D&D 5E What is Over-Powered?

And how much playtesting have you done to determine what's unrealistic or too powerful? And have you playtested your proposed changes?

He doesn't PLAY 5E. He's just ranting and yelling at clouds. Its overpowered because its different than whatever random rule Gygax made up when his mind was younger and more flexible. Different = overpowered!

You wanna talk overpowered? Nothing beats the cheese of 1E/2E's broken ass multiclassing rules. So... I could be a wizard. Or I can be a cleric/wizard and be on average, a level behind in exchange for way more spells, better saves, turn undead, more HP, better THAC0... Where do I sign up?

The good news for him is AD&D didnt go anywhere, and he can still play it. The good news for us is others who don't want to wont have to explain its backwards mechanics to new players anymore because game design has improved beyond +1 armors LOWERING your AC because... reasons! Hey my dex reaction adjustment of +2 LOWERS my initiative, which is good! My charisma reaction adjustment of +1 RAISES my reaction with NPC's, which is good. High/low, by bother with consistency! AD&D was needlessly convoluted and the rules were frankly a barrier to getting people in the hobby.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

He doesn't PLAY 5E. He's just ranting and yelling at clouds. Its overpowered because its different than whatever random rule Gygax made up when his mind was younger and more flexible. Different = overpowered!

Lol. Yeah, it was a rhetorical question. ;)

But seriously - I started playing AD&D (1e) as soon as it was released, moving up from the Basic Set rules. We loved it at the time because it was something new and exciting. We didn't fully understand its flaws and inconsistencies, most likely because we were 11 years old. We began to see the warts the longer we played and the older we got, so we house ruled a bunch of stuff. I will always have fond memories of the original AD&D, but would not go back to playing by those oft-confusing rules. Nostalgia only gets you so far.

edit: found this the other day. Amusing (and largely correct) look back at AD&D: http://www.lloydwrites.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/1e-sucks.pdf
 

He doesn't PLAY 5E. He's just ranting and yelling at clouds. Its overpowered because its different than whatever random rule Gygax made up when his mind was younger and more flexible. Different = overpowered!

You wanna talk overpowered? Nothing beats the cheese of 1E/2E's broken ass multiclassing rules. So... I could be a wizard. Or I can be a cleric/wizard and be on average, a level behind in exchange for way more spells, better saves, turn undead, more HP, better THAC0... Where do I sign up?

The good news for him is AD&D didnt go anywhere, and he can still play it. The good news for us is others who don't want to wont have to explain its backwards mechanics to new players anymore because game design has improved beyond +1 armors LOWERING your AC because... reasons! Hey my dex reaction adjustment of +2 LOWERS my initiative, which is good! My charisma reaction adjustment of +1 RAISES my reaction with NPC's, which is good. High/low, by bother with consistency! AD&D was needlessly convoluted and the rules were frankly a barrier to getting people in the hobby.

You know, I am here and it is rude of you to talk about me in the third person like this. How do you know I don't play 5e? My recommendations are not ranting or yelling at clouds. They are all very light recommendations, which may add more substance and verisimilitude to the game. It is hard for you to believe, but I am not making a value comparison between 5e and any previous edition. I am speaking about wanting to enjoy 5th Edition. I want such modifications because then I would enjoy it more.
 

And how much playtesting have you done to determine what's unrealistic or too powerful? And have you playtested your proposed changes?

I would not playtest such ideas before implementing them. I would try them and see what happens. If you mean to suggest that I am only offering suggestions, you would be correct.
 

I would not playtest such ideas before implementing them. I would try them and see what happens. If you mean to suggest that I am only offering suggestions, you would be correct.
Suggestion are good...they're how the game improves. As for "try them and see what happens", isn't that what play testing is?
 

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.)

The spell list needs a lot of attention, but let's discuss criticals. For me, there is nothing quite like the critical hit. I am so pleased that 5th Edition brought back criticals on a natural 20, instead of demanding a reroll to confirm it. Simply put, barbarians would be the envy of the arena if they could get this brutal critical ability even if the math is very small. Some decisions are about the flavor, not the math. I want criticals to be shared by all characters.
 

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.

AD&D is at the foundation of 5th Edition, and it was at the foundation of both 3rd and 4th Edition. The games were also sold as new editions of both AD&D and D&D, in the same sense that AD&D was a new edition of the original. If I believed 5th Edition was a whole new game, which didn't need to maintain the feel and quality of AD&D, I wouldn't play it. I only played 3rd to the extent I did because it was AD&D.
 

Suggestion are good...they're how the game improves. As for "try them and see what happens", isn't that what play testing is?

Play-testing was done by Wizards of the Coast involving the public. I wouldn't call "the results" of running a rule at one table play-testing.
 

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.

