D&D 5E Things 5E has taught you about your playstyle.

[Charles Wright]

So your players need to chill out a bit and enjoy the game.

 

[DaveDash]

So your players need to chill out a bit and enjoy the game.

Funny though, because three different youtube channels I've watched of 5e (one of them quite popular) they have exactly the same issue. Arguments over stealth rules, arguments over sneak attack, arguments what spells can be twinned, and so forth and so forth. Same channels run 4e and pathfinder - no issue.

A lot of this is also because 5e is new, so DM's don't have that established authority of "I've been DMing for x number of years now". Players feel they're just as experienced as the DMs and can challenge them, and more players are DM's themselves so everyone has their own idea of how the game should be ran.

But the vague ruleset does leave itself open for arguments. Pathfinder? Not an issue because there is 600 pages of rules alone in the players guide, so there is a very clear contract of how the game should be played. 5e? Not so much.

 

[exile]

I've played a few sessions of a home 5e game. We started with HotDQ, but are about to make new characters and abandon it for a setting and campaign of the DM's own design.

The main thing I have learned about my playstyle-- I don't have to have a grid style tactical map; but if one is in use, I like for it to be used appropriately. I have to know which square(s) a mini is occupying.

 

[Rhenny]

As a player I've learned that when I play a 5e fighter, I focus much more on roleplaying my character and I enjoy it much more than I have enjoyed playing fighters in past editions.

As a DM, 5e is making me see how balancing combat, exploration and interaction is easier and having the balance in my sessions, is making my games more interesting. I'm also realizing that I'm a ham and I enjoy roleplaying npcs or monsters that the pcs encounter. 5e is making it easier to indulge in rp.

 

[SirAntoine]

Great thread.

 

[ranger69]

To me the big thing with 5E is that the books are guidelines, with some of the guidelines being firmer than others. The rules are the DM and the consent of the players. One thing that helps to reign in players who want very liberal rulings on their characters powers is to say fine, but remember NPc's will be able to do that also. It often makes them reconsider. It also often causes other players to ask the player in question to reconsider.
I agree with Neechen that this version is creating more role-playing and less hacknslash.

 

[Uchawi]

We had rules arguments with AD&D moving forward, so I don't think 5E is different in that regards. However, in reference to play style from a mechanical perspective, 5E has shown my preference for a game that is more complex, and/or offers more choices. 5E is too basic to meet that need. It also shows my dislike for multiple sub-systems and unclear rules. And once again every edition of D&D has issues with rules. But I do not think the concept of natural language, or placing a lot of emphasis on the DM to interpret rules is a design feature. The DM always had the authority to make rules interpretations.

 

[SirAntoine]

To me the big thing with 5E is that the books are guidelines, with some of the guidelines being firmer than others. The rules are the DM and the consent of the players. One thing that helps to reign in players who want very liberal rulings on their characters powers is to say fine, but remember NPc's will be able to do that also. It often makes them reconsider. It also often causes other players to ask the player in question to reconsider.
I agree with Neechen that this version is creating more role-playing and less hacknslash.

Nice.

 

[Minigiant]

5e taught me that leaving open spaces in the rules and no massive structure for them to pick up, we realized how mean I.. err... a DM... can be whe n he has to make stuff up.

"Sandstorm... ummm sandstorm... diamond sandstorm.... the sand is diamonds... and a tornado. Diamond Sandnado.

Who's not wearing magic or adamantine armor which is appropriate for hot climates?"

 

[Hussar]

Interesting thread. I'm not sure what I've learned quite yet. I know I'm enjoying the heck out of the system. I guess I've learned that I don't mind letting go of a lot of the tactical complexity of 4e as long as I get some degree (a bit more than 3e, IMO - movement is still pretty important) of complexity at the tactical level. Absolutely loving the speed of play, that's for sure.

Something that did occur to me was that the flaw I took for my current character - he believes he has a "destiny" - is essentially the same flaw I've taken for a LOT of characters over the years. I really, really need to break that rut.