D&D 5E Is 5e the Least-Challenging Edition of D&D?

[Monayuris]

Looking at the game from a big picture view. I'd say 5e is definitely one of the less challenging versions of the game.

Mainly because of the stakes of choice in 5e seem to have been purposefully reduced. I attribute this to a number of factors:

• Ubiquity of magic and spells. Magic is easily accessible and available to every class. Spells are rules elements that overcome challenges. They are made more easily available. There are more ways to have character resources overcome challenges, instead of player choices.
• Spells and abilities that present challenges have been practically eliminated. There are very few detrimental effects that are not easily overcome. Life drain, damage, petrification is recovered after an 8 hour rest. Charm person only lasts an hour. There are less debilitating effects and those that exist are easily recovered from.
• Monsters that were previously immune to magical attacks are now only mostly resistant (1/2 damage). Even monsters that are actually immune are less challenging. Nearly every class has access to magical attacks such that resistance or immunity to normal attacks is all but irrelevant by 4th level. There is less need to think of alternate solutions. Just blast away.
• Death and dying rules are very easy. This couples with increased access to magic. Dropping to zero is not dangerous because of how much magic is available. Death saves make dying very rare. There is very little risk to being at 0 hit points.

I kill PCs mostly by massive damage at 1st level, or multi-attack against already 0 hp characters. Otherwise there is very little risk for PCs and there are very little long term consequences to PC actions in the game. By the rules of the default game, there is little consideration beyond the adventuring day.

At even 4th, 5th level, D&D 5E starts looking more like The Avengers than actual fantasy. At even 3rd to 4th level, every character is throwing magic lasers and turning into flame and flying like superheroes. The default style of play in 5e is definitely super hero fantasy. Add the new UA and now you have Iron Man.

Sleep 8 hours and multitudes of wounds, death touches by wraiths, and charm spells are immediately negated as if nothing ever happened. 5e is D&D easy mode.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Looking at the game from a big picture view. I'd say 5e is definitely one of the less challenging versions of the game.

Mainly because of the stakes of choice in 5e seem to have been purposefully reduced. I attribute this to a number of factors:

• Ubiquity of magic and spells. Magic is easily accessible and available to every class. Spells are rules elements that overcome challenges. They are made more easily available. There are more ways to have character resources overcome challenges, instead of player choices.
• Spells and abilities that present challenges have been practically eliminated. There are very few detrimental effects that are not easily overcome. Life drain, damage, petrification is recovered after an 8 hour rest. Charm person only lasts an hour. There are less debilitating effects and those that exist are easily recovered from.
• Monsters that were previously immune to magical attacks are now only mostly resistant (1/2 damage). Even monsters that are actually immune are less challenging. Nearly every class has access to magical attacks such that resistance or immunity to normal attacks is all but irrelevant by 4th level. There is less need to think of alternate solutions. Just blast away.
• Death and dying rules are very easy. This couples with increased access to magic. Dropping to zero is not dangerous because of how much magic is available. Death saves make dying very rare. There is very little risk to being at 0 hit points.

I kill PCs mostly by massive damage at 1st level, or multi-attack against already 0 hp characters. Otherwise there is very little risk for PCs and there are very little long term consequences to PC actions in the game. By the rules of the default game, there is little consideration beyond the adventuring day.

At even 4th, 5th level, D&D 5E starts looking more like The Avengers than actual fantasy. At even 3rd to 4th level, every character is throwing magic lasers and turning into flame and flying like superheroes. The default style of play in 5e is definitely super hero fantasy. Add the new UA and now you have Iron Man.

Sleep 8 hours and multitudes of wounds, death touches by wraiths, and charm spells are immediately negated as if nothing ever happened. 5e is D&D easy mode.

All of these points have been discussed in this thread, and I think this post harkens back to an earlier discussion that we had.

"Deadly" does not equal "Challenging".

There are some really good examples of some counter-points to be found in video games actually. For example, to your 4th point, most video game characters have infinite lives because of save points. You can die again and again and again and again and again, with no real penalty. However, people do not cite that as a reason the game is not difficult.

