D&D 5E What are the "True Issues" with 5e?

[Oofta]

fighter is arguably one of the best classes in PF2e full stop and they don't have any inherent supernatural powers. just say'n.

I don't have any familiarity with PF2e, I thought about playing PF v1 for a while but then 5E came out. But I can talk about 4E fighters. A lot of people said that about 4E fighters as well. I just disagree and no I'm not going to argue about how their powers were clearly labeled "martial".

There's nothing wrong with wanting different options for classes, I just have no problem with fighters as they are and would happily play another one given the chance.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Alternatively: A better rules or 'amendments' can remove the need for rulings on things.

 

[Stalker0]

They found ways to give fighters cool things to do that don't require supernatural powers. Level Up did too.

Supernatural is somewhat in the eye of the beholder though.

Take level's up "size up" ability for fighters, which lets them determine the CR of any creature they can see within 200 feet. Honestly....that's pretty damn fantastical. I can see a little girl and go "hmm that's a CR 19 creature.....wonder if she's shapechanged or something".

I can literally get the Cr of creatures that I have never seen, heck that my world has never seen. It could be a monster of myth and legend, but the fighter can go "CR 15 looks like.... oh wait CR 17 yeah looks like its thats enhanced variety".


Its a cool ability, but it quickly strains the notion of a "mundane ability". At somet point it gets a bit fantastical. Now personally I am ok with fighters dipping their toes into the fantastical and supernatural a bit more, but some might balk at even that much.

 

[Oofta]

This is the biggest conflict that I see that keeps Martial characters from getting exceptional abilities. And it's something that I get that I am in the minority on. And yet, Martial characters do have an anime ability: the ability to take a beating. Any real world person would quickly be turned into paste by dragons/demons/giants and so on. But that's an ability we accept.

I am firmly of the belief that the "BMX Bandit/Angel Summoner" video is really how we see high level adventurers playing out between Martial/Magical characters. But I get that I'm in the minority where if a fighter were to be able to jump a distance equal to their speed, that would upset a lot of folks.

And so that's a situation where it's clearly not a "true issue" with 5E. But it is an issue for me and others too. So I suppose it's a story for another time.

All I can say is that in actual play, the wizard occasionally outshines the fighter but over the course of multiple encounters the fighter holds their own or better at all levels of the game. Unless of course your wizard happens to have Batman's ability to have exactly the right thing in their utility belt to come out ahead no matter what they encounter.

 

[SkidAce]

My point exactly.

Less empowerment to some rando handed power by tradition that has long passed its expiration date.

Your DM is a rando?

 

[Vaalingrade]

Your DM is a rando?

In terms of 'could be literally any person who decides to run a game', yes.

We're talking about problems with the game, not specific people's games, despite how much people want to argue that the issue of putting everything up to DM fiat is a personal problem.

 

[Raiztt]

My point exactly.

Less empowerment to some rando handed power by tradition that has long passed its expiration date.

Well, I hope that your DM releases you from his dungeon and you're able to find a DM that better suits your needs.

Wait, what's that? You're not being held captive by your DM?

 

[Undrave]

But who determines that? When do you know?

The designers themselves, after play testing. Sometimes, an idea is just not turning out how you expected.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I did this very intentionally. We have dozens of "5e issue threads" out there, and honestly this one is starting to turn into a standard one where everyone just lists the stuff they don't like about 5e.

The original purpose of this thread was to go a step beyond that, and to identify things that are so fundamentally "wrong" with the edition that everyone would point and go "yeah that's not great, I would certainly want that improved or fixed".


And we do have one so far..... the index. I haven't heard a single person in this thread or in any other 5e issue thread I've ever known say they liked the index. At best its "barely tolerable". So that so far seems to be the only "True Issue" with 5e that has been concretely identified. Everything else is more of which side of a preference you are on.

And again that's ok, my assumption was this list would be small, as getting that level of true consensus is very hard.

Oh, I understand and agree with the goals of your first post - It's only a matter of degree that I think you've gone too far. For example, I don't think that @Parmandur thinking that the 4 Elements Monk is just "okay" should rule it out. A one or two person half-veto is enough to decide that it's not a "true" issue? That's a little too tight on "true" for my taste.

OTOH, I think the goal of identifying a few items that are "pretty universally" disliked is a great idea for a thread. I completely agree with discounting the obvious "matter of taste" examples, but I think there's a number of edge-cases that could (and should) be discussed further to decide if they qualify as "close enough" to "true" for "the purposes of this discussion". Otherwise, yeah, you've cut it off at "the Index" - which isn't, IMO, all that interesting a discovery.

It's your thread, though!

 

[Vaalingrade]

Well, I hope that your DM releases you from his dungeon and you're able to find a DM that better suits your needs.

Wait, what's that? You're not being held captive by your DM?

Did anyone ever make this argument you're going against here?