5E My biggest gripe with 5e design

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
Critical hits first appeared in 2E as an optional rule. The first option was as in 5E (double all dice, add all bonuses once), and the second was rolling additional attack rolls on each successive 20.

Personally, I've gone back and forth on the whole crtical hit thing, as in my thread about using exploding dice instead. I like the idea of a hit becoming "more", but like @Sacrosanct's thread, I like the idea of more than just doing more hp damage.
I'm pretty certain that I saw them appear in a Dragon Magazine during 1e. Just looked it up, they appeared in Dragon #39 in an article entitled Good Hits and Bad Misses.
 

dnd4vr

Hero
I'm pretty certain that I saw them appear in a Dragon Magazine during 1e. Just looked it up, they appeared in Dragon #39 in an article entitled Good Hits and Bad Misses.
Not surprising they showed up in Dragon, that's probably how they made it into 2E as optional.
 

Jd Smith1

Explorer
My two gripes with 5e are 1) the death issue; I feel like it is too easy for PCs to stay alive. I would prefer that when you hit 0 hit points, you have X rounds and then you're dead. As it is, the odds are that you are going to stabilize without help.

2) The armor system. I preferred RM's concept that the heavier the armor, the easier you were to hit, but the less damage you did, while lightly armored subjects were harder to hit (able to dodge, duck, etc) but took more damage. Or just soak damage based on type.

While I feel that with the rest system they have done a brilliant job with dungeon crawl resource management, but I am less thrilled with it for a single encounter while traveling, for example. I have no idea how to fix it, so I'm not counting that as a major issue. I have just made most travelling encounters as night attacks so I catch them out of armor, and really ramped up the danger level because I know they're going to face the full spell and special ability arsenal of the party. Hit hard and fast because they can only deploy their best at a specific pace. It's not perfect, but it works.
 

dnd4vr

Hero
My two gripes with 5e are 1) the death issue; I feel like it is too easy for PCs to stay alive. I would prefer that when you hit 0 hit points, you have X rounds and then you're dead. As it is, the odds are that you are going to stabilize without help.

2) The armor system. I preferred RM's concept that the heavier the armor, the easier you were to hit, but the less damage you did, while lightly armored subjects were harder to hit (able to dodge, duck, etc) but took more damage. Or just soak damage based on type.

While I feel that with the rest system they have done a brilliant job with dungeon crawl resource management, but I am less thrilled with it for a single encounter while traveling, for example. I have no idea how to fix it, so I'm not counting that as a major issue. I have just made most travelling encounters as night attacks so I catch them out of armor, and really ramped up the danger level because I know they're going to face the full spell and special ability arsenal of the party. Hit hard and fast because they can only deploy their best at a specific pace. It's not perfect, but it works.
Yep, too easy for PCs in general once you reach 5th level IMO. A couple suggestions for fixes if you still have the same issues and haven't fixed them yourself:

1. Make it so when you are at 0 hp, they suffer a level of exhaustion and must finish a short rest before they can take any actions other than moving (no dodge, no dash, no disengage, etc.). They can only act normally if they are restored to at least half their maximum HP, requiring powerful magic or multiple spells generally. Even if restored, they still have the lingering effect of exhaustion to deal with.

2. Armors provide half their AC bonus to AC (round up) and the other half (round down) as damage reduction. Shields still are +2 AC. So, a Breastplate (AC 15) would become AC 13 with 2 DR. Leather armor would be full AC 11, but with max DEX is AC 16, max with Breastplate would be AC 15.

It might make more sense to you, maybe not.

Finally, changing short rests to 8 hours and long rests to 24 hours or even 24-hour short rests and 1-week long rests. Since overland encounters tend to happen once every couple days or so, the longer long rest reduces spell overload on every encounter. It changes the dynamic in dungeon crawls, but for the better IMO.

If you find it too limiting, you can even change some class features to refresh on a short rest instead of long, but keep spellcasting on long rests.
 

Arnwolf666

Adventurer
My two gripes with 5e are 1) the death issue; I feel like it is too easy for PCs to stay alive. I would prefer that when you hit 0 hit points, you have X rounds and then you're dead. As it is, the odds are that you are going to stabilize without help.

2) The armor system. I preferred RM's concept that the heavier the armor, the easier you were to hit, but the less damage you did, while lightly armored subjects were harder to hit (able to dodge, duck, etc) but took more damage. Or just soak damage based on type.

While I feel that with the rest system they have done a brilliant job with dungeon crawl resource management, but I am less thrilled with it for a single encounter while traveling, for example. I have no idea how to fix it, so I'm not counting that as a major issue. I have just made most travelling encounters as night attacks so I catch them out of armor, and really ramped up the danger level because I know they're going to face the full spell and special ability arsenal of the party. Hit hard and fast because they can only deploy their best at a specific pace. It's not perfect, but it works.
I disagree about that armor. The heavier armor makes it harder for you to be hit. They are more likely to hit the armor than you. That’s my opinion anyway.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
I disagree about that armor. The heavier armor makes it harder for you to be hit. They are more likely to hit the armor than you. That’s my opinion anyway.
For games other than D&D, sure. In D&D, though, a hit doesn't equate to doing actual physical damage. Hit points are abstract and a hit to armor is sufficient to be a hit that does damage.
 

