D&D 5E What are the highlights of D&D 5th edition for you?

[Laurefindel]

some of the highlights I have in mind may have more to do with the decade than the game itself but...

• A conscious effort of inclusion and de-racialization
• Matt Mercer and Critical Role and live-streaming in general. Not unique to 5e but popularized during the growth of 5e.
• Meeting (and clash) of generations around the same game. Again not unique to 5e but reached an unprecedented level during 5e.

Highlights of the game itself...

• Advantage/Disadvantage mechanic
• Bonus dice instead of flat numeral bonuses (in most cases)
• Subclasses and subraces (l liked subraces...)
• Limited magical items attunement and spell concentration. While I sometimes disagree as to which item should require attunement and which spell should use concentration, these concepts are good innovations.
• Concept of bonus action

 

[Parmandur]

Earlier previews had indicated that Backgrounds -as they are in the 5E PHB- will no longer be part of how the game functions.

I was of the impression that 5.5 "backgrounds" would function more as a way to choose a level 1 bonus feat and would no longer have the narrative background features.

No, the very first playtest had them in, and they are in the final book (we've seen the pages with art!).

The only difference is that the same Backgalso now give a Feat..same as every Background published in the past 4 years in supplements.

 

[JEB]

Having an edition of the game that felt as welcoming to veteran players as it did new ones. As embodied by my group, which included both veteran and many new-to-D&D (and new-to-RPGing!) players. That campaign was the peak of my gaming life (so far).

Advantage/disadvantage. Backgrounds with suggested character traits. Inspiration. Natural language rather than keywords and jargon. The general ability to play both simple and complex options alongside one another (i.e. champion vs. battle master, multi-classing and feats being optional and not default assumptions).

The original Starter Set and core rulebooks, especially the Monster Manual. Volo's Guide to Monsters (it definitely has warts but it remains my favorite non-core 5e monster book). Xanathar's Guide to Everything.

Legendary actions and lair actions. Theros' Mythic Monsters (even though Theros itself was a bit of a letdown).

The return of the OGL. The return of classic PDFs. The DM Guild.

 

[Argyle King]

No, the very first playtest had them in, and they are in the final book (we've seen the pages with art!).

The only difference is that the same Backgalso now give a Feat..same as every Background published in the past 4 years in supplements.

The backgrounds still have the usable features like from PHB?

If newer books have had backgrounds that have feats, I wouldn't know. It's been quite a while since I've purchased a 5e book.

 

[Parmandur]

The backgrounds still have the usable features like from PHB?

If newer books have had backgrounds that have feats, I wouldn't know. It's been quite a while since I've purchased a 5e book.

Every book published since Mythic Odessey's of Theros in Summer 2020 has had first Level Feats, and tied them into Background.

All cruncy features from 2014 have made it over: the fluffy bits are presented more compactly.

 

[MNblockhead]

DM empowerment! Remove any and all obstacles that could stand in the way of a DM's judgment.

Serious question, I skipped from 1e to 5e (with a long period of not being engaged in the hobby at all). 2e wasn't to different from 1e from what little I remember of it. Did 3, 3.5, and 4e attempt to constrain the DM through rules and mechanics? I can't image that was very successful, though I wasn't around to experience it.

 

[Parmandur]

Serious question, I skipped from 1e to 5e (with a long period of not being engaged in the hobby at all). 2e wasn't to different from 1e from what little I remember of it. Did 3, 3.5, and 4e attempt to constrain the DM through rules and mechanics? I can't image that was very successful, though I wasn't around to experience it.

TL;DR yes, big time.

3E specifically tried to have a defined mechanical process for any possible action. 4E reacted to this by trying to make actions more restricted and gameable.

 

[JEB]

the fluffy bits are presented more compactly.

As an example, Glory of the Giants condenses them to a bespoke table of traits related to the background (like the schemes table for charlatans in the 2014 core), and a single table of potential personality traits.

 

[billd91]

Serious question, I skipped from 1e to 5e (with a long period of not being engaged in the hobby at all). 2e wasn't to different from 1e from what little I remember of it. Did 3, 3.5, and 4e attempt to constrain the DM through rules and mechanics? I can't image that was very successful, though I wasn't around to experience it.

I’d describe it less as constrain the DM and more a case of identifying standard DCs and procedures for things so that the player would also know them. Is that constraining the DM? Maybe?

 

[Parmandur]

As an example, Glory of the Giants condenses them to a bespoke tables of traits related to the background (like the schemes table for charlatans in the 2014 core), and a single table of potential personality traits.

I like the tables in the 2014 book, but theybwere only ever suggestions.