I'm genuinely curious what everyone here thinks is broken in 5th edition DnD. First though, a few things...
Broken in this thread I take to mean as one of two things:
1. Does not function well; not as effective as it should be, doesn't perform the task it's supposed to, otherwise does not work, etc.
2. Functions too well; more effective than it should be, usable for tasks not intended, etc.
If you have a different definition of broken, please explain what you mean when you say broken before explaining what is broken and why.
If possible, please suggest a fix (not required), this can be a conceptual fix, not a rules-lawyery explicit rule replacement, just like, "Oh if we changed X to only apply/generally apply then it would fix its strength/shortcomings."
Example: The Lucky Feat
I wouldn't ban it or anything, it's just very, VERY useful, especially on a halfling or with a diviner (a halfling diviner with lucky, bwahahahaha...). Turning disadvantage into super advantage is pretty sick. If I were to suggest a fix, I'd limit it to once per short rest, as the 3/long rest lets a character save up all the uses for a single fight and drastically change the outcome.
Personally, I don't think it's actually broken, I was just thinking of an example of a really powerful ability (depending on your table, suggested adventuring day implies basically 1 use per short rest) that can be attained relatively early in play. A variant human could start with it, for example. There's people who are going to take it all the time, and find every use they can for it, and there's people who are like, meh, I like this better. I don't really think it's a problem, but you may disagree, I'm just wanting to know what people have a problem with, and why.
Yes, I know there's a lot of threads about specific things being broken, but there's not a thread for people to come and just generally throw out what ideas they have as to "this is broken and why, here's my suggested fix." I just think if we had an idea of what kinds of things we actually agreed on, generally, it would be useful for us all when designing content for a broader audience. Maybe you think healing is too strong, or maybe you think that a particular ability or spell is too weak, the encounter building tools make boring and weak fights, whatever. I'm just curious to see what people don't like, and why, and how they think it could be fixed to work more appropriately to the way they want to play even if the fix isn't well thought out or you can link to your fix directly that you've already made.
I'm not wanting to start arguments, so if you disagree with someone, I suggest ignoring it. If you want to argue, by all means, don't get me wrong, I'm just saying that's not the intent of the thread. The intent is basically a giant user generated list of issues people have with the system itself. I'm looking for a diversity of viewpoints and the things they have issue with because I'm curious if there are any features of the system that are generally agreed upon to be broken, or not function well/as intended.
Broken in this thread I take to mean as one of two things:
1. Does not function well; not as effective as it should be, doesn't perform the task it's supposed to, otherwise does not work, etc.
2. Functions too well; more effective than it should be, usable for tasks not intended, etc.
If you have a different definition of broken, please explain what you mean when you say broken before explaining what is broken and why.
If possible, please suggest a fix (not required), this can be a conceptual fix, not a rules-lawyery explicit rule replacement, just like, "Oh if we changed X to only apply/generally apply then it would fix its strength/shortcomings."
Example: The Lucky Feat
I wouldn't ban it or anything, it's just very, VERY useful, especially on a halfling or with a diviner (a halfling diviner with lucky, bwahahahaha...). Turning disadvantage into super advantage is pretty sick. If I were to suggest a fix, I'd limit it to once per short rest, as the 3/long rest lets a character save up all the uses for a single fight and drastically change the outcome.
Personally, I don't think it's actually broken, I was just thinking of an example of a really powerful ability (depending on your table, suggested adventuring day implies basically 1 use per short rest) that can be attained relatively early in play. A variant human could start with it, for example. There's people who are going to take it all the time, and find every use they can for it, and there's people who are like, meh, I like this better. I don't really think it's a problem, but you may disagree, I'm just wanting to know what people have a problem with, and why.
Yes, I know there's a lot of threads about specific things being broken, but there's not a thread for people to come and just generally throw out what ideas they have as to "this is broken and why, here's my suggested fix." I just think if we had an idea of what kinds of things we actually agreed on, generally, it would be useful for us all when designing content for a broader audience. Maybe you think healing is too strong, or maybe you think that a particular ability or spell is too weak, the encounter building tools make boring and weak fights, whatever. I'm just curious to see what people don't like, and why, and how they think it could be fixed to work more appropriately to the way they want to play even if the fix isn't well thought out or you can link to your fix directly that you've already made.
I'm not wanting to start arguments, so if you disagree with someone, I suggest ignoring it. If you want to argue, by all means, don't get me wrong, I'm just saying that's not the intent of the thread. The intent is basically a giant user generated list of issues people have with the system itself. I'm looking for a diversity of viewpoints and the things they have issue with because I'm curious if there are any features of the system that are generally agreed upon to be broken, or not function well/as intended.