D&D 5E What is Over-Powered?

I want to use AD&D as the standard. I think the core rules for 5th Edition should have set the challenge and power levels to this, so I want it to be brought back up with ability score generation and brought back down (where applicable) in the case of dragons being too powerful. These are my preferences anyway.

The reference to bringing characters to life is one benefit of random ability score generation with a wide field of outliers, such as given by 3d6 in order. In this way, the world comes to life more because it provides for more different kinds of characters, which is closer to reality. I could have fleshed out this point more.

I don't know how, but we have to get back to AD&D.

I think you're missing a lot of glory there, but I won't try and force it on you.

I have played AD&D... the aspects of that system you enjoy, I did not.

There is room in both 5th edition and AD&D to play as you wish.. but there is no need to turn 5th edition into a reprint of AD&D.

The assertion that 5th edition is about Min/Maxing and stacking bonuses is only true if players wish to play that way. You can game any system in such a fashion, but the key is *choice*.

I feel that 3d6 in order removes a great deal of player choice, forcing them to play whatever RNG hands them, as opposed to crafting the character they *want* to play. For many(myself included), this can lead to a lack of any sort of investment in the character, and in the game in general- potentially harming the experience for everyone involved.

There can certainly be value in playing in the fashion you prefer, but only if all involved choose to do so.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

There are many benefits, Hussar. It's difficult to portray their relevance in the new edition, though. Without ability score requirements for any of the classes, or races, there is a different atmosphere, stemming from its own tradition going back to 3rd Edition.

Unless you get your DM and all the other players to agree to try out something like the suggestion I made to you earlier, you won't see the benefits.

Neither OE, BX, BECMI, nor Cyclopedia had attribute requirements for class entry.
So why should 5E?

5E isn't AD&D 5th Edition. 3E wasn't AD&D 3, either. Edition 3 wasn't an evolution, it was a redesign from first principles with an eye towards compatibility. 4E was another redesign from first principles, with an emphasis on class equality. 5E is another redesign. NOT ONE OF THEM IS MECHANICALLY AD&D-ish. They should be approached as wholly new games with similar classes and races, and the same published settings.

3.5 was a touchup of 3.0. 4E essentials was a touchup of 4.0.

Oh, and they did nerf a bunch of monsters. They also buffed a few up. The balance works differently. It's a whole new game that shares the same list of attributes, races, classes, and armors... but it's not the same game.
 

Neither OE, BX, BECMI, nor Cyclopedia had attribute requirements for class entry.
So why should 5E?

5E isn't AD&D 5th Edition. 3E wasn't AD&D 3, either. Edition 3 wasn't an evolution, it was a redesign from first principles with an eye towards compatibility. 4E was another redesign from first principles, with an emphasis on class equality. 5E is another redesign. NOT ONE OF THEM IS MECHANICALLY AD&D-ish. They should be approached as wholly new games with similar classes and races, and the same published settings.

3.5 was a touchup of 3.0. 4E essentials was a touchup of 4.0.

Oh, and they did nerf a bunch of monsters. They also buffed a few up. The balance works differently. It's a whole new game that shares the same list of attributes, races, classes, and armors... but it's not the same game.

LOL. I thought you were a newbie.

We call 3rd Edition - 5th Edition, "D&D 3rd Edition, or D&D 5th Edition", instead of "AD&D...", just for short! That was a decision Wizards of the Coast made long ago, probably to just use the brand name more simply, and for no other reason. Everyone knows it's really AD&D 5th Edition now, but AD&D has caught on nonetheless as referring to both 1st and 2nd Edition AD&D.

AD&D 1st Edition is the system that had the greater influence overall. It can be seen in D&D 5th Edition more even without ability score requirements. The most significant thing is the implementation of "races" to help define characters. In BECMI, there were only classes, even for elf, for example (1st level elf, then with experience advancing to 2nd level elf). The math is also AD&D's, and so are most of the spells and monsters.
 

Guess I'll start on the classes. First is the barbarian. Like every class, some abilities are standard and others are only if you choose a particular subclass. For barbarian, we have berserker and totem warrior in the PHB.

Rage is much too strong.
- Drop advantage on strength checks and strength saving throws. Instead apply the melee damage bonus to each of these.
- Keep bonus to melee damage, but give a -2 penalty to AC while raging.
- Reduce resistance to bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage to damage reduction 3 vs. these attacks.

Unarmored defense, reckless attack, danger sense, extra attack, fast movement, and feral instinct are acceptable.

Brutal critical is much too strong.
- Make the character confirm the critical for the extra damage, once for one additional die, twice for two, and thrice for three. So for a 13th level barbarian to do x4 damage, the hit has to be confirmed twice. That means a reroll where you just have to hit, not roll a natural 20.

Relentless rage, persistent rage, indomitable might, and primal champion are fine.

For the berserker now, frenzy, mindless rage, and intimidating presence are fine. Retaliation is too strong. Change it to once per day.

For the totem warrior, the rituals are fine.

At 3rd level, reduce the bear power to damage reduction 3 vs. all attacks except psychic, keep the eagle power, and change the wolf power to gives all allies get a +2 bonus to hit for one round only out of the battle.
At 6th level, each power can only be used for one minute per day.
At 14th level, the bear power needs to work differently, too. The enemy you are attacking while raging can be attacked with advantage by you if it attacks someone else. The eagle power is fine. The wolf power can only knock a creature prone if it fails a strength saving throw.

That was a lot of work. I don't know when I'll get to it, but the bard will be next.
 
Last edited:

That was a lot of work. I don't know when I'll get to it, but the bard will be next.

It's a lot of work, but you've shown absolutely no "working" in the sense of reasoning, and frankly, the changes you've made don't make a lot of sense. If you really think Rage is "much too strong", you're going to need to explain why in some serious detail. You'd also need to explain the rather peculiar choices you made on what to change.

