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

[Micah Sweet]

Could be.

Are their other editions where ammo is expensive and/or hard to find, or where storage is so limited PCs can't effectively stockpile it?

Depends on the situation in game mostly. I prefer to track it, because many weapons do in fact use ammunition, and therefore it can run out. That's all there is to it for me.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Sure, never said otherwise.

For the folks who enjoy moving numbers around on their character sheet that will seldom, if ever, have any kind of narrative impact in play..

Go nuts. Live your bliss.

You too, I suppose.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

All or nothing then. Not a great place to have a discussion from.

If people are going to tell others what they aren't allowed to play, then yes, I'm going to ask them to apply their standard consistently.

Being told that it isn't a "true issue" is exactly that.

 

[Maxperson]

I'm not the one who treats it as a dichotomy! I hate that people do this! But they do, in fact, do it. All the time! And they use it as an excuse for why the rules should be crappy for some players and super awesome for others!

And yes, it absolutely is hypocritical--because these people clearly want D&D to be a cooperative game.

How they play the game doesn't stop D&D from being cooperative. I'm sure their group does quite well together. There's still nothing hypocritical about it.

But I'm done discussing this with you. I guarantee you, you won't convince me on this one.

Fair enough.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Depends on the situation in game mostly. I prefer to track it, because many weapons do in fact use ammunition, and therefore it can run out. That's all there is to it for me.

Fair enough. For me, I track it while it is a reasonable resource constraint, typically low levels in wilderness locations.

Once there is enough gold and access to supplies, the juice is no longer worth the squeeze for me.

 

[Maxperson]

I assume you mean this, from the AD&D DMG, page 81:

View attachment 293362

Yes, exactly. It's possible to be both okay with the above AND also want fighters not to have supernatural abilities that aren't labeled supernatural. You don't have to desire the same levels of realism in different aspects of the game.

 

[Micah Sweet]

If people are going to tell others what they aren't allowed to play, then yes, I'm going to ask them to apply their standard consistently.

Being told that it isn't a "true issue" is exactly that.

Apparently and according to this thread, the only "true issue" here at all is that 5e has a bad index. Hardly worth getting up in arms about, or presuming that you're constantly under attack.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yes, exactly. It's possible to be both okay with the above AND also want fighters not to have supernatural abilities that aren't labeled supernatural. You don't have to desire the same levels of realism in different aspects of the game.

Apparently not, sadly.

 

[mamba]

I'm kind of boggled that folks role dice for commoners in 5e,

I don’t, since it basically never matters. That does not mean they are all straight 10s

or that the distribution of a 3d6 is taken as representative of the population distribution

That I do, but since it rarely ever gets rolled…

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Because it is always a compromise. You can't make it perfect for everybody.

Well aware. You can't make it "perfect" and you shouldn't even try. You can make it better, though.

And the thread was originally for true issues. A lot of issues, like Gold, Exploration and stuff are only issues because people don't play RAW.

That's not entirely true. They are issues because many people (I would say "most" but then someone would invariably ask me to "prove it") don't LIKE how it works RAW. Those things just aren't very well designed. I guarantee you, there is a way to design both those things that would appeal to many many more people.

Sure, some people might prefer a system that handwaves them while others might prefer a hard-coded rules-heavy sub-system for them. I don't suggest that either of those extremes get what they want.

They delete rules and then complain that the game is not working.

I mean, I guess some people do that, but I don't think that it's as many as you seem to think.

Is there room for improvement? Probably. But would be for example using a Slot-System instead I incumberance make ressource-management really easier?

I don't know. That definitely seems more like a matter of opinion, and therefore not the kind of thing that I'm talking about.

Like if you play with DnD Beyond or Roll20, there is no excuse to not use encumbrance, because it calculates that for you automatically. And even in Paper it is not hard to do. Doing it actually improves the game.

Not sure that I agree that encumbrance is a big deal either way. IMO, it doesn't add much nor is it a particular problem.