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

[Micah Sweet]

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.

How do you enforce 6-8 encounters per day? Is your world that filled with enemies?

 

[Helldritch]

How do you enforce 6-8 encounters per day? Is your world that filled with enemies?

It is soooo easy. But it entirely depends on the style you play. Gritty realism is the key.

And combat rounds are often going into the 7th or 8th round. Our absolute longest fight lasted 25 rounds against a single dragon.

But campaign style and rules are what gives
many short rests character their chances as the daily resource type characters must be careful with their resources. We often see characters taking the dodge action to mitigate damage since resting do not restore HP and long rest is quite hard to get. Feats such as Healer, Inspiring leader, Heavy armor master and shield master for fighters are quite a must. Heck, war caster is the first pick of any casters with spell sniper a close second. Tough is also taken quite often to add a bit more HP.

It maybe why feats such as heavy weapon master and sharp shooter are not problematic in my games. Since HP is a resource to be closely watched, defensive feats are easily seen as very good. A simple heavy armor master, assuming being ht every single round could save almost 21 points of damage per combat. And since we roll damage, sometimes the feat negates damage entirely. An arrow doing 3 pts of damage effectively do nothing to such a character. Les HP loss means less spells spent on healing and more spell spared.

If the characters see that their foes have trouble to hit them, they will go all in after a few rounds but they fight defensively quite a lot. I should try to note a typical fight and write it down as an example of how it is going on in my games.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

It is soooo easy. But it entirely depends on the style you play. Gritty realism is the key.

And combat rounds are often going into the 7th or 8th round. Our absolute longest fight lasted 25 rounds against a single dragon.

But campaign style and rules are what gives
many short rests character their chances as the daily resource type characters must be careful with their resources. We often see characters taking the dodge action to mitigate damage since resting do not restore HP and long rest is quite hard to get. Feats such as Healer, Inspiring leader, Heavy armor master and shield master for fighters are quite a must. Heck, war caster is the first pick of any casters with spell sniper a close second. Tough is also taken quite often to add a bit more HP.

It maybe why feats such as heavy weapon master and sharp shooter are not problematic in my games. Since HP is a resource to be closely watched, defensive feats are easily seen as very good. A simple heavy armor master, assuming being ht every single round could save almost 21 points of damage per combat. And since we roll damage, sometimes the feat negates damage entirely. An arrow doing 3 pts of damage effectively do nothing to such a character. Les HP loss means less spells spent on healing and more spell spared.

If the characters see that their foes have trouble to hit them, they will go all in after a few rounds but they fight defensively quite a lot. I should try to note a typical fight and write it down as an example of how it is going on in my games.

Your game sounds like you use some heavy house rules, so I'm not sure how "easy" it is if you have to change the very nature of the game and make what is expected to be a daily thing (long rest) hard to get. .

 

[Thomas Shey]

I indicated nothing of the sort.

Then bluntly, you were as clear as mud.

 

[Helldritch]

Your game sounds like you use some heavy house rules, so I'm not sure how "easy" it is if you have to change the very nature of the game and make what is expected to be a daily thing (long rest) hard to get. .

No heavy house rules. They are all in the DMG.
We follow the 6-8 encounters per day. 2 short rests and 1 long rest. Filling with random encounters if necessary and it works. The game was built around this and dungeon delving. So the Gritty realism and alternate rest rules are exactly what is needed to follow the basic assumptions. I blame the DMG and PHB for not being clear about it.

The rules as written in the PHB only encourages the 5mwd and it is why monks can't shine. They need two short rests (or three if you do not add wisdom to ki) to shine.

 

[MoonSong]

Were they that bad? I thought the initial concept, get a skill proficiency and a minor bonus were ok. Some were a little strong, but it was way better than the mess they made of Feats.

I'm more talking about things like Dirty Trickery (use Dirty Trick Master to impose the Nauseated condition, preventing standard actions, while also requiring a standard action to remove it), nerfs to Crane Wing and the Jingasa of the Fortunate Soldier for being "too good for public play", and how almost every class Paizo designs has to have a limited resource to juggle and was overly complex (contrast and compare the level 7 Eldritch Knight subclass feature to the Spell Combat of the Magus).

In theory they weren't that bad, small flavor packets that buy fictional space and give you a small perk. But they are a nightmare. A lot of people just see them as free bonuses, but I can't ignore the flavor. And the bonuses and benefits are so fringe at the same time. The good ones have flavor I don't like and the ones with good flavor are meh benefits at best if not actively against what I want. Then they had the brilliant idea of dividing traits in categories and you just get up to one on each category, so many times I end up wanting two that are from the same category. Then there's the fact there are hundreds if not thousands of them scattered across books...

The only way I would play PF is if I was allowed to not having to choose traits...

 

[Eyes of Nine]

Consider feat-only campaigns.

Well yes. But that sounds like work

 

[Peter BOSCO'S]

Having a discussion with some players this evening and I wanted to ask the general community here:

What do you find "wrong" with 5E?

1d20 does not give a bell curve. Bounded Accuracy makes this worse by decreasing modifiers to this roll.
D&D 5th is too much about how well do your dice roll and less about how well did you build and play your character.

The index is terrible.

Skills should be required, not optional.

 

[Minigiant]

Just realized something else.

The desire to make the game simple for newbie made too basic and backloaded for veterans.

Almost every class with a 3rd lvel subclass has hard baked in features that are simple and require the subclass to expand.

There are few real choices for many classes in the first 2 levels to make it easy for new players. This is where half of the martials/casters issues arises as casters get to choose spells with definite effects.

 

[James Gasik]

I thought I read a dev comment saying this is the case, but just in case I have old man brain, I apologize in advance.

How do people feel about the "intended" starting level being 3?