D&D 5E What does 5E do well?

[Aldarc]

This is the Forge Fallacy: A game should zero in on a single purpose, be good at one thing, and forget everything else. In fact, an RPG needs to be good at many things.

I don't really think that Matt Colville is committing the Forge fallacy since he is not claiming or even implying that it should be good at one thing. He's simply asking what it's good at in terms of its game play. If asking a basic question about a product, such as what a game is good at, is a fallacy, then it's a pretty hollow fallacy.

 

[Arilyn]

I'd say the appeal is a fun mix of player abilities that don't bog the game play down. The game has lots of minor problems, but I have found it the most enjoyable D&D edition. I guess fun isn't really a play style, but it does seem to be 5e's strong suit.

 

[darjr]

 

[Parmandur]

This is the Forge Fallacy: A game should zero in on a single purpose, be good at one thing, and forget everything else. In fact, an RPG needs to be good at many things.

5E isn't as good at combat as 4E. But it's better than the other editions, and it beats 4E in verisimilitude and integration of mechanics with fiction.

5E isn't as easy to learn as Basic. But it's easier than the other editions, and it beats Basic in character options and balance.

5E offers less scope for charop than 3E. I missed the part where that was a point in 3E's favor.

And so on. I don't think 5E is the best possible edition of D&D; there's still plenty of room for improvement. But, considering all the elements instead of just one, I think it is the best edition so far.

O think this gets to the heart of the matter.

 

[Aldarc]

I believe that as Matt would say, that's not a style of play.

 

[darjr]

I believe that as Matt would say, that's not a style of play.

No, it does however give us a clue. 5e was meant to cover a lot of D&D styles of play. And that is, imho, inviting. And it also makes it hard to pin down 5e like he can pin down 4e style of play.
If you ask me his question is the wrong question anyway. 4e answered it really well and 5e did not and we see directly what the consequences have been. One game is mothballed and the other has been doubling (sales? Or players? Or both?).

 

[darjr]

And frankly 5e is just as good at Save the World adventures, I’ve run a fair few.

 

[Manbearcat]

5e is “the best D&D” at the most common form of D&D:

* Adventure Path/metaplot/setting tourist play

* which enables GMs to use Force/Illusionism + heavy content curation + spotlight tailoring/management to (a) keep the pace up, (b) keep a compelling story “online”, and (c) enable players’ Power Fantasies.

* where players don’t have to aggressively drive the trajectory of play (which is extremely demanding) but can toggle cognitive load/passivity on/off while being tourists to their favorite settings, experiencing a compelling story + power fantasy, expressing some skillfulness of play, engage in performative theatrics/characterization at their discretion.

* being extremely hygienic for talented characterization/theatrics + high-production live-streaming.

* being inoffensive


That collection of attributes is a recipe for D&D going mainstream as a media cash cow.

 

[Aldarc]

No, it does however give us a clue. 5e was meant to cover a lot of D&D styles of play. And that is, imho, inviting. And it also makes it hard to pin down 5e like he can pin down 4e style of play.

I disagree, because I don't think that it particularly does OSR styles of play well per the default. Wilderness exploration, hex crawling, and Gygaxian skilled dungeon play or B/X dungeon-crawling aren't really what 5e is about.

If you ask me his question is the wrong question anyway. 4e answered it really well and 5e did not and we see directly what the consequences have been. One game is mothballed and the other has been doubling (sales? Or players? Or both?).

All too often I have seen people try to reduce the complex situation around 4e's failure to sell a highly narrow argument. It always raises my red flags, just like it does here.

And frankly 5e is just as good at Save the World adventures, I’ve run a fair few.

Sounds like someone has a chip on his shoulders.

IMHO, I think that 5e does curated-story play well. I think that the "rulings not rules," increased GM authority/force, fudging, adventure paths rather than modules, etc. and the GM advice seem to land pretty solidly in the idea that the GM is there to help deliver a cool story for the players.

Edit: beaten to the punch by @Manbearcat.

 

[Parmandur]

No, it does however give us a clue. 5e was meant to cover a lot of D&D styles of play. And that is, imho, inviting. And it also makes it hard to pin down 5e like he can pin down 4e style of play.
If you ask me his question is the wrong question anyway. 4e answered it really well and 5e did not and we see directly what the consequences have been. One game is mothballed and the other has been doubling (sales? Or players? Or both?).

Yeah, exactly this: 4E was a polished, focused game, but that focus cut too many people out of the frame.