Most frustrating quirk of 5E?


log in or register to remove this ad

Sadras

Legend
1) ability scores - no point for odd numbers, makes everyone samey.
2) weapons and armour tables (for same reasons mentioned by others)
3) limitation on learning new skills, ofc this can be tweaked via downtime
4) short and long rest not well thought out at all and designers could have easily tied overuse of abilities to the exhaustion track
5) base game = cantrips (high fantasy)
6) no cost of magic
7) racial ability caps
8) monster design reflects base game thinking
9) inspiration needs help
10) expertise bounded accuracy issue
 
Last edited:

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
What restrictions?

I figured you were talking older editions, though there has never been a true restriction against metal for druids. They have been able to use daggers, sickles, maces with metal heads, etc. since 1e. They've just been limited with metal, which does restrict use, but not as badly as paladins get it. And it's not even a moral limitation. Paladins on the other hand used to have truly moral restrictions.

If we're talking 5e, then druids still have no moral restrictions, but paladins do. The Oaths of Devotion and Ancients have moral tenets that if violated, can cause the loss of paladinhood. The Oath of Vengeance has immoral tenets that of violated can cause the loss of paladinhood. Those tenets are moral restrictions on what the paladin can and cannot do.
 
Last edited:

Azzy

ᚳᚣᚾᛖᚹᚢᛚᚠ
I need to figure out a better way to kill those who are unconscious as well. The other night we knocked out a major villain and his cronies were coming to try and drag him out to save him. The fighter in our group whacked his unconscious body with a full axe stroke and............one measly death save failure. The wizard fireballed the area to clear some of the cronies, toasting said unconscious bad guy and...........one more measly death save. The fighter had to hit him with a second axe stroke to finally kill him. It just shouldn't take two axe blows and a fireball to the face to kill an unconscious person. That bothered me and warrants mention in this thread. :)

You could just have the big bad die at 0 hp. You don't have to actually use the death save mechanic for villians/monsters.
 

lluewhyn

Explorer
I need to figure out a better way to kill those who are unconscious as well. The other night we knocked out a major villain and his cronies were coming to try and drag him out to save him. The fighter in our group whacked his unconscious body with a full axe stroke and............one measly death save failure. The wizard fireballed the area to clear some of the cronies, toasting said unconscious bad guy and...........one more measly death save. The fighter had to hit him with a second axe stroke to finally kill him. It just shouldn't take two axe blows and a fireball to the face to kill an unconscious person. That bothered me and warrants mention in this thread. :)

Melee attacks against an unconscious person are automatic Crits, hence 2 Death Saves. Plus, at least one other person mentioned the fact that NPCs can truly be killed when they reach 0 HP as well. When they drop, the player states whether the final blow was lethal or not, and they are then either dead or unconscious (to avoid using the more intricate but cumbersome non-lethal mechanics of 3.X).
 

Yardiff

Adventurer
Sorry to pick on you, @Yardiff, but yours is the most recent example that I’ve seen on this point. And that point is that I find some, if not many, complaints can easily be quelled by reading the books:

Missed that in the DMG and it seem backwards, the touchy feely should be the optional rule not the default.


Variant: More Difficult Identification
DMG p136
If you prefer magic items to have a greater mystique, consider removing the ability to identify the properties of a magic item during a short rest, and require the identify spell, experimentation, or both to reveal what a magic item does.
 


Li Shenron

Legend
I figured you were talking older editions, though there has never been a true restriction against metal for druids. They have been able to use daggers, sickles, maces with metal heads, etc. since 1e. They've just been limited with metal, which does restrict use, but not as badly as paladins get it. And it's not even a moral limitation. Paladins on the other hand used to have truly moral restrictions.

If we're talking 5e, then druids still have no moral restrictions, but paladins do. The Oaths of Devotion and Ancients have moral tenets that if violated, can cause the loss of paladinhood. The Oath of Vengeance has immoral tenets that of violated can cause the loss of paladinhood. Those tenets are moral restrictions on what the paladin can and cannot do.

YeahI know but 5e Paladins "restrictions" are narrative restrictions, while that of a Druid is a mechanical restriction. And it's the only case.
 

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
Most frustrating quirk of 5e? It's the lack of legal PDFs so I can carry my books with me, easily cut-n-paste when prepping for a session, easily search, use bookmarks, and have page numbers links to the page.

In other words, what I do with all of the other modern games on the market.

Note that buying access to the rules in an app likely doesn't fulfill those requirements.
 

oreofox

Explorer
YeahI know but 5e Paladins "restrictions" are narrative restrictions, while that of a Druid is a mechanical restriction. And it's the only case.

I haven't read all 180+ replies, so I apologize if you are actually speaking of previous editions. The 5e druid has no actual restrictions to wearing metal armor. It says they will not, not they can not. It's a narrative "restriction", and unlike in some previous editions (such as 3rd), they don't lose their abilities for donning metal armor. So you can make a druid character that wears metallic medium armor and still be a functional druid. Now whether the DM will go along with that is another story.
 

Remove ads

Top