excelling. I think 4E would have been just as popularly had it mechanically not taken such a radical departure from other editions (I am not saying 4E was bad. I actually liked it I just think it was very different from any edition before or since and that turned many players away).

 

[Flamestrike]

Your solution is a fair and effective one. It does rub me the wrong way since decoupling resource recovery that way just seems odd.

For example.

If the current state of affairs is: Travel out and adventure, return to town, rest a week and repeat, if long rests are a week long it makes sense logically, the characters spend the week recovering and resting.

If I make it the end of every other session, then I have to figure out why characters can long rest one week and adventure but can't long rest the other. It is counter-intuitive. If they can rest the first week, why can't they rest the second?

No, you just make 'resource recovery' not linked to in game resting.

You seem to do this anyways. You grant a long rest at the end of your sessions (at which point the characters 'in game' and the players 'in real life, take a week off) automatically.

If that's too jarring for you, simply rule that the 'end of session rest' works as follows:

The first and second in game 'end of session rest' grants the benefits of a Short rest. The third such in game 'end of session rest' grants the benefits of a Long rest, and then the rest counter resets to zero (and the cycle begins again).

So in game the players characters are resting after every game session, binding wounds, taking time off etc, and gaining a benefit (short rest recovery of powers, healing via Hit Dice etc, PCs with the healer feat get that recharged etc). Every third such rest is a Long rest.

Be very clear to your players before you do this that you're doing it, and why, so they know NOT to nova. Warn them that nova-ing could lead to a TPK later on down the line, and advise them to marshal resources accordingly. If they Nova anyway, screw them - dont listen to their whining for a rest, hit them with both barrels so they know you're not messing around (but avoid a TPK - you want to get them self policing resources around this paradigm, not murdering them).

On your part, tone down your encounters if you do this. Dial them back to Medium-Hard (with the occasional easy and deadly encounter as well). Your players should get around 2-3 encounters per session (followed by a Short rest at the end of the session) and have to deal with 3 such sessions (of 6-9 encounters) in between long rests every 3rd session.

You'll find class balance will straighten up, and Monks, Fighters, and Warlocks will suddenly hold their own with the Paladins, Barbs and full casters. Every session the Locks, Monks and Battlemasters come to the table with a fresh use of Second wind, Action surge, Pact Magic Spell slots, Ki points, Superiority dice and so forth.

The full casters (and paladins and barbarians) have to marshal their resources over 3 entire sessions.

At 5th level, this means your casters have 4/3/2 slots each for 3 sessions (3 spells per session), your Barbarians have 3 rages (enough for 1/ session) and your paladins have 2 x smites per session (4/2).

That brings those classes roughly on par at this rest frequency with the Short rest heavy classes.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

The problem is that 3.5 and other modern D&D's shot a little too far over heroic fantasy for my tastes. My 5E group is only level 5 and they can fly at will, have the ability to allow all of them to breathe underwater, see in complete darkness (including magical darkness), not need to consume rations or forage for food, be able to get stealth at any time, they never run out of spells or healing (spell caster heavy party which is something 5E encourages).

I'm going to have to ask for more details here: How are your party able to fly at will, never run out of spells or healing etc?
That has not been the case with any group I've run or played in until at least beyond double-digit levels, and I'm pretty sure I don't ave any houserules that would affect that.

Not having enough encounters between resting is going to turn things a bit gonzo, but the same was true in 3.5 and Cyclopedia. A pretty good guide for 5e is that your casters should be reduced to cantrips on a fairly regular basis.

Personally, if I screwed up such that my character dies or is taken out for the encounter, then it is my own darn fault and I probably deserved it. I played poorly and suffered the consequences. I'll root for my other players and work on doing better next time.

That is pretty much the ethos 5e was aiming towards. Character death does happen, but it is more often due to making a mistake rather than rolling badly on a single d20 roll. Or saying that you were checking the door, but not specifying that you were checking the lock.

uhh... what the heck does jumping have to do with the fact that PC's can faceroll through every encounter just like pretty much every other encounter & after sleeping through the night minus about an hour of walking around to be perfectly 100% recovered from any number of near death experiences over the course of an adventuring day that looks a lot like the massacres that took place in a wolverine or deadpool movie. or the fact that it causes problems with certain settings?

If your characters can faceroll every encounter, your DM is going seriously easy on you. If everyone in the party feels that way, ask the DM to step things up a bit. Do you and the rest of the group tend to optimise somewhat?

