D&D 5E What (if anything) do you find "wrong" with 5E?

[DEFCON 1]

I don't think this point has anything to do with 4e.

Not 4E specifically, no... other than it is the more recent D&D game that has a much more concise ruleset than 5E does. So if being able to sit down at a table with a bunch of people one doesn't know and want to be able to jump right in without needing to figure out everyone's tastes... 4E is probably a better ruleset than 5E in that regard.

 

[DEFCON 1]

So...

IF you're just starting 5e, 5e might not be for you?

Because people just starting, people playing pick up games at their local store, people who are not blessed as I and probably you are to have a years or decades old play group are exactly the kind of people hurt by lazy design and unclear rules that give themselves an out by appealing to the nostalgia of the older players who will not be thus effected.

I'm not talking about other new people... I was talking about you. Because I thought you were referencing yourself when you talked about 5 people who don't know each other's playstyles and thus could not come to a consensus on how the rules should be run.

If in fact your whole issues with 5E is "Think of the poor inexperienced D&Ders!"... then I think your concern about the precision of the rules is greatly misplaced. Has there been any indication whatsoever that all this new influx of players have not been able to pick up 5E because the rules are just too obtuse and confusing? I certainly haven't seen that. And dare I say most of us haven't. We would have heard about this massive roadblock of unintuitive rules grinding the new 5E generation to a halt long before now if that was the case. The fact that 5E D&D is bigger than almost any other edition or point in time tells us probably the exact opposite-- most new players are having no issues whatsoever, which is why the numbers have grown to the staggering numbers that they are.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Excellent point. It also makes me wonder what 5e would be like if they made it in 2022 and not in 2014. Assuming the player base WotC is trying to court now. Would you like it better as a ground up new game conforming to today's desires, or the modified 5e we're going to get in a couple years?

Heh... if they made 5E in 2022, it meant that 4E was successful enough that it lasted 14 years.

And in that regard, I would be willing to guess that that 5E would look nothing like it did in either 2014 or where we are now... because WotC would have taken their most successful edition to date (4E) and just expanded its style to clean things up. We certainly wouldn't have gotten the "back to basics" 5E we currently have, because those 14 years would have told them almost everyone was thrilled with the 4E direction and they would have kept going in that way. LOL.

 

[Shardstone]

Honest question then... do you feel you cannot play D&D with the rules in the 5E books?

If I had to make an educated guess... I'd say the rules of 5E D&D are more than able to allow you to play the game for the most part of how you like it (because if you really hated the 5E rules, you probably would've stopped playing it by now.) Are there things you wished we different? Sure! That's not surprising, and it's completely reasonable. And it's the same with me, there's a bunch of 5E rules I think could work better for my particular playstyle (and which is why I houserule all kinds of stuff happily.)

But I'll say this... I would MUCH prefer to take a more generalized 5E as-is and modify bits of it to fit my needs, than to take a very concise and specific ruleset like 4E and try and change THAT into something more my speed. And that's entirely my point. 4E (for good or bad) has a very specific gameplay format and style. That's why those who love it really love it... and those that don't really hate it. But trying to hammer 4E into something different than what it is? Much more difficult and dare I say almost not worth doing?

But 5E isn't like that. It being everyone's "2nd Favorite D&D game" to quote the joke... means that I can make it my own because it leaves things more open and less specific. And I'll go to my grave thinking that the design paradigm that gave us this was what makes it great. 5E could have been as specific in its design as 4E... and we would have had just as much (if not more) complaints about it as we did 14 years ago.

Your question isn't a good one.

My problem isn't that I can't play D&D. I don't have a problem in that aspect. I want the game to improve. This is a very normal thing to want for many people, It is also normal to just accept what you have. I'm glad that you are able to do that, but I don't want to do that. I want D&D to continuously improve. I want to see what else D&D can become, and what else it can do. In that aim, I'm willing to entertain a lot of ideas, and like to discuss 5E's ruleset to great lengths to see where it can go from here, and what potential ramifications might be.

 

[Shardstone]

I shouldn't even say improve. I just like to see D&D change. I'm not interested in having one edition of rules to last me a lifetime; I'm interested in an evolving game, even if the evolution comes in minor steps.

 

[d24454_modern]

d20 still being default over 3d6

Why does this matter?

 

[DEFCON 1]

Your question isn't a good one.

