D&D 3E/3.5 Thoughts of a 3E/4E powergamer on starting to play 5E

[thecasualoblivion]

I think it's hard to deny, even from us who really enjoy 5e, that "tactical variety" isn't anywhere near as rich as it was in 4e, or in man other games. And that's a bummer for people who really like playing the tactical game.

But is it possible to have a game be tactically rich *and* have combat be resolved as quickly as it is in 5e? Because I don't want to spend my whole gaming sessions resolving combats. I don't play D&D to scratch a tactical miniatures itch, I play it to to scratch a storytelling itch, and too much time spent on combat gets in the way of that.

One of my favorite games is The One Ring, and it has a tiny fraction of the character and combat options that even 5e has. And it's a great game. Combat plays a smaller role than in most RPGs, and when it happens it's resolved pretty quickly and easily, and completely in TotM (there's no need for a grid and miniatures at all). The point being that 5e is actually kinda in the middle, at least from my experience.

And I don't mean to put down the really rich tactical game; that's another valid kind of gaming and I understand that some people really like. I'm just sayin' that there IS a trade-off. Making that part of the tent "more inclusive" does in fact come at a cost.

This begs the question if 5E wasn't an overreaction like some earlier editions were, or whether 5E couldn't have been more flexible or customizable in this regard.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

The question I would have is why you feel it neccessary to sacrifice offense for that? A Warlock can have good offense from just Agonizing Blast and Hex, and you could focus everything else on scouting and still hit fairly hard.

Were you under the impression that warlocks can have it all? They are a class of hard choices and limited resources.

If I were to take Agonizing Blast, which invocation should I ditch? Devil's Sight? Mask of Many Faces? Or Book of Ancient Secrets? Funny how the choice isn't so easy when it's an actual choice...

BTW, I do have hex. But I don't generally have the option to have it up all the time. I realize whiteroom theory crafting assumes such, but I've found that's not nearly the case at the table.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[thecasualoblivion]

That's an odd observation, given that the impression I've gotten, from your various posts in this thread, is that you consider your preferred playstyle "real roleplaying". So much so that you bragged that other players, once they see your awesome character building skills, often want to convert to your playstyle and ask you for help making their characters as cool as yours. <shrug>

I wasn't referring to myself with the "real roleplayer" comment. I have stated that I don't feel that kicking ass in combat doesn't make me any less of a roleplayer in my opinion, but I said so in posts other than the one you quoted.

I'm not sure what helping other people optimize characters has anything to do with the discussion at hand. It's not about bragging, other people often are new, inexperienced, or lack my level of system mastery and enthusiasm for it. They ask for my help because they aren't specifically choosing to be unoptimized, like many in this thread.

 

[Ristamar]

EDIT: Double post.

2nd EDIT: Oops, apparently not. Lost in the æther now...

 

[Imaro]

That's a hard thing to accomplish with monsters who are nothing more than bags of hp.

I find this criticism of 5e to be vastly overstated. On top of that nothing precludes a DM from creating interesting "win" conditions, terrain, traps, obstacles, etc. into a combat in 5e.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

It's not about bragging... my level of system mastery...

Are you sure?

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[thecasualoblivion]

So in the home game I've been running for going on a year now, one of my players is a self-described powergamer. A few months ago he confessed, with tongue partially but not entirely in cheek, that in most games before this one he felt his biggest accomplishment would be if he could make the DM cry - i.e., come up with some loopholing combo of powers that could exploit RAW to effectively work as a cheat code and do an end-run around the carefully crafted obstacles of the scenario.

I am perfectly okay with the idea that 5e does not especially support this style of play. It doesn't need to be a tent that friggin' big.

In our game, this guy is a delight to play with - he's proactive, he does things that forward the plot, he often makes choices that are interesting instead of "optimal." His style balances well with a group that has varying levels of time and experience in the hobby and want diverse things out of the game. I think I can take some credit for this, because I invest a lot of time and care in the game, I'm not an adversarial DM, and I want everyone to have the kind of fun they're looking for as best as I can provide it - he wants to kick a lot of ass, and I'm happy to give him lots of opportunities to use his powers to be awesome doing it. But the system helps, simply by not being fiddly in ways that make it easy or tempting to rules-lawyer. It's set up to be a conversation between the players and the DM, and that suits our collective style well, even though it means having to find the sweet spot among a number of different player goals.

(Which, by the by, is why, having seen this diversity in action, I cast a very serious side-eye on assertions that "everyone power-games" and "everyone optimizes." Yes, if you dim the lights and squint, you can sort of say that those words include most of the things players do, but whether it's intended to or not, saying these things feels like a gotcha-game rhetorical flourish, an attempt to say, "Actually, you agree with me, if you'd only admit it." Which is kinda not cool on its face, really, but also not helpful in that it doesn't actually illuminate the things that are being discussed - so you can dilute the meaning of optimize so that it covers the whole universe of player choices, but doing so sheds no light on what we actually point to when we talk about "optimization" or "power-gaming," which really truly are definitely not things everyone does. Anyway.)

So this probably isn't much consolation to folks for whom previous editions with more robust build choices hit their fun buttons more thoroughly than this one, even if your definition of "powergamer" isn't "rules-lawyer who enjoys playing trump cards at the DM." It's true! 5e probably doesn't support your playstyle as well as it does others. Sorry. So it goes.

The question, then - which the OP can feel is directed specifically at him if he likes, or not - is what does that mean for you? What do you want out of this thread? Is this a problem you want to find some solution for? If so, you're going to have to give in on one side or the other of this, I hate to say. Either accept that you are not the audience for this edition and don't play it, or find a way to have fun playing in a way that isn't your preferred style. Your tastes and druthers aren't going to change, probably - which is fine! Your playing style is a perfectly legit approach to this hobby! - but neither is 5e. Alternatively, do you just want a place to bitch about the disparity here? Also cool, bitch away. Only maybe be clear that what you want is a space to say, "Goldurnit, this sure dissatisfies me," so your fellow posters will quit trying to look at it as a problem to solve. Because, fifty pages into this discussion, there's been an awful lot of heat, but precious little light, and maybe it would help to define just what it is you're looking for here.

I started this thread to talk about my preparing to play a system that doesn't on the surface fit me very well, as well as my observations of and solutions to that.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

Anecdote. I run games for the kids* occasionally to introduce them to D&D. Long enough to get them excited to buy their own books and run their own games.

And you can't beat their enthusiasm. One thing I keep seeing is that they don't care about DPR (or RPing), they only care about the fun. They decide on what they want to be, and they make it happen; and it doesn't matter much if it's optimized, or (um) really that sensical. Just cool to them. But at the same time, the games are always surprising because they come up with new and inventive ways to deal with situations that I could never have imagined. Spells cast in a way I never would have dreamed of casting. Very rarely do combats end up as a "bag of HPs." So I think it goes to expectations.

That said, and I've related this before, it's amazing how much we know that we're not aware of. I remember one of the most memorable encounters they had was with a troll because *it never occurred to them that fire might be useful.*

Now, some of those kids will be DMs. Some will be players. Some might never play again.** Some will enjoy system mastery and optimization, and some will enjoy roleplaying. Some will enjoy both. There's no wrong way to play, so long as they are having fun.


*I really mean kids. Not being euphemistic.

**I hope not!

On an anecdotal basis, in my experience those kids you describe tend to start caring about high DPR after seeing it in play.