Killing PCs is easy. It always has been, and it doesn't really make the game more challenging because the player simply rolls up another character. Plus, TPKs generally ruin plans, most DMs I've talked to do not want a TPK because it means an end to the campaign as it exists. And we work hard enough to start a campaign and keep it afloat, we don't need to be knocking holes in the boat while we are at it.

I also feel like you might be creating your own problems. The idea that all classes have access to a magical attack by 4th level makes me wonder if you are handing out magical items far too much. Besides that, spellcasters obviously have magical attacks starting at 1st level, so I find your choice of level to lend itself to this idea (6th level is when most options activate, and that is generally only the moon druid and the monk, no one else). They tend to be relatively rare in my games. So, it is very possible that the fighter is hitting with a non-magical weapon for close to half my campaign.

But, on to magic.

Yes, there is a lot of magic in 5e. Every class can have access to it. To a degree, this removes the supremacy of casters. IF you have 20 goblins for a fighter to kill, you are going to struggle. IF you have the same goblins fighting a wizard, the first question is whether they are in fireball formation. It is a fundamental gap, especially since almost all buffs, debuffs, and AOE's are magical. But, these are merely options. Yes, someone can choose to play an Eldritch Knight and take magic initiate, but they may not take that option. Giving players more tools does not necessarily make the game less challenging, it simply means you can use more complex and difficult challenges. For example, if everyone has magic in 5e... then so do the antagonists. That opens options.

Also, petrification does not go away on a long rest. IF you are petrified, that needs to be cured. Sure, other things do, but again, I don't see that as a bad thing. In fact, I think you hit the nail entirely on the head with one of your comments.

There is little consideration beyond the adventuring day

5e does not ask the DM or the player to track things for months at a time. The game is concerned about the single adventuring day that you are playing through. Because of this, you can actually throw more difficult and interesting fights at the players. You can dominate a player with a high level caster opponent, and not have to worry about the fact that you just removed that character from the game for multiple weeks. What we care about is the single day and the resources you expend.

And, there are explicit ways (and homebrew ways) to take the threat beyond that, by denying the players a long rest. Some of the nastiest long-term enemies are those like Hags which can prevent your long rest. That means you don't recover any of those debuffs, any of your spells, nothing.

The game is just as challenging as it has ever been, and in a lot of ways, it is more challenging.

There is no PC build that is immune to monster attacks. None. Even the highest ACs I have ever seen can still be hit by mid-level monsters if they get lucky.

You cannot stack buffs that make you immune to monsters or that allow you to alpha strike monsters. The game is not determined by who wins initiative in every fight. It can be, it is perfectly possible for the PCs to set an ambush and annihilate an encounter, or for the enemy to do the same, but it requires much more effort than it used to. And still relies on luck and whether or not the other side can counter your abilities

 

[Monayuris]

All of these points have been discussed in this thread, and I think this post harkens back to an earlier discussion that we had.

"Deadly" does not equal "Challenging".

Deadly is indeed challenging. When the game is more deadly, more thought, care, and strategy needs to be considered in order to succeed. With games like B/X and OSR games, which have death at zero hit points, save or die poisons, and minimal hit points, you have to approach the game from beyond just the rules. The rules will not help you and you don't have a safety net to fall back on. You have to use the world around you and develop strategies and tactics to flip the scales to your favor. You can't just use the abilities on your character sheet and expect to survive.

There is little consideration beyond the adventuring day

5e does not ask the DM or the player to track things for months at a time. The game is concerned about the single adventuring day that you are playing through. Because of this, you can actually throw more difficult and interesting fights at the players. You can dominate a player with a high level caster opponent, and not have to worry about the fact that you just removed that character from the game for multiple weeks. What we care about is the single day and the resources you expend.

The lack of long term consequences and the reset of everything on a long rest removes a lot of strategic considerations. You don't have to worry about attrition or resource management. When you have limited resources and limited recovery of resources you are forced to make strategic decisions on how to use them. It forces tough choices like when to use a spell, whether or not to engage in a combat, what path to take in the wilds, whether to keep the ogre that has been charmed for 3 weeks around, etc. These kinds of choices are eliminated from the game in 5e.

The game is just as challenging as it has ever been, and in a lot of ways, it is more challenging.