In particularly I'd love to see a solid mathematical basis for all the ultra-vague "too strong" claims. All the analysis and indeed all the actual play experience I've seen relating to Barbarians certainly does not paint them as "too strong" in any way, shape or form.
 

It's a lot of work, but you've shown absolutely no "working" in the sense of reasoning, and frankly, the changes you've made don't make a lot of sense. If you really think Rage is "much too strong", you're going to need to explain why in some serious detail. You'd also need to explain the rather peculiar choices you made on what to change.

In particularly I'd love to see a solid mathematical basis for all the ultra-vague "too strong" claims. All the analysis and indeed all the actual play experience I've seen relating to Barbarians certainly does not paint them as "too strong" in any way, shape or form.

I added something in as a substitute for advantage on strength checks and strength saving throws from rage. I didn't get back to that after I said drop the advantage, but I meant to add something in its place.

As for your other questions, I can't answer at this time. I shall continue to analyze the new edition, and try to assess its strengths and weaknesses. I am looking for ways to ground the new edition, to make the characters and their abilities more realistic and less powerful.
 

As for your other questions, I can't answer at this time. I shall continue to analyze the new edition, and try to assess its strengths and weaknesses. I am looking for ways to ground the new edition, to make the characters and their abilities more realistic and less powerful.
And how much playtesting have you done to determine what's unrealistic or too powerful? And have you playtested your proposed changes?
 

As for your other questions, I can't answer at this time. I shall continue to analyze the new edition, and try to assess its strengths and weaknesses. I am looking for ways to ground the new edition, to make the characters and their abilities more realistic and less powerful.

I trust you will going through the spell list & making those more realistic too?


(& FWIW your assessment of brutal critical undermines any other tweaking you may come up with - it's maybe a 5% damage increase - more when it ups in power later but still nothing like the fighter's 3rd attack per round.)
 

LOL. I thought you were a newbie.

We call 3rd Edition - 5th Edition, "D&D 3rd Edition, or D&D 5th Edition", instead of "AD&D...", just for short! That was a decision Wizards of the Coast made long ago, probably to just use the brand name more simply, and for no other reason. Everyone knows it's really AD&D 5th Edition now, but AD&D has caught on nonetheless as referring to both 1st and 2nd Edition AD&D.

AD&D 1st Edition is the system that had the greater influence overall. It can be seen in D&D 5th Edition more even without ability score requirements. The most significant thing is the implementation of "races" to help define characters. In BECMI, there were only classes, even for elf, for example (1st level elf, then with experience advancing to 2nd level elf). The math is also AD&D's, and so are most of the spells and monsters.

3E shows a lot of AD&D influences... but those are almost all from the Player's Option series versions. It shows a lot of BX/BECMI influences as well, perhaps more... but it's a different game entirely from either. The use of the name was a sales ploy.

Most other game systems don't have such radical edition change. (Traveller does, but it's the most notable exception. Mechwarrior also.) Champions 1E to Champions 6E, the adventures, mechanics, and general process of resolutions is unchanged. Rolemaster has 35 years with the same mechanics in use. Tunnels and Trolls went 30 years with the same fundamental mechanics; 7th ed made some changes to levels, XP, and added an attribute, but the Saving Roll process is the same as in 1E (except it can be used on more than just Luck). Palladium added MegaDamage, but otherwise, it's pretty much the same mechanics now as when first published 34 years ago. BRP has added various special modifications for CGen for a variety of settings, but the resolution mechanics are still the same 37 years later.

There's more difference between AD&D 2E and D&D 3E than between RQ 1E (from 1977) and BRP's current edition. In BRP, only Character gen and magic vary all that much; in D&D/AD&D, the rules of play vary while the basics of Character Gen (barring 4E) are what stay the same.
 

LOL. I thought you were a newbie.

We call 3rd Edition - 5th Edition, "D&D 3rd Edition, or D&D 5th Edition", instead of "AD&D...", just for short! That was a decision Wizards of the Coast made long ago, probably to just use the brand name more simply, and for no other reason. Everyone knows it's really AD&D 5th Edition now, but AD&D has caught on nonetheless as referring to both 1st and 2nd Edition AD&D.

AD&D 1st Edition is the system that had the greater influence overall. It can be seen in D&D 5th Edition more even without ability score requirements. The most significant thing is the implementation of "races" to help define characters. In BECMI, there were only classes, even for elf, for example (1st level elf, then with experience advancing to 2nd level elf). The math is also AD&D's, and so are most of the spells and monsters.

I'm not convinced that 5E really qualifies as "Advanced" at all. I'm enjoying it (after a looong hiatus, 15+ years since I drifted away from AD&D2 around the S&P era) but it's pretty simplistic in a lot of ways, from the lack of spell research rules to the game-ishness of the encounter design rules to the dreary sameness of all the clerics[1]. Maybe they took the "Advanced" Moniker off it for a reason. (Or maybe 3E still had the richness of AD&D and 5E only recently lost it? I don't have the historical context to know for sure here.)

I'm enjoying 5E and I may stick with it, but I want more Advanced stuff! I loved Fifth Edition Foes and I'm really looking forward to the Book of Lost Spells. And I want Spelljammer.

[1] Hopefully, anyone who is familiar with the Tome of Magic and Legends and Lore knows what I'm talking about here. In AD&D, any given priest usually knew no better than half of the total available spells, and some spells (e.g. Solipcism, an illusion that works only on yourself) were so obscure that only relatively esoteric priesthoods had access to them. In 5E, cleric spells are cleric spells and that's pretty much it. All you get from your particular priesthood is additional access to non-cleric spells. It works but it's simple, not Advanced.
 

Remove ads

Top