I was referring to the power level of the characters in GoT vis a vis combat capability and physical capability, not anything to do about the politics of the books. Last time I checked, when Jon Snow had to fight the white walkers, he didn't sprout luminescent wings, fly into the air, and shoot fire beams out of his eyes.

That sounds more an issue with classes (and possibly races) available than editions. You would get that in most editions from a spellcaster.
Jon Snow is a very accomplished fighter, and may well be reasonably high level in 5e terms. But the GoT setting is not one in which the spellcasters of any edition would fit beyond extremely low levels.

I don't want a play a D&D game where the default is to make the PCs the heroes via their abilities. That sounds like there is a expectation of the PCs should always win and never fail. It also seems to state an expectation where the character's abilities are what is important.

My character isn't a hero just because I created it. My character might become a hero if it does heroic acts in the face of adversity in challenging environment. My character might also die in a pit trap in the dark dungeon and be forgotten.

How well I play the game will determine which fate will come to pass.

How do you determine whether your character does heroic acts in the face of adversity in challenging environments or dies in that pit trap, if not from your use use of your character's abilities?

I prefer a more realistic approach to the game. I don't want superheroes in D&D, I want mortal level characters. I want to have my success at the game be based more on the choices I make as a player as opposed to the powers my character has on the character sheet.

So don't play a spellcaster and you should be fine.

 

[Flamestrike]

I'm going to have to ask for more details here: How are your party able to fly at will, never run out of spells or healing etc?

He gives them a long rest at the end of every session, and only has 2-3 combat encounters (tops) per session.

Accordingly his games are full of full casters, nova-ing every encounter, who never run out of spells (because they get topped up at the end of the session).

There is probably a Paladin in there somewhere as well.

 

[Garthanos]

I absolutely agree. In a lot of old school modules and games I often felt it was an adversarial approach of the DM vs. The Players (which is automatically a slanted combat in favor of the DM) as opposed to a collaborative effort where the players and DMs are coming together to weave an exciting adventure story of mythic heroism,

The reason I said "damn near" instead of just did is because there was a theoretic ideal mentioned wrt the neutral dming but it also seemed to be veneer that was offset by other elements... too many tools for the dm to say die roll rocks fall you die but since it was a random die rolled encounter (that I set up or decided to use from a table) its neutral right? Like that door haunting ear burrowing monster... neutrality in a swingy swingy system might as well be hostility. I remember the haughty way DMs were mocked for being Monty Haul DMs. I remember how the rules outright told dms to cull the player character power (magic item destruction and the like) to help balance things that might go wonky because of random tables. How exactly is that really neutral. Killing them randomly (with a table you designed) is neutral is it? but use this here monster we recommend to keep them less capable and use this monster to discourage over formulaic use of listening at doors.. yeah those are so not neutral.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

He gives them a long rest at the end of every session, and only has 2-3 combat encounters (tops) per session.

Accordingly his games are full of full casters, nova-ing every encounter, who never run out of spells (because they get topped up at the end of the session).

There is probably a Paladin in there somewhere as well.

OK. That's pretty gonzo. But I think that you'd have similar issues in most other editions of D&D if you let the spellcasters run as rampant over your game as that.

 

[Flamestrike]

OK. That's pretty gonzo. But I think that you'd have similar issues in most other editions of D&D if you let the spellcasters run as rampant over your game as that.

He's using the Gritty rest variant too, but basically grants the PCs a long rest at the end of every session in any event.

This probably just nixes the Fighters, Monks and Warlocks more, because they're the only guys trying to get a 1 day short rest in there somewhere during the session.

My personal rest rules are 5 minute 'hand-waved' short rests (maximum of 2 per long rest). Take a knee, quick breather, sip of water, bite to eat, bind some wounds, check the map kind of thing.

Long rests stay the same, but 90 percent of my adventures have the PC's on the Doom clock (save the princess/ stop the ritual/ destroy-recover-locate the macguffin/ escape the dungeon/ stop the BBEG by [time X] or else [failure condition Y] happens), so it's not an issue for me.

I only reduce the Short rests to stop jarring 1 hour breaks in the narrative when the PCs are desperately trying to beat the clock and complete the quest, or suddenly decide it's a good idea to set up camp for an hour in the middle of a dungeon.

It also means I dont have to think ahead and provide 2-3 convenient places to hole up for an hour in every damn adventure I come up with.