Most frustrating quirk of 5E?

[jasper]

No beef jerky on the items table.
Elves still getting trance.

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

In earlier editions there was a common issue of characters having a "Christmas Tree" of glowing magic items. The limit of three was directly put in to address this point, which powerful items need attunement so a character will only have a few of them.

This addressed a pervasive problem in earlier editions. I wouldn't want to change that until I had an alternate way to limit items a character had.

Now, where I would change attunement is make it more like Earthdawn, where you need to learn more about the item to unlock it's abilities, and you can unlock more over time and have the item grow with you.

Make it more like Cyberpunk. Use an existing Stat or create a new one...or make it a number based on a combination of stats and that number lowers the more numerous/powerful items you have and have those items slowly drive you crazy. There was a reason Gollum succumbed to the One Ring.... MOIHAHAHAHAAAA!

 

[Maxperson]

What I do is that if a character drops to 0 hp they get one level of exhaustion. That level can be removed during a short rest. However, for each failed death save they gain another level of exhaustion that can only be removed in the normal manner (i.e., one per long rest).

It tends to get rid of the jack in the box heal/die cycle.

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.

 

[Selvarin]

Hmmm...I thought that with an unconscious person a 'coup de grace' was automatic if they so chose. I'm used to just whacking people into fillets or hamburger, but still...

 

[Maxperson]

Hmmm...I thought that with an unconscious person a 'coup de grace' was automatic if they so chose. I'm used to just whacking people into fillets or hamburger, but still...

"Damage at 0 Hit Points. If you take any damage while you have 0 hit points, you suffer a death saving throw failure. If the damage is from a critical hit, you suffer two failures instead. If the damage equals or exceeds your hit point maximum, you suffer instant death."

As you can see, it's only one death save unless you get lucky and crit. The instant death I just don't see happening once you reach mid level or higher. The system gives too many hit points to do that in one strike.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

"Damage at 0 Hit Points. If you take any damage while you have 0 hit points, you suffer a death saving throw failure. If the damage is from a critical hit, you suffer two failures instead. If the damage equals or exceeds your hit point maximum, you suffer instant death."

As you can see, it's only one death save unless you get lucky and crit. The instant death I just don't see happening once you reach mid level or higher. The system gives too many hit points to do that in one strike.

But a melee attack against an unconscious foe is automatically a critical hit, so your first hit should have given him 2 failed saves and the fireball would have killed him.

 

[Maxperson]

But a melee attack against an unconscious foe is automatically a critical hit, so your first hit should have given him 2 failed saves and the fireball would have killed him.

We missed that. Thanks! That makes it a bit better, but I still feel a single strike should have the potential to kill the target. Perhaps if you roll a crit, I'll have it do all three failures.

 

[5ekyu]

Make it more like Cyberpunk. Use an existing Stat or create a new one...or make it a number based on a combination of stats and that number lowers the more numerous/powerful items you have and have those items slowly drive you crazy. There was a reason Gollum succumbed to the One Ring.... MOIHAHAHAHAAAA!

I prefer trait based numbers as well - but even if you wanted to keep 3, you could do this as items above 3 start causing magic toxicity

 

[MechaPilot]

For me, I'd say it's a confluence of poor indices, the amount of cross-reference required, and the lack of easy reference stat blocks for spells and other abilities.

I've played and enjoyed every edition of D&D from BECMI to 5th. Each has their features and their flaws, and I don't begrudge anyone for liking one edition more than another (though I do begrudge those who claim any of those editions "isn't D&D"). Now, regardless of what you might think of 4e, I thought the indices in those books were good, and that 4e made ease of reference a real priority with their ability stat-blocks, and with monsters having all their abilities in their entries. By contrast, 5e is less user-friendly with regard to reference.

 

[Maxperson]

For me, I'd say it's a confluence of poor indices, the amount of cross-reference required

What?! You don't like to look up fireball and find "see magic," then look up magic and find, "see spells?"