D&D 5E (2014) What (if anything) do you find "wrong" with 5E?

[Jefe Bergenstein]

There's a reason memes like this exist.

View attachment 257326

Hah! I made that.

 

[Oofta]

That was a bad and dismissive argument then ("oh, you'll eventually come around" like we were a bunch of wayward, willful teenagers), it's a bad one now. If Paizo hadn't put out Pathfinder, people would probably just have continued playing 3.5 like my Thursday group did. In that group, we never made the shift to Pathfinder, we just went back to a D&D version we found more acceptable than 4e - 3.5.

I have no doubt Pathfinder hurt 4e in the sense that it ruptured the idea that 4e, no matter how well it did on release day and that it was profitable, could keep D&D as the flagship RPG in the market and thus hastened it being shelved in favor of 5e. But the argument that we'd have eventually accepted 4e is insulting.

Some of us even embraced 4e for a while and did our best to make it work. For years. It just ended up not working for me.

If 5e had not come along we would have switched to something else when my 1 to 30 campaign ended.

 

[MoonSong]

Never no mind that Pathfinder 1e ended up just as bloated and ridiculous as 3.5 (though admittedly in different ways) by the end, lol.

I still shudder at the mention of traits....

 

[Helldritch]

Being B tier at a couple things isn't exactly a sexy niche. It works for the bard, who is ALSO a 9 level spellcaster. What is the monk's excuse?

Existing to spam stunning fist is kind of lame. I feel it is a bit too strong compared to other options and crowds out other uses (should probably be 1/round). Monk's really just need some kind of mid-fight resource recovery mechanic.

The monk at low level outshines the fighter. But falls behind at high level. Strangely, in my game the monk is again:
Top damage dealer
Best scout
And also act as the trap finder/removed and picks locks.

She holds her own against any opponent.

The monk works out fine for most tables. Only tables that rises to high levels (11+) where the fighter will start to out pace the monk have any trouble at all. The monk however, will retain its power over shutting down single target. In essence, the problem is almost a white room problem as the vast majority will see the monk working as intended. Remove the Paladin's smite ability and the same complaints will start to appear. The monk should have had a third attack at around level 14-15.

We hear similar complaints about rangers and people still play them and TCoE did almost nothing for them either. Again an other attack around level 14-15 would do a lot for the ranger. And still, most tables will not see the problem because they never rise to these levels.

There is nothing wrong for a class to see a shift in its role over the course of the levels and there is nothing wrong to be second best at a lot of things. See the bard, it promises a lot, but second best healer and poney trick... not even close in damage to warlocks and wizards. Heck, it damage cantrip only does a d4 and disadvantage on one attack fades in power the higher level you get as most high threat foes will have more than one attack or will be able to cast spells.

But you claim the bard is fine. I do the same fir the monk. We just added wisdom mod to ki.

Also, the monk pretty much assume two short rests between long rests. Do you have these or do you simply have one fight per day? With no short rests, the monk does not compete at all with long rest classes. It simply can't. And without 6-8 encounters per day, the long rests classes simply have too much going for them. They do not have to withhold their ressources in case of...

A lot if the monk's problem can be directly related to the level you play and the style of your table. I strictly enforce the 6-8 encounters per day and only allow 2 short rests between long rests. Allowing more simply gives too much power to short rests classes, especially warlocks but the monk too as it can use all his ki points in every fights.

 

[Minigiant]

If anything, that's a deficiency in the conjuration wizard, not something new to the druid. Having played them since 1e, druids have always been a significant summoning class.

That's the flaw of 5e giving the wizard almost everything....

There's almost nowhere to go afterwards.

It's the same reason why 3.5 wizard PRC we're either lame or OP.

 

[Vaalingrade]

That's the flaw of 5e giving the wizard almost everything....

There's almost nowhere to go afterwards.

It's the same reason why 3.5 wizard PRC we're either lame or OP.

D&D 5.50 : Delete the wizard.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I have no doubt Pathfinder hurt 4e in the sense that it ruptured the idea that 4e, no matter how well it did on release day and that it was profitable, could keep D&D as the flagship RPG in the market and thus hastened it being shelved in favor of 5e. But the argument that we'd have eventually accepted 4e is insulting.

While I can see why it reads that way to you, I do think the dynamic would have been very different if the base split had not been so profound. All one has to do is contrast the 3e situation (where there was a lot of hostility, but there were a lot of new players and returnees, and where, if not the only game in town, there wasn't a well enough developed OSR to give too many options for people who weren't going to be content with just the old material) and the 4e situation (where it landed at a time when D&D wasn't attracting a lot of new players for outside reasons, and most returnees had already come back if they were going to, and where there was a viable, well-supported alternative) to see there were some real and practical issues beyond how many people didn't like 4e versus not liking 3e when they both came.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I still shudder at the mention of traits....

Fundamentally they were stuck with a bad underlaying structure and it wasn't going to be a thing they were going to be able to fix at that time; all that could happen would it'd get worse.

 

[Rogerd1]

I think 4e just had too many options with each class. Choice is great, it really is but every class had the same issues - at will, daily etc and it became somewhat unwieldy.

At least in my opinion.

But I have never liked the use X powers so many times a day, having had a tendency to replace with magic points. But that could have been down to one of my first rpg being Runequest.

 

[Minigiant]

The monk at low level outshines the fighter. But falls behind at high level. Strangely, in my game the monk is again:
Top damage dealer
Best scout
And also act as the trap finder/removed and picks locks

The monks no AC and mitigation of it costs the same bonus action and resources as their offense. And since they have limited options for upgrades, they then to grow slower. This hurts the monk at tanking and best down.

And that's the issue. The monk fantasy for many are is being good at offense and defense with the limitation of their style being the core balancing factor as a weakness.

So the monk sorta works as a tank, damage dealer, scout, or utility. But really only if better classes aren't doing it as well. It is very easy to step on the monks toes. And even if someone doesn't, the monk doesn't match the fantastical martial artist of media very well.