Arnwolf666

Adventurer
For games other than D&D, sure. In D&D, though, a hit doesn't equate to doing actual physical damage. Hit points are abstract and a hit to armor is sufficient to be a hit that does damage.
I don’t view the abstraction necessarily that way all the time.
 

Oofta

Title? I don't need no stinkin' title.
I like the RAW
I agree. Armor as DR may make sense from a certain perspective, but it messes with the math of the game. A monster that has only a single massive [attack] suddenly has a big advantage over a monster that does multiple attacks for smaller damage even if they are the same CR. Some monsters become completely ineffective against PCs with a good AC.

I'm sure there are better ways of modeling armor, but to be "realistic" would require a computer because of the complex interplay of attack, damage and HP. No thanks.
 
Last edited:

jayoungr

Adventurer
I feel like it is too easy for PCs to stay alive. I would prefer that when you hit 0 hit points, you have X rounds and then you're dead.
Try having the monsters continue to target PCs after they go down. Every hit on a PC who's at 0 is an auto-fail.

As it is, the odds are that you are going to stabilize without help.
I've never studied statistics, but aren't the odds exactly 50-50?
 

Oofta

Title? I don't need no stinkin' title.
Try having the monsters continue to target PCs after they go down. Every hit on a PC who's at 0 is an auto-fail.
In addition if the attack is from an adjacent creature it's automatically a critical. If that doesn't kill the PC outright, it's 2 failed death saves.

So yes, it takes a bit of effort but if you really want to kill off PCs it's not that hard.
 
I've never studied statistics, but aren't the odds exactly 50-50?
10 or better so actually 55% chance on each roll. And you usually get 3. So de facto (and yes this is a simplification) it's more like a 9-10% chance to not stabilise over those three checks. Obviously a lot can interfere with this in both directions. Monsters continuing to attack a downed PC will typically kill them the next round in my experience.
 

NotAYakk

Adventurer
No, because you succeed on a 10, which means you have a 55% chance per roll of making the death save. Also, the 1 counting as two fails and the 20 auto-stabilize will mess with it further.
Build a graph like this:

FAIL
LIVEDIELIVEDIELIVEDIE
0​
0​
1​
1​
2​
2​
0​
0.181375​
0.404875​
0.1425​
0.5825​
0.0875​
0.7875​
SUCC
1​
0.14​
0.265​
0.115​
0.435​
0.075​
0.675​
2​
0.0805​
0.1145​
0.07​
0.23​
0.05​
0.45​
LIVE means get up; DIE means die, remaining chance is stabilize. I filled the cells "outside" with 100% death chance at more than 2 failures, and 0% live/death chance in all other outside cells. Then wrote a formula for each cell in terms of the stuff right of it and stuff below it.
 

5ekyu

Adventurer
Ah, right. Well, I did say I never studied statistics!
:blush:

Still, monsters attacking will cancel that out pretty quickly.
Also, AoE attacks have good chances of catching down foes. Even tossing one dart from a MM. Though the better choice may be Chill Touch.

But, if you include adversaries you may invlude friendlies which takes it out of odds and to choices.
 

dnd4vr

Hero
Build a graph like this:

FAIL
LIVEDIELIVEDIELIVEDIE
0​
0​
1​
1​
2​
2​
0​
0.181375​
0.404875​
0.1425​
0.5825​
0.0875​
0.7875​
SUCC
1​
0.14​
0.265​
0.115​
0.435​
0.075​
0.675​
2​
0.0805​
0.1145​
0.07​
0.23​
0.05​
0.45​
LIVE means get up; DIE means die, remaining chance is stabilize. I filled the cells "outside" with 100% death chance at more than 2 failures, and 0% live/death chance in all other outside cells. Then wrote a formula for each cell in terms of the stuff right of it and stuff below it.
Why do all that if you don't give the final result of death saves? I don't know if your set-up will work or not, but for anyone who wants to know the percentages they are (close to what @Ruin Explorer said):

DEATH: 11.683375%
LIVE: 88.316625%

So, @jayoungr , unfortunately is is not even close to 50-50. :(
 

NotAYakk

Adventurer
Why do all that if you don't give the final result of death saves? I don't know if your set-up will work or not, but for anyone who wants to know the percentages they are (close to what @Ruin Explorer said):

DEATH: 11.683375%
LIVE: 88.316625%

So, @jayoungr , unfortunately is is not even close to 50-50. :(
I did? The 0,0 entry? At 0 0 you have a 40% chance of dieing if left alone, and an 18% chance of getting back up shortly, and a 42% chance of bring stable and getting up in hours.
 

Advertisement

Top