D&D 5E The Official Poll! What THREE things do you like most about D&D 5th Edition?

[EzekielRaiden]

Backgrounds were lifted and expanded from 4e, which had tons of them as player options, and you could do exactly those things with 'em, too. You could even have multiple backgrounds, you just picked one to get the explicit mechanical benefits from.

Any 'soft'/RP benefits or fluff remained, such as...

Yeah, for all my 5e gripes (esp. what and how much it lifted from other eds), Backgrounds were absolutely influenced by 4e Backgrounds and Themes--all to the good. The fact that almost everyone who raves about the 5e version is absolutely convinced, not only that they're brand-new to 5e, but that 4e was "a roleplay unfriendly...mess," is extremely sad IMO. What's good for the goose was apparently -awful for the gander.

5e further expanded backgrounds into more character-defining detail, which, also, was something 4e had done but with a separate option, 'Themes' (and 2e, had done, before, with Kits), though those (both, in the case of some kits) went farther in letting you pull in higher level abilities, as well. 5e looks to be picking up on and going above and beyond that level of customization by re-introducing a 3.5 sub-system: Prestige Classes.

I dunno on that one. I don't think Prestige Classes are at all the same sort of thing, at least if the one playtest PrC is meant to be distinctly emblematic. 5e PrCs appear to be more like "you access the same thing you could always access, but in a sharply distinct way," rather than "you're still basically an X, but you have a greater breadth of customization." Maybe I'm splitting hairs, but I really do feel like Themes were something purely addative--a mechanical "sidecar," if you will--while PrCs are a mixture of addative and subtractive (since you're not advancing as a Sorcerer or Warlock or w/e, you're advancing as a Rune Scribe with distinct but related abilities).

 

[Onussen]

I'm surprised that Advantage/Disadvantage is so very popular --i t is a good mechanic though-- and the magic system not so popular. This 5e wizard class is so much nicer to play than the old Vancian style Magic-User. IMHO.

The notion of "Old School feel"? 5e seems like what 2e should have been, or at least close to it. I never played 3.Xe or 4e, so this talk of old school is a bit foreign to me.

 

[Mercule]

The notion of "Old School feel"? 5e seems like what 2e should have been, or at least close to it. I never played 3.Xe or 4e, so this talk of old school is a bit foreign to me.

2E was a reasonable progression from 1E (well, besides introducing Rangers w/ TWF). It gave some good evolutionary things, like making non-weapon proficiencies core -- even though the 2E mechanics for them sucked, it was a necessary step. Also, adding in the idea of domains/spheres for clerics.

I'd say 5E is what 3E should have been. I don't think we could have gotten to 5E without 3E, but it rolled back almost as much to AD&D as it carried forward from 3E. 4E is a completely different beast that I don't feel (emphasis on IMO) is really "D&D"; it made too many sacred burgers and any influence it had on 5E is almost as watered down as, say, the influence Fate aspects and fate points may have had on Inspiration and traits.

Tangentially, based on many other conversations since I first voted, that I should have selected "magic system", probably over "old school 'feel'". The "old school" that I feel is "DM empowerment", for which I also voted. The way Wizards and Clerics now prepare spells is such a simple change, but it takes them from "never play because I hate Jack Vance (misplaced rage, I know)" to "I'd happily play one". That's a big deal and solves one of my long-term issues with the game.

 

[Parmandur]

Yeah, for all my 5e gripes (esp. what and how much it lifted from other eds), Backgrounds were absolutely influenced by 4e Backgrounds and Themes--all to the good. The fact that almost everyone who raves about the 5e version is absolutely convinced, not only that they're brand-new to 5e, but that 4e was "a roleplay unfriendly...mess," is extremely sad IMO. What's good for the goose was apparently -awful for the gander.







I dunno on that one. I don't think Prestige Classes are at all the same sort of thing, at least if the one playtest PrC is meant to be distinctly emblematic. 5e PrCs appear to be more like "you access the same thing you could always access, but in a sharply distinct way," rather than "you're still basically an X, but you have a greater breadth of customization." Maybe I'm splitting hairs, but I really do feel like Themes were something purely addative--a mechanical "sidecar," if you will--while PrCs are a mixture of addative and subtractive (since you're not advancing as a Sorcerer or Warlock or w/e, you're advancing as a Rune Scribe with distinct but related abilities).

To be fair, Themes as far as I can tell look like they were added after most people had tuned out from 4E? Anything past the Core launch and the Forgotten Realms release, basically...

Themes seem really cool, not sure why those didn't make it through the play test? Balance issues?