My problem isn't that I can't play D&D. I don't have a problem in that aspect. I want the game to improve. This is a very normal thing to want for many people, It is also normal to just accept what you have. I'm glad that you are able to do that, but I don't want to do that. I want D&D to continuously improve. I want to see what else D&D can become, and what else it can do. In that aim, I'm willing to entertain a lot of ideas, and like to discuss 5E's ruleset to great lengths to see where it can go from here, and what potential ramifications might be.

Hey, I'm all for discussing D&D as well, both what we have and what can be changed. If people ever ask "How could I do X so that it will give me Y"... I'll jump in with both feet! Coming up with ideas for how to make D&D work in a particular way for people is fun and I think all of us do it all the time.

But instead if someone just says "The game needs to have more precise rules because what we got was lazy design..." I have no problem saying "Be careful what you wish for." Precision in and of itself isn't better automatically than more generalized and open design, especially when it comes to 5E in my opinion.

 

[Ondath]

Basically, the design philosophy writ large.

'Ask your DM' is not game design.

I have no idea what they think 'natural language' is, but... this ain't it, chief. It just adds more ambiguity seemingly to encourage people to ask their DM.

The cruelty of knowing there were better designs in D&D Next and we'll never get them.

Levels 1 and 2 are pretty empty and you aren't really the character you're trying to be in most classes (subclasses). This is meant to create 0-levels, but they're too strong to be 0-levels and too weak to be fun for people who don't want 0-levels.

Bounded accuracy makes leveling not feel like advancement and acts like it's a feature that you get to fight the same boring monsters forever. All to make the math simple, which to me is not a worthy design goal.

We can't have just setting books and just options books because of the business model.

"Math is hard, let's get rid of static bonuses. Let's also add randomized bonuses like +1d4."

'Optional' features means we can half-ass them: magic items, feats, etc. Oh, you want a good magic weapon that's not a sword or ax? Go fish. Want decent magic economy or craft? Don't make us laugh. Want feats to have an interesting character design? We have one for you. One.

Tons of ASIs, but max is 20, which you can start with your primary at anyway. Stat boosting items set your stat, so you wasted your ASIs, chump.

Daily Attrition design has reached its apotheosis and they're planning on doubling down on it.

Heavy dependence on subclasses and a stubborn refusal to admit some chassis can't handle everything and just make some new classes.

Design space is self-limited. Advantage/disadvantage for EVERYTHING.

Monsters. Where to start? CR is a cruel joke on new DMs, spellcasters require you to get another book, Too few cool abilities.

Combat healing isn't actually worth it.

6 saves to make things 'simpler' than 3... somehow.

I have to say, while I have a lot of points I dislike about 5E, I heavily disagree with this. For all its problems, I cannot go back to any other edition besides 5E. I like a lot of the things you point out as issues (getting rid of fiddly bonuses, bounded accuracy, saves being aligned with abilities, healbots no longer being necessary etc.). Even though I started out with 3.5/PF 1E, there's no way I would return to 3.X's insanely tedious stat blocks and two-page grapple rules. 4E disconnected the rules from the fiction so much that I simply cannot enjoy a 4E game as a fiction-first guy. The only alternative I'd even consider is B/X or 1E and their retroclones. Even they come as a close second though as they require a very specific play style (which clashes with modern player sensibilities and thus makes for a smaller player pool).

5E is deeply flawed, yes. But I think its fundamental design philosophy is the best D&D has ever been. It's the lack of effort in matters around that solid core (illusory natural language, lack of supplemental rules, the new rules paradigm after Tasha's etc.) that grinds my gears.

 

[Oofta]

No. Specificity gives me a reference point for when I might want to change things.

Been playing a long time now, mostly as a DM, and I have never found specificity to make things more difficult for me.

I've found that specificity was meaningless, or at least no more meaningful than the general guidelines we have fo 5e.

But if you can't or don't want to give examples/details of what you mean other than "I'm right, you're wrong" I guess there's no conversation to be had.

 

[tetrasodium]

While I dislike 5e's reliance on ask your DM when it comes to unfinished rules subsystems there is another even greater sin that 5e hides behind ask your GM & vague natural language. Specifically there are a lot of areas where the munchkin knob is cranked to 11 then thrown to the GM to be the bad guy taking away or breaking PC toys.. Feats being one of the biggest examples but there are things like the too good to errata that one level of warlock on 19 levels of sorcerer does not restore 19 levels of sorcerer spell slots while restoring 1 level of pact slots on a short rest.