Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8719976" data-attributes="member: 18">First off, to be clear, I like 5E, it's my second-favourite edition of D&D, but yeah I have a lot of specific issues with it - not in order of importance!1) Skill mechanics - It uses d20s with small modifiers for skill resolution, and doesn't have Take 10 and Take 20 to mitigate (at least not clearly presented in an up-front player-accessible way).This strongly encourages a binary approach to skill use, and whilst TECHNICALLY 5E allows for other approaches, they're not well-handled by the skill system, and never presented in any kind of player-facing way, and just as a thing DMs could maybe perhaps sometimes occasionally do if the whim strikes them.20 years ago, I was okay with this. By 2010, though, nah. I guess we have to expect d20s to stay as a sacred cow, but they really need to do better.2) Hit Dice - A great concept, with nearly ZERO integration into the actual game system (does anything except Bard even interact with them?), which is just absolutely dumb. Magical healing should trigger the use of them, so should stuff like Second Wind, rather than them being entirely used on Short Rests. Worlds Without Number does a similar thing but much better, for example. They could be a major and cool mechanic with good interactions, instead they're a weird addenda.3) Short Rests - As others have said, 60 minutes is not a "short rest". That's a generous lunchbreak, or a free period, or something. Short Rests should be 10 minutes. It's just dumb, and I dunno why they went with it, except maybe as a clumsy attempt to "self-limit" Short Rests when they should have just said "X per day".4) 6-8 encounters/day - As we found out recently, this was a last-minute unplaytested changed, and BOY WAS IT A BAD ONE. 3-4 encounters/day should have been the default.5) LFQW - I mean, let's be real, 5E is nowhere near as bad as 3E. It's not even comparable. And yet... Full Casters are still pretty much straight-up better than everyone else, even if you try to push for the mythical 6-8 encounters/day. It's particularly silly out of combat (in combat it's not too bad, unlike 3E), because Full Casters get everything martials do and then some, typically. They lose nothing.6) Skill choices - Virtually all skills in 5E key off INT/WIS/CHA, and not in a remotely balanced way even. A couple key off DEX (one of which has questionable reasons for even existing - Acrobatics), and a single solitary one of STR, and none off CON. This contributes further to Full Casters pulling ahead outside of combat, and just being more interesting to play, because their primary attributes link up with a bunch of skills.7) Too many CHA classes - I mean come on. Did the Warlock really need to be CHA? They did not.8) Some really questionable and rushed-seeming class design.8a) Monks - way too much stuff in the base class means subclasses are weaksauce and every single monk is a mythical Chinese Shaolin Monk specifically, which is dumb as hell. Slapped together.8b) Sorcerers - Went back from a cool DNDnext design to the 3E-style "metagame justification" as to why they exist, which so awful.8c) Ranger - Just like roundly C- grade design.9) Feats - Poorly designed and indecisive. Loads wildly underpowered or ridiculously overpowered. Stuff being made Feat-only even though 5E is a Feats-optional game. And now D&D is sort of going "Oh uhhh maybe we should give out Feat for free at 1st and 4th!", which I think is sensible but also COME ON guys you are so against them in the PHB.9a) Charger - A prime example. It is truly demented to make Feats optional, and then lock being able to Charge at all in 5E behind a Feat. Charging should be a default thing you can do.10) Weapons are ditchwater-dull. Maybe just go back to damage-by-class or something if you want to be boring? We don't need 3E levels of idiocy but come on.11) No Swordmage-type class, instead a dozen half-arsed to quarter-arsed subclasses to ineptly mess with the concept instead.12) 1/16th-arsed take on Psionics. The Mystic was easily 90% of the way there - I blame WotC-of-that-era's idiotic adherence to the "70% test", which would also have blocked, say Wizards or Bards if they were being added (Wizards wouldn't even have made 30% acceptance lol if they were a new class). The subclasses are wildly inconsistent - but at least the Soulknife is extremely well-designed and the Psi-Warrior ain't bad (why they couldn't give those two invisible mage hand though I dunno).13) Backgrounds - Custom is supposed to be the DEFAULT, but so few people seem to get this. Fewer actual backgrounds should have been made, but more examples of special stuff should have been given. Maybe background should be a thing people can roll on by default (as opposed to a random variant rule in the DMG).14) The DMG - It's just a mess. Mediocre to poor quality advice, waffling, weird sections which go nowhere, and truly bad optional/variant rules section which was clearly mega-rushed. Loads of stuff should have been popped out for clarity and is instead included in paragraphs of waffle. Just a failure on multiple levels, esp. compared to 4E's ones.15) Monsters - Were bungled the first time around. MotM improves them a lot and I have hope for the 2024 MM.16) CR system is bad, where in 4E it was excellent. This makes the DM's job a lot harder than it has to be. Still infinitely better than 3E where the CR system was actively misleading and had to be ignored because it told you lies!17) Warlock is better designed than almost all other classes because you actually make real decisions whilst leveling and it dares to diverge from the Martial/Half-Caster/Full Caster paradigm.I have more but these are some of the obvious ones.</blockquote>

Verification