D&D 5E Sell me on 5th…

[bedir than]

Conversely, those 2750 stories will only end up being, like, 30 different stories. Because ultimately there's no difference. That's the whole point. That's the benefit and the problem of "Custom Lineage," for instance; it can cover everything, because it isn't really anything. And, clearly, plenty of people are cool with that. Two characters being pretty much indistinguishable mechanically, despite theoretically being very different stories, is no impediment.

However, given what the OP has said, I am disinclined to think they're such a person.

Poppycock

This is telling me that the dozens of characters and stories at my tables over the past decade have been exactly the same as each other and everyone else's .

Complete and utter crap

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Conversely, those 2750 stories will only end up being, like, 30 different stories. Because ultimately there's no difference. That's the whole point. That's the benefit and the problem of "Custom Lineage," for instance; it can cover everything, because it isn't really anything. And, clearly, plenty of people are cool with that. Two characters being pretty much indistinguishable mechanically, despite theoretically being very different stories, is no impediment.

However, given what the OP has said, I am disinclined to think they're such a person.

My experience is very different... despite having so many choices, people tend to play only the mechanically best ones after a while... or their favourite.
On the other hand, 2e had little room for real customization. A proficiency here and there, a class kit give or take, but in the end, more or less copies of each other. Despite that, all cahracters were different, because that game was played on the table, instead of choosing the right "build".

5e strikes a good balance. You don´t have to plan out your character too much. You can multiclass. You can´t really do wrong with choosing feats. If your 2750 characters are all the same, that is on you, not the game. And it has always been this way.

 

[Parmandur]

And, as always, all of the 4e PHBs are equally "core" books

Yes, but the PHB 1 is more equal than the others in that I actually read it.

At any rate, 5E has really run with the concept.

 

[Parmandur]

Others have covered it a bit, but just in general, having species, class and other modeling options that can produce PCs that vary significantly from the pre-2Ed editions.

While AD&D introduced some new classes & races, 2Ed took the first major steps with introducing kits, then vastly expanding race options with the softcovers. Then the Player’s Options books arrived…

And 3.X expanded upon that.

After more than 45 years in the hobby, I’ve played most of the stereotypical race/class combos from pre-2Ed that lingered on even afterwards. So when I sit down at a gaming table to start a new D&D campaign, I have those character concepts ready to go and can generally create one pretty quickly- I’ve even played some in 3.5 while I was still generating the character (I was late for the first session). But I’d much rather try something askance from the same old same old.

So being able to create and play things like a full caster in heavy armor, a “Paladin” with arcane spells, or a 2-headed bipedal fey dog-man engages my creativity at a different level. I invest more in the PC.

Feats do yelp with this quite a bit. A single 5E Feat us supposedly on the scale of three 3E Feats, and can significantly tweak s concept.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

My experience is very different... despite having so many choices, people tend to play only the mechanically best ones after a while... or their favourite.
On the other hand, 2e had little room for real customization. A proficiency here and there, a class kit give or take, but in the end, more or less copies of each other. Despite that, all cahracters were different, because that game was played on the table, instead of choosing the right "build".

5e strikes a good balance. You don´t have to plan out your character too much. You can multiclass. You can´t really do wrong with choosing feats. If your 2750 characters are all the same, that is on you, not the game. And it has always been this way.

I liked what you said about simpler earlier editions. We have very storied characters back then! Our expectations and wants have changed over time but we were creative with fewer rules.

All of that said I also played 3.0. It was fine if a bit fiddly. The prestige stuff left me very cold.

As to the OP…

I think 5e has walked the line capably. In its maturity it’s got a few subclasses I ask “just why?” In that they seem a bit superfluous. But as a player I won’t ever play 1/10th of options.

With very rare exception…and maybe it’s not true at all? You can play any of them and contribute to a party.

The number of built in subclass abilities you o me more than compensate for the glut of feats in 3.0…they along with feats mean you can make a huge variety of characters if that is your thing.

Or you can play a champion fighter if you want comparatively super simple.

I don’t personally get an old school feel but it’s not alien either. I am enjoying it and still just want to play any chance I get. I would say it’s my favorite edition for mechanics…though I am a 1e guy in terms of tone and fiction.

The downside…I don’t think you have to be so careful with resources. Healing up from a beating is easy with few consequences. On the whole it’s been fun. I lament no scheduled game for weeks…asside from me running a game for the kids over Christmas break!

It’s going to be a whacky bunch! A kenku crow person, a sentient fruit person (using rules for fairy and just changing appearance!) and a very naughty goblin!

It was the only way I could get one daughter interested so so be it! But the point for OP is that is a good example of party diversity.

