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

[Haplo781]

few do more than one-two encounters a day so that does not matter in the slightest

Then you aren't playing by the book. Never mind that nobody actually does that because the book is garbage.

or you build the game properly to how most people play you know like a logical person but apparently patching a ttrpg is too difficult for a multinational subsidiary of an entertainment juggernaut.

No comment needed.

 

[Haplo781]

You play a different game than I've ever encountered.

Web, hypnotic pattern, sleep...

 

[James Gasik]

They should have enforced opposition schools, with 2 schools of magic a wizard simply cannot not cast from. Also bring back spheres!

OK, I may be the only one who wants the latter. But it at least differentiated clerics more than what form your spirit guardians take.

Nope, I'm totally on board with this (to a point, just make sure the Cleric still has all the spells we want all Clerics to have).

 

[Oofta]

Well, for one thing, I seriously doubt that a relationship between a human woman and a red dragon would be consensual. I REALLY doubt that a consensual relationship between evil dragons (not really known for their caring side) and enough non-dragons would result in an entire race. Thus the ickiness factor.

So no women are evil and/or attracted to power? Lots of people will sacrifice a lot in exchange for luxury. You're also assuming that the woman is the human parent.

 

[MoonSong]

I think the issue is over-versatility.

For example the Dungeon Dudes are doing a video series of the tiers of the classes at different roles (frontline, damage support, utility, etc). One thing that is coming up is that the Wizard is S, A, or B rank at everything but Frontline and Negotiator. This is different from the other classes that they rank as C or D several times. And even then they state that you can built wizards to be Frontline or charming.

it all really seems to come down to 5e not taking a page from modern gaming and making a decision on strengths and weaknesses then sticking to it. 5e just let's it's biased and favoritism fly and tells the DM to fix it as usual.

A big problem is even most of the people calling out the bias are biased themselves. A lot of times the Caster/Martial discrepancy is more Wizard/everybody else discrepancy. It is just hard to call that out for some reason...

A lot of the martial/caster disparity comes from giving spells too much power. Charm Person is a huge spell in this category. Too many treat it almost as mind control, when really the best it can do is get you something fairly minor. There are other spells that are also interpreted in a way that makes the spells stronger than intended.

Particularly when these spells are actually borderline useless. (Friends anybody?)

 

[MoonSong]

I think the issue is over-versatility.

For example the Dungeon Dudes are doing a video series of the tiers of the classes at different roles (frontline, damage support, utility, etc). One thing that is coming up is that the Wizard is S, A, or B rank at everything but Frontline and Negotiator. This is different from the other classes that they rank as C or D several times. And even then they state that you can built wizards to be Frontline or charming.

it all really seems to come down to 5e not taking a page from modern gaming and making a decision on strengths and weaknesses then sticking to it. 5e just let's it's biased and favoritism fly and tells the DM to fix it as usual.

A big problem is even most of the people calling out the bias are biased themselves. A lot of times the Caster/Martial discrepancy is more Wizard/everybody else discrepancy. It is just hard to call that out for some reason...

A lot of the martial/caster disparity comes from giving spells too much power. Charm Person is a huge spell in this category. Too many treat it almost as mind control, when really the best it can do is get you something fairly minor. There are other spells that are also interpreted in a way that makes the spells stronger than intended.

Particularly when these spells are actually borderline useless. (Friends anybody?)

 

[tetrasodium]

With all the talk about casters I'll say that I hate cantrips. The idea is sound but the execution largely removed a bunch of classes from treasure tables with an auto scaling thing that never needs replacement or upgrading.

 

[Nightfly]

In the game I'm currently running, I've seen the wizard trivialize encounters by casting Web, a 2nd level spell. I admit that is true.

But I have also had encounters trivialized by the fighter standing in a chokepoint and taking the dodge action for three rounds. From level 1 to level 16, he's never once felt less than very strong to me. Both characters have had their moments to shine.

 

[Oofta]

A big problem is even most of the people calling out the bias are biased themselves. A lot of times the Caster/Martial discrepancy is more Wizard/everybody else discrepancy. It is just hard to call that out for some reason...


Particularly when these spells are actually borderline useless. (Friends anybody?)

Not to mention that if you charm someone they know it after the spell wears off. People have a tendency to be a mite peeved at having their mind manipulated.

 

[Minigiant]

A big problem is even most of the people calling out the bias are biased themselves. A lot of times the Caster/Martial discrepancy is more Wizard/everybody else discrepancy. It is just hard to call that out for some reason...

Well because on the class side, 5e can't stick to class strengths and weaknesses. It didn't focus on making sure some classes were good at their strength while it shored up the weaknesses of other classes too quickly.