NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="brehobit" data-source="post: 6584749" data-attributes="member: 12032">On the whole, I am very happy with 5e.  While I've only played a bit, it seems to be a great system.  Thus far I like it better than any other edition and, while there are other RPGs that cover different ground, I think it's my favorite RPG (previously either 3.5e, Hero, or maybe True20).Things I really like:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Feels like D&D.  The classes, races and general play style all feel like D&D.  In many ways 4e (which I rather liked) did not.  And many other games, even d20 variants, really don't.  True20 is cool but not D&D etc.  </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Combat seems to go quickly.  This is huge coming from 3e and 4e.  It feels more like the pacing of 1e or 2e which is great.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Backgrounds.  Very nice idea and very nice implementation.  I like the "RPG" bonus as well as a bit of crunch (skills).  One of those ideas that are obvious in retrospect.</li> </ul>Things I have issues with:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Skills.  This is the big one.  I feel the bonus for being skilled is just too small, especially at first.  Sure, I'm "proficient in stealth" but I'm only 10% more likely to succeed than someone who isn't?  To me this really make backgrounds less fun than they could be because proficiency just doesn't matter much RAW.  Now of course the GM could fiat a lot of stuff (oh, you are prof. in cooking, sure, your food is generally just fine). I'd also like to see a way to become "expert" other than being a rogue or bard.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Flexibility.  (minor concern and I'm not sure it's really an issue) I'm a bit worried that after a bit a member of a specific sub-class will feel a lot like the next member of the specific subclass.  As taking stat bonuses is probably the way to go (rather than feats) it seems like feats will often come very late in the game.  Multi-classing may well address this nicely, but it _seems_ like a sub-optimal choice much of the time (especially for non-casters in this edition!)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Alt human is too strong.  Don't get me wrong, I think the alt human is cool.  But the other races are generally sub-optimal (elf monk and dwarven fighter might be on-par?) as far as I can tell.  In our current game we all (all!) independently choose to play an alt human.  The bonus feat is just too good (and flexible) to pass up.</li> </ul>I've also got doubts about class balance, but I'm interested in seeing how those play out--pure theorycraft doesn't mean much there--they are just too complex.  And I've not seen enough different classes in play.I think all of those are fixable (if they need fixing at all).  I'm tempted to just give a generic +2 additional bonus for proficiency and start everyone with a feat.  I think that would make the skills feel more useful and make the alt human less desirable.  Also would create greater variety in characters.  So...What do you like and dislike? What do you think of my issues and praises?</blockquote>

Verification