Vaalingrade
Legend
I will count it as an original setting if they do the Brothers War as a setting
D&D 5E What (if anything) do you find "wrong" with 5E?
- Thread starter DND_Reborn
- Start date
Garthanos
Arcadian Knight
It is more complicated than that 4e's level 1 is level 4 or 5 in 5e. 4e does not have the practice levels the 15 levels from 5 to 20 correspond to 1 to 30 in 4e approximately (The last three tiers correspond well in the 5e implied story to 4es three tiers including the transformative events in the last one). There are many other elements that go with that advancement over those 15 levels is half the amount in 4e. Most 5e feats are worth around 2, 4e feats so you have to translate to having half the levels. In 2 levels you get approximate one levels worth of 5e hit points because in 4e you do not get a con bonus after first level (level 1 hit points are approximately the same as level 4 or 5 and 4e skipped those). Shrug others who are even more math heads have said as much, but once I started looking it seemed rather definite. Note attribute bonuses in 4e reach double what they do in 5e as well its a factor of 2.
Last edited:
Okay, this is certainly an assertion.
Let's unpack this!
Statement A
5e brings in new players.
Statement B
5e cannot support the type of fantasy that new players like.
....so?
This would mean that we should see evidence to support your claim! This would be pretty simple- obviously, we would continue to see large numbers of new entrants playing for a short period of time ("brings in new players") and also large numbers of players exiting ("cannot support the type of fantasy that new players like.").
Do you have evidence to support this? It would seem that the popularity of 5e continues to increase. Are there large numbers of people exiting because D&D doesn't support the type of fantasy that they like?
Or is it possible (and more likely) that you have strong interests in fantasy you like that you'd like to see D&D support more?
Thomas Shey
Legend
At a certain point, if you can't get that to work, don't act like it does, though; it just gives people a false sense of security. Its not impossible, but it may require doing things the system is unwilling to for other reasons.
Beastmster printed poorly
4element monk printed poorly
No gish class
No summoner class
No supernatural warrior class
Monster races printed as weak or typecasted
No rules for fantasy science
No rules for superheroics
Psionics not appearing until 6 years in..
etc etc etc
All stuff I've been asked for by new players.
Shardstone
Hero
I think an important thing that has to be said is that not even WotC always knows what will be popular, nor do the consumers themselves. This is seen at the very root of 5E, which without a doubt exceeded any and all expectations, and was almost a shot in the dark to see if they could make something popular. And even then, not everything in the PHB or published by WotC has remained widely popular. The Saltmarsh rules for naval combat, the Four Elements Monk and Beast Master Ranger, the absolute minimal space background currently takes up, the ideals/bonds/flaws in backgrounds seemingly being dropped in all modern additions — what is popular cannot always be predicted. That means, at some point, when discussing new ideas, you have to accept that not every single idea needs to be provably extremely popular. First, you prove that it is good. Then, you try and see how it might effect the game at large for different tables.
Garthanos
Arcadian Knight
4e simply does the last 3 tiers yup 4e does not do level 0
Warpiglet-7
Lord of the depths
That is the rub: is the game special?
How many people like the product seems to mean something. How many choose to stay engaged to the present! Seems to mean something…
Is it the most elegant design? Does it have the best math? Do most people who enjoy it even care?
This reminds me of board games in a way. Some of the highly detailed wargames do it right historically. And yet we have bunches of people playing Axis and Allies.
If the goal is to entertain, then the answer is that it does. Neand
in previous posts it was intimated that increasing long term popularity is correlated with a “drunken toddler” consumer and slick marketing.
Popularity does not mean good! OK. I will concede that.
But I am waiting for any response to your later point for which there has been…crickets. Is there any evidence of significant dissatisfaction on the part of the gaming community other than anecdotes or personal preferenxe.
I am not just saying that either. I am genuinely interested in evidence of this.
Vaalingrade
Legend
Like not giving monsters a free range laundry list of abilities from the game's most broken class?
Well, let's use one of your examples, since I agree with it as a matter of personal preference.
"Psionics not appearing until 6 years in..."
I don't think psionics has really appeared at all. But this is a perfect example of why are assertions of "what people want" just aren't supported by what is happening.
I WANT real psionics. WoTC repeatedly tested psionics. And ... "the people" couldn't get behind it. There's a lot of reasons for that - but it's just not broadly popular.
The vast majority of players don't go around saying, "I WANNA GISH CLASS."
I asked you for evidence- you know, real evidence. Evidence would consist of ... like, numbers or people exiting the game because it doesn't support their desires? But instead, you reiterate personal anecdotes of stuff you want to see. Which is fine- I know you like "superheroism," and I also know that you realize (having talked to other people here) that some people don't.
It's rinse, repeat. D&D will not be everything to everyone- but it's trying to be enough for most people. That's the sweet spot it occupies.