There is no PC build that is immune to monster attacks. None. Even the highest ACs I have ever seen can still be hit by mid-level monsters if they get lucky.

You cannot stack buffs that make you immune to monsters or that allow you to alpha strike monsters. The game is not determined by who wins initiative in every fight. It can be, it is perfectly possible for the PCs to set an ambush and annihilate an encounter, or for the enemy to do the same, but it requires much more effort than it used to. And still relies on luck and whether or not the other side can counter your abilities

The point is the game is easier and less challenging because it eliminates challenging and difficult choices from the game. Having to roll a higher number does not make a game more challenging. Nor does having more powers and abilities. Nor does having more complicated mechanics.

My apologies because I did not define what I consider challenging...

What makes a game challenging is the difficulty of the choices the game presents to the players.

5e presents less difficult choices in its game play (compared to say B/X or OD&D), and that makes it easier and less challenging.

 

[Garthanos]

The lack of long term consequences and the reset of everything on a long rest removes a lot of strategic considerations.

shazam look mah I am back from the dead I thought always cheapened those consequences the best consequences were if you got people attached to your game world in a way where a villain really coming in and ruining something badly was a more felt consequence any way. And before you claim it sure attribute decay in a game where attributes had far less impact than now is almost a faux limit. I thought the raise spell always should have involved some interesting after life quest and I doubled the level of it even way back when make it something epic and a real story.

 

[Garthanos]

Also bing I rolled up a new character in 40 seconds Im done can also make character death a bit of a faux consequence.

 

[Monayuris]

shazam look mah I am back from the dead I thought always cheapened those consequences the best consequences were if you got people attached to your game world in a way where a villain really coming in and ruining something badly was a more felt consequence any way. And before you claim it sure attribute decay in a game where attributes had far less impact than now is almost a faux limit. I thought the raise spell always should have involved some interesting after life quest and I doubled the level of it even way back when make it something epic and a real story.

I would rather remove raise dead from the game. But some games attach long term side effects from being raised from the dead which makes it more of a consequence. I agree that raise dead should have some significant consequence.



That being said. Getting your character killed is something of a loss and a failure. Just from the nature of playing a game, it is appropriate to accept defeat and failure as just part of the game, but it is often not fun.

Sure you can just roll up a new character, but you still got your previous one killed. You still got to live with that.

 

[Garthanos]

Sure you can just roll up a new character, but you still got your previous one killed. You still got to live with that.

Or you didnt act like a sneak thief and coward and decided to face evil and that death is sometimes what happens.

 

[Monayuris]

Or you didnt act like a sneak thief and coward and decided to face evil and that death is sometimes what happens.

Not sure I understand, but my interpretation is that you are making a comparison between being cowardly and sneak thief vs. being heroic and facing evil.

I think being heroic and being smart are not mutually exclusive. If you are facing a bunch of evil cultists and instead of charging headlong into the fray, you have the opportunity to ambush them from cover and use flaming oil, you should do the ambush. The evil cultists will get their end, but you will be more likely to survive so you can continue the fight.

 

[Garthanos]

Not sure I understand, but my interpretation is that you are making a comparison between being cowardly and sneak thief vs. being heroic and facing evil.

Rewarding gold acquisition greater than stopping those enemies how every you manage it ... is what I am referring to.

 

[Sadras]

"Deadly" does not equal "Challenging".

Yeah we are just going to have to agree to disagree on that issue.

When you might have to go up against save or die affects - that encounter is gonna prove challenging.
There is an overall loss condition - TPK. Just because you can draw up a new character sheet, it doesn't mean you haven't failed. In 5e there is no resurrection survival roll, no loss in constitution. Your hit points increase well over 9th level, you have feats nows, your abilities increase, magic is much easier to cast, the vancian magic system has been watered down, rogue skills are much easier to perform no more % and anyone can attempt to climb, pick pocket, detect/disarm traps or walk stealthily with reasonable (compared to prior editions) chance of success, especially if they are proficient, revivify & healing spirit, no -10 or 0 = dead - instead you have 3 death saves, attacks hit often enough...etc. I do not know how anyone can call that less challenging.

It is a no brainer. The real question is this less challenging than 4e. That answer I'm not so sure about.