Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Thoughts of a 3E/4E powergamer on starting to play 5E
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Sunseeker" data-source="post: 6857956"><p>As someone who played mostly in 4E and 3.X; I tend to agree with your reviews. I like the edition for its overall simplicity, but I find myself frustrated by many of the same things you do.</p><p></p><p>1: I would go as far as to say it's not just randomness, but a level of <em>unreliability</em>. It's not so much that things are unpredictable, after a couple hits it becomes fairly easy to predict the outcome of any given action, but any given action seems to have largely the same chance of success as a coin flip. Even classes who should be reliably good at something, such as Fighters, seem to have little control over their ability to hit on a regular basis. </p><p></p><p>2: What I've tended to find is that there's a "deadzone" of AC between 16 and 20-21 where there's no point in having an AC within that range. If your AC is greater than 16, but less than 20, you are either best served by "going tank" and getting to the 20+ range, or "going glass cannon" and going for 16 or less AC in exchange for higher output. It seems like monsters can reliably hit between 15 and 18 AC on a regular basis which is a minimum 10 on your average monster with a +3-4 modifier and a +1-2 bonus, which once again, is a 50/50 chance to hit, might as well flip a coin (after writing this, I may try it in my next session). Defenders ARE fragile, unless as noted above, you can reach into that 20+ AC range (which is difficult at low levels, but I guess that's the point). Once you hit 22AC (Plate+Shield+two defense boosts) and if you're able to bump that up to 24, you are almost unhittable except by monstrously powerful creatures (things with like, a +17 to hit). </p><p></p><p>3: I think the biggest downside to defenders now is that they lack the ability to defend. Sure, they can take a hit. But in order to actually <strong>defend</strong> they need to put in significant feat investment (typically, at least two, Shield Master and the Heavy Armor DR/3 feat), in a game without feats (as a I feel many older gamers are attempting to play) this makes defenders an even WORSE investment. I loved 4E's defenders. Simple and effective. 5E does not have a simple and effective defender.</p><p></p><p>4: Currently playing a support character and I'll say this. It's not so much taking one for the team, but it's either you are FULL support, or you are not support at all. There's no reasonable middle ground. And much like older editions, it feels like support is back to "I shield him." or "Gain 2d8+5 HP". It's not really a <em>role</em> so much as a game function you're performing, this has been true of many past editions of the "support/healer" role. It's also true of many other games.</p><p></p><p>5: I think this harkens back to the randomness. There is indeed a much higher reliance on the dice to decide your fate in this edition, which makes any potential builds, as the word I used before <strong>unreliable</strong>. The level of RNG makes it difficult to ensure a specific outcome, with the ability to ensure a specific outcome taken out of the mix, building becomes less useful since you could put together exactly the same thing as someone else and get entirely different results.</p><p></p><p>6: I agree, but I think that was the point. Spellcasters in several prior edition were flat out superior and in many ways a well-built spellcaster still is, but being more powerful than the alternatives is no longer something provided to spellcasters by default and something you have to specifically work to become. I like the weaker spellcasters, but I think it needs some tuning, both to make them stronger in some regards and less powerful in others.</p><p></p><p>---As I mentioned in another thread, I enjoy 5E largely for its simplicity and speed. After my campaign wraps up (which could be quite a while), I'm thinking I'll go back to 4th. After nearly 2 years of 5E; I just don't think the speed and simplicity are enough to outweigh what I enjoy about 4E.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Sunseeker, post: 6857956"] As someone who played mostly in 4E and 3.X; I tend to agree with your reviews. I like the edition for its overall simplicity, but I find myself frustrated by many of the same things you do. 1: I would go as far as to say it's not just randomness, but a level of [I]unreliability[/I]. It's not so much that things are unpredictable, after a couple hits it becomes fairly easy to predict the outcome of any given action, but any given action seems to have largely the same chance of success as a coin flip. Even classes who should be reliably good at something, such as Fighters, seem to have little control over their ability to hit on a regular basis. 2: What I've tended to find is that there's a "deadzone" of AC between 16 and 20-21 where there's no point in having an AC within that range. If your AC is greater than 16, but less than 20, you are either best served by "going tank" and getting to the 20+ range, or "going glass cannon" and going for 16 or less AC in exchange for higher output. It seems like monsters can reliably hit between 15 and 18 AC on a regular basis which is a minimum 10 on your average monster with a +3-4 modifier and a +1-2 bonus, which once again, is a 50/50 chance to hit, might as well flip a coin (after writing this, I may try it in my next session). Defenders ARE fragile, unless as noted above, you can reach into that 20+ AC range (which is difficult at low levels, but I guess that's the point). Once you hit 22AC (Plate+Shield+two defense boosts) and if you're able to bump that up to 24, you are almost unhittable except by monstrously powerful creatures (things with like, a +17 to hit). 3: I think the biggest downside to defenders now is that they lack the ability to defend. Sure, they can take a hit. But in order to actually [B]defend[/B] they need to put in significant feat investment (typically, at least two, Shield Master and the Heavy Armor DR/3 feat), in a game without feats (as a I feel many older gamers are attempting to play) this makes defenders an even WORSE investment. I loved 4E's defenders. Simple and effective. 5E does not have a simple and effective defender. 4: Currently playing a support character and I'll say this. It's not so much taking one for the team, but it's either you are FULL support, or you are not support at all. There's no reasonable middle ground. And much like older editions, it feels like support is back to "I shield him." or "Gain 2d8+5 HP". It's not really a [I]role[/I] so much as a game function you're performing, this has been true of many past editions of the "support/healer" role. It's also true of many other games. 5: I think this harkens back to the randomness. There is indeed a much higher reliance on the dice to decide your fate in this edition, which makes any potential builds, as the word I used before [B]unreliable[/B]. The level of RNG makes it difficult to ensure a specific outcome, with the ability to ensure a specific outcome taken out of the mix, building becomes less useful since you could put together exactly the same thing as someone else and get entirely different results. 6: I agree, but I think that was the point. Spellcasters in several prior edition were flat out superior and in many ways a well-built spellcaster still is, but being more powerful than the alternatives is no longer something provided to spellcasters by default and something you have to specifically work to become. I like the weaker spellcasters, but I think it needs some tuning, both to make them stronger in some regards and less powerful in others. ---As I mentioned in another thread, I enjoy 5E largely for its simplicity and speed. After my campaign wraps up (which could be quite a while), I'm thinking I'll go back to 4th. After nearly 2 years of 5E; I just don't think the speed and simplicity are enough to outweigh what I enjoy about 4E. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Thoughts of a 3E/4E powergamer on starting to play 5E
Top