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

[Davinshe]

4e.

4e multiclassing is very consistent. You should always take one multiclass feat unless you literally can't spare one. You should (almost) never paragon multiclass, because it sucks. Hybrids have a few basic rules (have at least one stat shared between your classes, pick two classes of different roles in most cases, keep in mind what benefits you can get via feats, e.g. Hybrid Paladin can take a single feat to get Plate prof.)

Taking 1 MC feat is always good. Two is a sometimes food. Three+ and PMC, inadvisable.

Plus, feat-based MC isn't too far off from 2e's Dual-Classing, just skipping the "re-level through 8 levels of the new class" part, and Hybrids are straight-up 2e dual-classing with better balance.

Yeah, I was going to say that 4th edition did multiclassing pretty well. I actually forgot paragon multiclassing was a thing, but the later hybrid system was especially fun and seemed extremely balanced. 4e multiclassing worked a little bit like the 5e bard's magical secrets -- instead of starting at the beginning of a class, just take a limited number of higher level abilities instead of one from your own class. Nixing a la carte level based multiclassing and making multiclassing feat based would probably please no one, but it would potentially be more balanced than the current system. There's a reason multiclassing was technically an optional rule -- the designers never claimed that it would produce even results.

 

[Incenjucar]

Spells being the same level is fine, we just need more spells for the different classes.

 

[SteveC]

If your table uses the session = adventuring day paradigm then the number of tables I've heard of in my life that actually do it this way just increased from zero to one.

I have played in hundreds of "Western Marches" games across editions. Spend a few summers doing so in college. They all ran this way. These days, Adventurers League games work the same way. If I have a long enough play session, I try to do this as well, which is possible in low to medium level games. I'd say it happens a lot. Just not in home games at higher levels, or short sessions.

 

[Eyes of Nine]

Not everything having levels.

Characters have levels, spells have levels, dungeons have levels. Clearly the fans want LEVELS. I say give it to them!

• Abilities should have levels (My Dex? why I am 16th level in Dex my good sir)
• Attacks should have levels (I attack with my sword with my level 7 attack bonus)
• Armor class needs to be renamed to Armor level, so as to not overburden the word "class" with too many meanings. (Now that I have chainmail, I'm finally up to level 16 armor level!)
• Monsters should have levels instead of CR (Demogorgon, 32nd level monster!)
• Ability check targets should be called levels - (oh, you want to climb the wall? That'll be a level 15 Dexterity (Acrobatics) check)
• Advantage should be called "up-level" - you can roll with up-level; of course Disadvantage should be called "bad-level", so that no one gets confused by using the same dimension of up-down or good-bad for the two concepts Advantage and Disadvantage
• Inspiration, instead of either having one or not having one, should be called "Level-on" when one has Inspiration; and "Level-off" when one doesn't
• There's a couple others we can probably think of (such as instead of narrative names for backgrounds, just call them "Background Level 1 - you used to work on a sailing ship" etc etc)

/irony

 

[Weiley31]

The issue that truly bugs me is how the way Size rules are set up makes playing anything other than a Small or Medium character basically a no-go. That's something 3E could handle (I had a freind play a Hill Giant in one campaign), and literally the only thing I can think of as a downgrade.

And it's not like you have to bend the system over backwards to make Large Weapons work. Just make the bloody thing increase its damage by one Die step.

Heck, Kobold Press gives you Large-sized playable Centaurs and basically handwaves it by saying "Well, it's Large, but the upper portion of the Centaur has a similar upper body structure to medium sized races so no need to go crazy with new rules. Keep it the same."

There's also the large sized Cyclops-Kin pc race option, but Kobold Press explains that their singular penalty feature is what keeps it balanced to avoid having to come up with rules for Large Races and all that. That being said, their one feature happens to seem like a good ruling for how Large characters can deal with weapons in someway

"Giant Strength. You are considered proficient with improvised weapons and deal an extra die of damage when making weapon attacks with one. Additionally, you ignore the two-handed weapon property and treat all weapons without the heavy property as if they had the thrown property."

Shoulders of Giants: The Cyclops-kin

Going Against the Giants? Impatient for Glory of the Giants? Play as a cyclops PC in your 5E D&D roleplaying game!

koboldpress.com

 

[Yenrak]

Why are spell levels and caster levels not aligned?

In other words, why do I have to use a chart to figure out what level spell I can cast? At first level, a caster should have access to first level spells. At second level, second level spells. And so on.

Seems a needless legacy of older editions that a Wizard cannot cast a second level spell until third level and doesn't get 5th level spells until 9th level. If a 5th level spell is too powerful for a 5th level Wizard, why not just make it a 9th level spell?

 

[Vaalingrade]

I was referring to its popularity.

I was referring to its integrity as a game.

Because I don't care about appeals to popularity especially from things that became popular from outside factors.

 

[Yenrak]

Do typographical issues count?

The index font in the Player's Handbook is so small it is almost unusable.

 

[Fifth Element]

You still need your core players around to draw in the newbies.

Cool. Good thing I didn't say anything about only needing new players.

 

[Fifth Element]

It is

And that's a good thing right?

It is. Dismissing new players because they're new is counter-productive.