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

I wish "simplicity/light rules" wasn't on this list, because it's kindof a catchall for many smaller pieces, and it would be far more interesting too see which simplifications people are most keen on.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Yeah, for all my 5e gripes (esp. what and how much it lifted from other eds), Backgrounds were absolutely influenced by 4e Backgrounds and Themes--all to the good. The fact that almost everyone who raves about the 5e version is absolutely convinced, not only that they're brand-new to 5e, but that 4e was "a roleplay unfriendly...mess," is extremely sad IMO.

"Truth is the first casualty of war," even a war as petty and metaphorical as the edition war.

I dunno on that one. I don't think Prestige Classes are at all the same sort of thing, at least if the one playtest PrC is meant to be distinctly emblematic. 5e PrCs appear to be more like "you access the same thing you could always access, but in a sharply distinct way," rather than "you're still basically an X, but you have a greater breadth of customization." Maybe I'm splitting hairs, but I really do feel like Themes were something purely addative--a mechanical "sidecar," if you will--while PrCs are a mixture of addative and subtractive (since you're not advancing as a Sorcerer or Warlock or w/e, you're advancing as a Rune Scribe with distinct but related abilities).

Kits in 2e, PrCs/templates in 3e, and Backgrounds/Themes in 4e, were all further levels of character customization as are Backgrounds in 5e, and, hopefully as will be PrCs when done in 5e. Yes, PrCs, since they replace levels in some full class under the 3e-style MCing mechanic, so both take and give, but that just allows for that much more customization, if there's some class-level that doesn't fit your build.

To be fair, Themes as far as I can tell look like they were added after most people had tuned out from 4E?

In Dark Sun, 2 years in.

Anything past the Core launch and the Forgotten Realms release, basically...

Which included Backgrounds. Though, clearly, there were folks who 'tuned out' even before then.

Themes seem really cool, not sure why those didn't make it through the play test? Balance issues?

Themes were a bit of a balance concern in 4e, which had very tight, systematic, balance, but ultimately they proved to be just fine. In 5e that would be a non-issue. 5e Backgrounds are very much like 4e Backgrounds, but also a bit like Themes and some 5e Sub-Classes are also a bit like class-specific Themes, while PrCs are similar from a different angle, that doesn't overlap with Backgrounds so much. Even so I could see Themes making it in at some point as a sort of 'Advanced Background,' that grants some goodies at higher level.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

To be fair, Themes as far as I can tell look like they were added after most people had tuned out from 4E? Anything past the Core launch and the Forgotten Realms release, basically...

Well, Themes were originally added with the Dark Sun release, which was just over 2 years after launch. Still relatively early in the edition's life, IMO, but perhaps you're right. Still sad and frustrating to see people talk about the terrible, horrible, no good, very bad 4e...and then praise stuff in 5e that legitimately, distinctly DOES derive from 4e.

Themes seem really cool, not sure why those didn't make it through the play test? Balance issues?

Do you mean 4e-style Themes in 5e? I don't think they ever had something like that. The closest thing was Specialties, which (initially) sounded relatively open-ended, but eventually proved to be just pre-selected feat packages; they were more trouble than they were worth, so they got dropped. Or were you thinking of something else?

Also...is it just me, or is there something....wrong with the poll? I know it's multiple-choice and all, but Advantage/Disadvantage has more votes than there are voters. How is that even possible?

 

[Tony Vargas]

Do you mean 4e-style Themes in 5e? I don't think they ever had something like that. The closest thing was Specialties, which (initially) sounded relatively open-ended, but eventually proved to be just pre-selected feat packages; they were more trouble than they were worth, so they got dropped.

I think sub-classes are rather like class-specific themes. People have brought up the idea of class-agnostic sub-classes, but that doesn't really work because sub-classes aren't all taken at the same level and don't all have the same progressions, and don't represent the same fraction of the total character from one class to the next, you can't just pop them in and out like interchangeable modules. PrCs, I think, are the best hope for after-1st-level-customization, linked to the setting, along those lines. Maybe PrCs that require a specific Background. Take the Background, take the associated PrC appropriate to your class/build, and you have the equivalent of a Theme.

Also...is it just me, or is there something....wrong with the poll? I know it's multiple-choice and all, but Advantage/Disadvantage has more votes than there are voters. How is that even possible?

(Note that the total # of voters updates periodically, while the actual votes update in real-time, so the total # can fall behind occasionally).

 

[Herobizkit]

To be fair, d20 Modern did Backgrounds before 4e (called Occupations) and in the same style that 5e does them. It was an excellent way to get skills and bonus proficiencies outside of what your class(es) gave you.

 

[Morrus]

To be fair, d20 Modern did Backgrounds before 4e (called Occupations) and in the same style that 5e does them. It was an excellent way to get skills and bonus proficiencies outside of what your class(es) gave you.

2E Kits were pretty much backgrounds.