D&D General Stuff 5E Did Right

[Micah Sweet]

So what's stopping you from using those rules? Or just use Matt Collville's version?

Nothing. I use the rules I like. So should everyone else. My preference is for Level Up's version over Matt Collville's though. Most of his work is too influenced by 4e's design philosophy for my taste.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Is there a point to anything you've posted on this thread? You don't like 5E. We get it. You've told us over and over again.

and

Its every. Single. Thread.

He's the vegetarian wandering around the restaurant moaning about how other people's steaks are cooked.

Mod Note:

Other posters are just as free to express their opinions as you are yours. If you begin to find a particular person’s oft-stated positions boring, repetitive, grating or otherwise irritating, DO tune them out, use your account’s ignore list, or otherwise disengage from them.

DON’T post in the thread about your history of personal interactions with them.

 

[kigmatzomat]

Still not stronghold based and it was kinda opt in.

2E kinda stripped it out. Its soneting I noticed back in the day with references to ear machine iirc in the RC or 1E DMG vs 2E dmg (we had no 1E phb).

It was a mix of opt in and controlled by the DM. Most of the rules were in the DMG, and probably for good reason. it's not something all players or DMs want to deal with. Over 15 years of 1e and 2e gaming, I had never been in a game with strongholds or followers. Well, that might be a fib. I think a 1e game started with our castle being burned down and the followers turned to an undead horde, although 30-odd years later, I could be wrong and we weren't the lords of the damsel castle.

3e at least released SBG fairly early in the supplement cycle, which wasn't totally horrible. Plus the feat did include cohorts, so there was some direct mechanical boost that could entice less RP-centric people to dip their toes in the waters. "Hey Ranger, want a cool pet that gets almost as many hit dice as you? Great, it comes with 15 adoring ranger-scouts and their families! Enjoy!"

4e....wasn't a bad game but it didn't taste like d&d to me. No clue about that.

5e is, as I said earlier, overly simplified for my tastes. We use the Kobold Press Tome of Heroes plus the d20 Magical Medieval Society:Western Europe to add in those elements to our game.

 

[Zardnaar]

It was a mix of opt in and controlled by the DM. Most of the rules were in the DMG, and probably for good reason. it's not something all players or DMs want to deal with. Over 15 years of 1e and 2e gaming, I had never been in a game with strongholds or followers. Well, that might be a fib. I think a 1e game started with our castle being burned down and the followers turned to an undead horde, although 30-odd years later, I could be wrong and we weren't the lords of the damsel castle.

3e at least released SBG fairly early in the supplement cycle, which wasn't totally horrible. Plus the feat did include cohorts, so there was some direct mechanical boost that could entice less RP-centric people to dip their toes in the waters. "Hey Ranger, want a cool pet that gets almost as many hit dice as you? Great, it comes with 15 adoring ranger-scouts and their families! Enjoy!"

4e....wasn't a bad game but it didn't taste like d&d to me. No clue about that.

5e is, as I said earlier, overly simplified for my tastes. We use the Kobold Press Tome of Heroes plus the d20 Magical Medieval Society:Western Europe to add in those elements to our game.

I kinda like stronghold rules. Occasionally and everyone needs to be keen.

 

[THEMNGMNT]

I totally agree with Zard's original post. I've played over 250 games of 5E (mostly as a DM) including a 1-20 level campaign. While there were challenges along the way, it worked. It just worked. It's my favorite edition of the game. And browsing my physical copy of the 2024 edition, it's now even better. Not perfect -- but better.

 

[GrimCo]

No game is perfect. And no game can please anyone. Game that is great for one group is bad for the other. What they did right with 5e is they made game that's good enough for majority of people. They made everybody's second favorite game.

I heard numerous times reason for playing 5e was because it's system whole group liked well enough.

 

[niklinna]

No game is perfect. And no game can please anyone. Game that is great for one group is bad for the other. What they did right with 5e is they made game that's good enough for majority of people. They made everybody's second favorite game.

I heard numerous times reason for playing 5e was because it's system whole group liked well enough.

It's not my second favorite game, not by a long shot. So I guess, manybody's second favorite game.

 

[CleverNickName]

I like:

• the Advantage/Disadvantage mechanic
• the action economy
• the d20 mechanic
• the customization and emphasis on creativity (instead of rules rigor)

(off-topic) I dislike:

• healing
• resting
• exhaustion

 

[Li Shenron]

3. Opt in complexity. Yes the champion might not be to exciting and we probably love our feats. A feats probably better than an ASI but ASI is still good in your prime stat early on. The champion might not be for you play something else.

This was always a missed opportunity. The only character they ever designed was the Champion. It should not have been that difficult to have at least also a low-complexity Wizard, Cleric and Rogue. OTOH feats being optional is definitely a great idea.

Good points on the rest, but you missed my favourite innovation of 5e: the proficiency bonus, also known as "one bonus to rule them all".

 

[Zardnaar]

This was always a missed opportunity. The only character they ever designed was the Champion. It should not have been that difficult to have at least also a low-complexity Wizard, Cleric and Rogue. OTOH feats being optional is definitely a great idea.

Good points on the rest, but you missed my favourite innovation of 5e: the proficiency bonus, also known as "one bonus to rule them all".

Didn't forget that but 4E did the same thing. It's not unique to 5E.