I think the kenku might go warlock and focus on trickery which will be hilarious!

 

[kigmatzomat]

One of my last 2Ed PCs was a Minotaur F/MU from a charioteering plains tribe, visually based on the picture of the Hurloon Minotaur and playing of Native American legends of the Great White Buffalo.

OK, let me show you what different combos can result in thematically similar but mechanically different characters. Parenthesis indicate subclasses.

This could be a Fighter(Eldritch Knight), a Bard (Valor), Bard(Sword), a Wizard(Bladesinger) or maybe a Warlock(Hexblade).

All would get some armor &martial weapons, the ability to attack at least twice, and spellcasting.
Most can use shields, and Bard/Wizard/Warlock can get 9th level spells.

You could also do Fighter/caster to have access to two subclasses, possibly Fighter(RuneKnight)/Bard(Eloquence) which gives you a small number of elemental powers, a size-based buff, and the ability to rally troops or discourage enemies.

Barbarian(Ancestral Guardian) is an outside possibility as it can summon spirits of the ancestors in combat or use them for Clairvoyance/Augury on top of being buff-murder-person. Thematically appropriate, not sure how it fit the rest of the concept.

It could also be several of the Paladins (Ancients, Vengeance, Glory, etc) as paladins no longer have to be Sir Galahad. We have a party-paladin (Oath of Ancients) who is known for his revels and bachanalias.

Late stage 3.X PCs included:
1) a polearm-wielding githzerai monk who could grow a size class. Mechanically centered on maximizing opportunity attacks, controlling movement on the battlefield. (Also played a human versions of same in a convention game.)

5e keeps the feats of 3e so there are a number of "stand still" feats. You could got for the generic Great Weapon Master/Sentinel or the dedicated Polearm Master. Or layer them up for total comedy.

Fighter(Battlemaster) has a number of "fall down/lose your weapon/I can take an AoO just because/I can let a PC take an AoO/I can boost my attacks/debuff their attack" stunts.

All Monks have stunning blow still. Monk (OpenHand) gets push/knockdown plus a limited "you can't attack me". Monk(Astral Self) gets ghostly arms with extended reach so keep the "bigness" flavor. And it can provide haste-ish effects of bonus AC and extra attacks.

Again in oddball territory, Barbarian(Beast) might work. You can get a tail with reach that can also do a parry and it can cause a target to go feral and use its reaction (AoO) to attack a creature of your choice.

Mix with Monk(Astral) and maybe all the ghost limbs are tails for flavor.

There is an enlarging Barbarian(Path of Giants) in the guide to giants that could also fit and it can go to size Huge and make weapons do elemental damage. Mix with Fighter(Battlemaster) or Monk(...) for flavor.

Hope this provides examples of what the system could do.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Paladin with arcabe spels doesn't really exist. An arcane "paladin" it either a hexblade warlock or multiclass Paladin/Sorcerer. Hexblades also a popular dip eg hexblade 1/Sorcerer XYZ.

There wasn’t in 3.5, either. My PC was a multiclass kludge:

1) Marshal grants the use of Marshal & Draconic Auras, plus all Knowledge skills as class skills.

2) Duskblade and Battle Sorcerer6 w/Stalwart Sorcerer ACF give you a bunch of arcane spells you can cast in armor. Paired with Celestial Sorcerer lance, they supply a large number of spell slots for a reliable ranged “zap” for Evil critters- a substitute for Turning Undead.

3) The combined skill points for maxing out KS paired with Knowledge Devotion Feat creates a reliable and broad based Att/Dam modifier for huge swaths of critters. Think Smite/Favored Enemy: Everybody.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Side question about

OK, let me show you what different combos can result in thematically similar but mechanically different characters. Parenthesis indicate subclasses.

Thanks. That was helpful.

Q: in 2Ed & 3.X, Minotaurs were size L, so did (and received) extra damage based on size. 4Ed did away with that. How does 5Ed handle PC species of large size, if any?

 

[bedir than]

Side question about

Thanks. That was helpful.

Q: in 2Ed & 3.X, Minotaurs were size L, so did (and received) extra damage based on size. 4Ed did away with that. How does 5Ed handle PC species of large size, if any?

There are no official size L PCs. Several of the formerly L races have an ability that grants them greater carrying capacity. Bugbears get extra reach

 

[abirdcall]

If 3.5 is your favourite you probably won't like 5e.

This is doubly true when your measurement is what character options are available.

I would stick with 3e.

Give 5e a try if you want a different experience of course, but comparing it to 3e won't be fun.

It took a long time for the 3e players at my table to grasp the game because the underlying game is so different while using similar terminology.