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

[Baron Opal II]

'Rest, Long'?

"Realism"

 

[MichaelSomething]

The refusal to make a stand on just about  any issue is my biggest frustration with 5e.

That's the definition of "DM empowerment" you asked me for.

By taking absolutely no stance on an issue, it empowers the DM to run the game as they see fit! No rules or advice to impede the DM's judgement.

Why are we arguing about Human capabilities when the DM will just set them to be however mundane or epic they desire? It's their game!

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I'd like us to take another pass at @CleverNickName's Master List of the Issues that were raised in the first 7 pages. (To my knowledge nothing of significance was added in the 37 pages since, but I could be wrong! Also, a few of these clearly don't count, but I think there's quite a few corner-case, that (to me at least) ought to count as "close enough" to an "actual issue" with the game, that in the very least, no one ought to be upset if the problem were FIXED. I'm going to green ones that I think are worth another look. Feel free to argue with me!

THE "TRUE ISSUES" WITH 5E
Economy:

• Gold has no purpose/not enough purpose
• Magic item prices aren't listed
• The resting mechanics

Combat and Encounters:

• Expected number of encounters
• Expected difficulty of encounters
• combat is uninteresting
• combat is too simple
• combat is too complex
• The caster-vs-martial disparity
• lack of 4E monsters
• lack of 4E character options
• lack of high-CR monsters
• monster design section of MM
• no risk
• combat lacks depth
• the Size rules
• monsters are boring
• better rules for encounter design
• saving throws as ability checks

Exploration:

• lack of exploration rules
• darkness and visibility rules
• skill system doesn't match actual play

Characters and Leveling:

• Subclasses have different leveling structures/complexity.
• the monk
• the wizard being too similar to a video game
• multiclassing rules are "a hot mess"
• multiclassing rules aren't like 4E
• lack of full classes
• the experience system
• hit points representing all types of harm
• Ability scores not balanced
• fighters have too little to do

Meta:

• People shouting down other peoples' discussions of these issues
• These issues presented are all subjective, and not 5E specific
• People not agreeing with other peoples' opinions
• The players (okay, I'm kidding about this one)
• Tradition

Spellcasting:

• not impeded
• spells kept at the same level of power
• spell schools poorly implemented
• everything supernatural is modeled after spells
• arcane spells lacking creativity/boring
• the simulacrum spell
• the spellcasting being too similar to a video game

General:

• The layout of the books.
• The awful index
• The terrible binding
• 5E is an "apology edition"
• 5E isn't the game everyone wanted
• 5E isn't perfect
• Font size
• lacks support for high-level play
• the game feels rushed
• Pareto Optimality (shout-out to the economists out there)
• lack of guidance in the DMG
• no "advanced" version for experienced players
• too much focus on campaigns, not enough on adventures
• no DungeonTM or DragonTM Magazine
• some rules are very specific, others very vague

 

[Minigiant]

But yes, I do think there are plenty of issues that have been brought up that rise to the level of "true issues," but we just took a hard turn into ... "D&D 5 isn't a simulation." At least I think that's the underlying issue people are having at the moment.

That's because the source of many of the issues of 5e is that it makes no stances on anything and leaves it all up to the DM to fill massive holes.

That's because 5e was not to be a complete game for D&D fan, old, middle, and new.
5e was designed to bring back former 1e, 2, and 3e D&D fans by being as least offensive to these groups as possible.

The DMG index is bad because it as rushed. And it was rushed because it wasn't a priority. And it wasn't a priority because the 5e designers didn't think vet DMs needed much more than reminders and conversions.

The DMG index is being focused on improvement now because.... Oooops! 5e got big an attracted a ton of new gamers.

 

[MuhVerisimilitude]

Exactly. I was wondering what we were going to get discussed and I did not have "physical capabilities of real world people as compared to characters in the game." I don't think that's an issue many people have thought about too much. The designers did think about it in 3X, but since then? I don't think it has been a concern.

But yes, I do think there are plenty of issues that have been brought up that rise to the level of "true issues," but we just took a hard turn into ... "D&D 5 isn't a simulation." At least I think that's the underlying issue people are having at the moment.

Not at all. It has nothing to do with simulationism. People aren't demanding more rules or want some return to 3.5 or whatever. I don't see where you're getting that from.

Real life as a point of comparison becomes highly relevant because there are two irreconcileable opinions.

• Everything that is not magical must be realistic, therefore martial characters must suck.
• Martial characters in D&D have nothing to do with reality, and need not be shackled by the constraints of realism.

This is why there also was a temporary detour into dealing with the question of "are Martial characters already realistic?"

• If Martial characters are already realistic then we can argue that any changes we make must be constrained by realism.
• If Martial characters are not realistic, then we are free to add other non-realistic things to them.

 

[James Gasik]

because the original idea of wizards was them sitting in thier tower or colleges doing as little physical work as possible while they study their Arcane ways. Commoner's have to actually do physical labor.

Makes me think that Background should have some bearing on hit points, then. An Outlander Sorcerer should be tougher than a Sage Wizard...but I digress.

 

[James Gasik]

agreed. would make Blacksmiths pretty useless wouldn't it.....

Personally, I'm not sure how that stat block can be used for merchants or artisans (as it claims to be) either, but that's what's in the MM.

 

[Minigiant]

Characters and Leveling:

• Subclasses have different leveling structures/complexity.

My argument was not that the Subclasses have different leveling structures or complexity.

My argument was that the Subclass levels were purely chosen to fill dead levels based on how powerful or complex the base class was.

Crawford practically alluded to this with the rogue getting new space for class features by changing the subclass model.

The fighter has the most subclass features because it is just 4 class features that upgrade about twice each which leaves a ton of dead levels.
The bard has the least subclass features because it is a full caster with actual class features.

That's gridfilling

 

[Oofta]

That's because the source of many of the issues of 5e is that it makes no stances on anything and leaves it all up to the DM to fill massive holes.

That's because 5e was not to be a complete game for D&D fan, old, middle, and new.
5e was designed to bring back former 1e, 2, and 3e D&D fans by being as least offensive to these groups as possible.

The DMG index is bad because it as rushed. And it was rushed because it wasn't a priority. And it wasn't a priority because the 5e designers didn't think vet DMs needed much more than reminders and conversions.

The DMG index is being focused on improvement now because.... Oooops! 5e got big an attracted a ton of new gamers.

Maybe, just maybe, and I'm just spit-balling here but maybe the fact that they don't try to tell people how to play their game is one of the (many) reasons that it's the best selling version of D&D in recent history. I'd say best selling ever but it's not like TSR knew how to keep records. While there are a lot of other factors at play you don't get to be the best selling TTRPG by far with a crap product*.

There's plenty of supplemental material from modules to streams to approximately a bazillion blogs out there giving advice on how to run the game. If I want to pick up just about any hobby nowadays all I need is an internet connection and I have more advice than I know what to do with. But the fact that after hundreds of posts the only thing we can consistently say is bad is the layout of the DMG and the index? Really? Have you ever tried to use the indexes in older editions? Some were decent but most left, if we're being charitable, something to be desired.

*and of course the standard disclaimer that there are other high quality products out there, saying D&D is not total garbage is not saying it's the best design ever, yada, yada, yada.

 

[James Gasik]

The game is not about heroes. They are protagonists whose lives we are following at best. And as much of a simulation as is reasonable for play is what I play D&D for, and what I want from it.

Are we sure the game isn't about heroes?