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

[Hussar]

The bigger problem, in WotC-era D&D at least, is that in ship-v-ship combat a "combat round" of maneuvers, lining up broadsides, etc. would be measured in minutes where at the individual character level a normal round of combat is just a few seconds.

Original 1e with its 1-minute combat rounds was actually much easier to adapt for this as the combat round didn't have to be extended by all that much for it to work.

Meh. A round is a round. This isn’t a mechanical issue. It’s an issue based on expectations. Frankly one minute is still WAY too short. Actions per turn would be closer. That was the length of a round in Battlesystem for a reason.

But again it’s not a mechanical issue at all.

I want Master and Commander.

They want Conan. Or Sinbad.

How many times does Conan engage in ship to ship combat? Like almost never. In the stories, the action starts at boarding. Same with pretty much any swashbuckling pirate themed story.

So I go with expectations. Skip the whole ship to ship thing because it’s not any fun for the players.

They don’t want to do it.

 

[Hussar]

Again, I want to stress that this is literally dozens of players, different groups, three or four different editions, and multiple countries.

This isn’t just one group. This is what happens every single time I try. Players want to play their characters. Spending an hour or more, multiple time over a campaign, playing something that isn’t their character is a non-starter for a lot of players IME.

If it was one time in a campaign that’s one thing. But we’re talking about something that’s going to happen repeatedly.

 

[Scribe]

Again, why is my great axe wielding barbarian shooting a cannon?

I mean...because its the tool for the job, in that moment. If the player was told 'listen, you are not going to row, for 4 sessions, thats all you do, your on the row team now' I could get it, but like...yeah weird.

 

[pemerton]

Or, perhaps, they are giving people what they want.

Players have zero interest in ship to ship combat where each player takes a role - navigator, pilot, gunner, etc. They don’t want it.

At least every player I’ve tried to get to do it has. So WotC listened to fans and made a system that players actually want to play.



I mean I get it. I want a more detailed system too. But I know that what I want will never fly with players.

Surely the solution is to get better players, who know what you want! In fact, WotC should stop slacking off and find you better players!

 

[Fifth Element]

Yeah, a lot of gamers seem to be deathly afraid of any bookkeeping.

You say "be deathly afraid of", reality says "find it tedious and without purpose."

 

[Minigiant]

Again, I want to stress that this is literally dozens of players, different groups, three or four different editions, and multiple countries.

This isn’t just one group. This is what happens every single time I try. Players want to play their characters. Spending an hour or more, multiple time over a campaign, playing something that isn’t their character is a non-starter for a lot of players IME.

If it was one time in a campaign that’s one thing. But we’re talking about something that’s going to happen repeatedly.

That's even more point to provide the good quality modules and variants to the groups who want them.

That is the true issue of 5e

​

5e recognizes that every table is different but does not advise nor provide variant rules for different groups. It leans on DMs to create the variants with old edition material or experience or 3rd Party Publishers who are not financial incentivized to make the high quality, general, setting agnostic, moderately simple, variant rules.​

Like how the PHB was printed with 8 wizard subclasses, the PHB should had 8 barbarian, fighter, ranger, and rogue subclasses. Or if not in the PHB, within books within 2 years.

I mean it's 2023 and the barbarian who has a decent ranged attack or can throw an orc into a wall just got realized and published.

 

[mamba]

The push back I got was, “why is my swordsman shooting a cannon? Shooting a cannon has nothing to do with my concept”

well, you can not shoot the cannon too, but the other ship will shoot theirs, up to you

As was pointed out, all of this still happens in the story, you just gloss over it. Or do you let their ship be blown to pieces before the boarding begins?

Barbarian: “Me smash door”
DM: “It’s a shop, the door is unlocked, you can walk right in”
Player: “That is not me using my character”
…

 

[jasper]

they don't have to

Part of Appendix A of GoS should have been ported over and upgraded for Jammer
that is what they did

Um. Please give me some page numbers. Appendix A Ghost page 186 is where in Spelljammer books?
Appendix a Ghost page 194 to 196 Offices and Crew. What page number is that information on in Spelljammer?
Where are the Str, Dex, Con, Int, Wis, Cha stats on Space Gallon? I look at page 46 and 47 Astral and don't see them?
I see no default global stats on page 24 on Astral Guide.

 

[Hussar]

well, you can not shoot the cannon too, but the other ship will shoot theirs, up to you

As was pointed out, all of this still happens in the story, you just gloss over it. Or do you let their ship be blown to pieces before the boarding begins?

Barbarian: “Me smash door”
DM: “It’s a shop, the door is unlocked, you can walk right in”
Player: “That is not me using my character”
…

Yea because opening a door takes up an hour or more of play time.

Repeatedly.

Look I’m just the messenger here. I agree with you. But I’m telling you that we’re very much the minority here.

I fixed the problem in Spelljammer. Nothing can cross gravity planes. So spell effects no ranged weaponry.

So encounters always start at the point of boarding. Everyone is happy.

 

[billd91]

You say "be deathly afraid of", reality says "find it tedious and without purpose."

Tedious, maybe. But not without purpose. Keeping track of ammo (or other expendable resource) always has a purpose… just not one everyone respects.