D&D 5E Just a reality check.

[ren1999]

5E still has a lot of potential. But I want a starting hit point increase variant. I demand it. I shouldn't have to ask for it as this was a big argument with those promoting low hit points and those promoting higher hit points clearly divided.

 

[Dausuul]

5E still has a lot of potential. But I want a starting hit point increase variant. I demand it.

Sure thing! Here you go:

Starting Hit Point Increase Variant. All PCs receive +5 to their maximum hit points at 1st level.

Man, that was easy. Anything else I can do for you?

Edited to add: Okay, snark aside, the debate was primarily between supporters of the old-school "zero to hero" approach, who want to start as novice adventurers and work their way up, and supporters of the 4E approach, who prefer to start as reasonably tough, competent types. As far as I know, the designers' solution was simply to have the first group start at level 1, and the second group start at level 3, 4, or 5. This seems eminently sensible to me.

 

[SkidAce]

I can't help notice after seeing multiple rev-rolls play out on-line, that there's a consistent pattern of some folks who complain about every little thing, and others who tell them not to: first because it's too soon to make judgements, then because it's too late to make changes.

:shrug:

Kinda Catch 22 almost.

 

[Tony Vargas]

5E still has a lot of potential. But I want a starting hit point increase variant. I demand it. I shouldn't have to ask for it as this was a big argument with those promoting low hit points and those promoting higher hit points clearly divided.

Here's one: Don't start your campaign at apprentice level.

Here, have another: Add your CON /score/ to your hps at 1st.


Seriously, I can see dumping on 5e for a lot of structural, hard-to-change things, but this is something that DMs have been fixing with a snap of their fingers for 40 years. I get the frustration that WotC has gone back to 'forcing' us to make this easy fix, ourselves, when they'd finally gotten around to fixing it officially, but it's not worth ragequiting over.

 

[Joe Liker]

Plenty of people think it's great

I followed the first half (maybe two-thirds) of playtesting, and I became very discouraged. The ideas the developers were talking about, and the arguments a lot of the players were making, all made it seem like this edition of D&D was going to be the worst ever.

But I'm very pleasantly surprised to see that the final product contains none of the worst ideas I remember from playtest. The magic system is an amazing compromise that is probably better than anything any of the hardcore extremists on either side were proposing. The fighter class is exactly the basic-but-flexible framework I think they were going for. Saving throws make more sense than they have in any previous edition. The streamlined proficiency system brings everything together and seems like it will address some of the scaling issues we've seen in the past.

Honestly, before reading the Basic Rules, I really did think I was going to skip this edition. I'm awfully glad my curiosity prodded me to at least look at the final version of the rules because now I'm really excited to see how all of this plays out!

(Then again, I thought 4E was the most awesome thing ever right at first. It took me a about a year to realize how many of its foundational design decisions are antithetical to the kind of game I want to DM or play.)

 

[Evenglare]

Here's one: Don't start your campaign at apprentice level.

Here, have another: Add your CON /score/ to your hps at 1st.


Seriously, I can see dumping on 5e for a lot of structural, hard-to-change things, but this is something that DMs have been fixing with a snap of their fingers for 40 years. I get the frustration that WotC has gone back to 'forcing' us to make this easy fix, ourselves, when they'd finally gotten around to fixing it officially, but it's not worth ragequiting over.

Though I have no qualms with the HP, this is the fix I would use if I had a problem with the HP thing.... which I dont.

 

[Dausuul]

(Then again, I thought 4E was the most awesome thing ever right at first. It took me a about a year to realize how many terrible design decisions were firmly engrained in its foundations.)

Yeah, this happened to me too. I'm hoping I don't follow the same path with 5E.

 

[jodyjohnson]

It is both. It is too early to determine if your issue is dealt with using an option found in the PHB or DMG. And it is too late to change anything, as both books have already been completed.

The PHB was off to the printer June 7. The Monster Manual has been worked on as recently as last weekend, and presumedly hasn't been sent to the printer.

Monster Manual is probably due this week.

The DMG is still being written, and I expect there will be continue to be urgent pleas for specific inclusions until it gets shipped to the printers. Which if the schedule holds, won't be for almost 2 months.

If anything the scheduling almost allows for options to be included to account for Starter, Basic, and PHB feedback. Possibly by intention.