These changes basically remove any reason whatsoever for playing a barbarian over a fighter.
-Changes from resistance to DR3 on rage essentially remove the barbarian's primary defense.... A guarantee of being able to take some hits and survive, changed to half of the "Heavy armour master" feat. You..do know how hard things hit in 5th ed, right?

-An additional -2 to AC while raging? Given that you seem to like low stat PCs... Barbarian with ~AC 14, 12 while raging? Basically anything and everything will hit at worst a 9, usually less... Damage resistance while raging mitigates this somewh...oh, wait :(

-6th level powers for Totem warrior- Sure glad I can travel stealthily at normal pace for 1min/day! You really think these "always on" minor abilities need to be nerfed to 1 min per DAY?

-Retaliation- one attack, once per day, as a reaction.. as a level 14 class feature? This is now much weaker than the Fighter-Battlemaster's Riposte maneuver (uses= #superiority die, recharge all dice on short rest)

-Brutal Critical- Wait, what? You just said that you were pleased with the removal of critical confirmations in this edition.. and now you want to ADD them?

If you treat the other classes in this way, everything will just be reduced to mediocrity.
 

These changes basically remove any reason whatsoever for playing a barbarian over a fighter.
-Changes from resistance to DR3 on rage essentially remove the barbarian's primary defense.... A guarantee of being able to take some hits and survive, changed to half of the "Heavy armour master" feat. You..do know how hard things hit in 5th ed, right?

-An additional -2 to AC while raging? Given that you seem to like low stat PCs... Barbarian with ~AC 14, 12 while raging? Basically anything and everything will hit at worst a 9, usually less... Damage resistance while raging mitigates this somewh...oh, wait :(

-6th level powers for Totem warrior- Sure glad I can travel stealthily at normal pace for 1min/day! You really think these "always on" minor abilities need to be nerfed to 1 min per DAY?

-Retaliation- one attack, once per day, as a reaction.. as a level 14 class feature? This is now much weaker than the Fighter-Battlemaster's Riposte maneuver (uses= #superiority die, recharge all dice on short rest)

-Brutal Critical- Wait, what? You just said that you were pleased with the removal of critical confirmations in this edition.. and now you want to ADD them?

If you treat the other classes in this way, everything will just be reduced to mediocrity.

I'll start with brutal critical. In making recommendations, I am only putting a little of my own preferences into them. I know I said I am writing these because I'd enjoy the game better, but that's what it would do for me. I am trying to suggest things other people would like, too, and confirming criticals were very popular among a few players I used to know so I think they'd like it back in the game on a partial basis like that. I'm not claiming to know more than anyone else would about what people might like, and I know there are some real experts here who can make better suggestions.

I am really very humble. As for the rest of your comment, I need to get through the other classes to put everything into perspective. The fighter's superiority dice, for example, I may recommend changes to, and for the other classes. You say everything will be reduced to mediocrity, but I want to stop you there and say that it would be very balanced from what I am used to. The monsters wouldn't hit so hard, or have so many hit points. I want to use the original hit dice, such as 1-1 for goblins and 2 for gnolls. That is 1d8-1 (minimum 1) hit points for the standard goblin, and they just get a shortsword or spear typically, which does 1d6 points. You see where I am coming from? It's all different. I'm not going as far as to say 5th Edition should be a reprint of AD&D, it's just that there should be like a dial in the game to make it more like AD&D and BECMI also, in terms of power.

I'm the kind of player who never looks at the DMG or the MM, also. So all I know of the monsters is my expectations from earlier editions. I want to be able to join a 5th Edition game, say at a convention, and know how much it will take to defeat goblins. It's all very particular, I know, but I hope to find a proper balance between the old standard and the 5th Edition "modern" standard. I am not meaning to disrespect the 5th Edition or the modern standard.

Things sound very big to me, which your experience may show isn't. Advantage, for instance, sounds like a real big deal. Getting to roll a second die was unheard of, at least until the Choose Future spell from the Tome of Magic was released in 2nd Edition. I just don't feel the barbarian should be "twice" as strong as others with the same strength scores, or be able to fight with bonuses to damage without taking at least a small penalty. I am very much a believer in balancing things out that way, like the fumble with a natural 1 to balance the critical hit. Now I am maybe starting to rant, but I feel there is no other way to address your questions without explaining more of where I am coming from.

The barbarian's "resistance" to bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage is a 50% reduction by the book in 5th Edition. This, too, was just unheard of before. I don't feel there is anything about the barbarian that would provide that kind of bonus. That is the kind of thing I might expect from an iron golem in the new edition, or from skeletons vs. piercing and slashing weapons. The barbarian already has extra hit points that let him take more damage. Damage reduction 3, which is 3 fewer points per hit down to a minimum of 1, is something I could live with. If you play with much higher damage, this maybe should be more significant, maybe something like 5 or 4 + 1 per three barbarian levels.

The stealth only working for 1 minute is poor, I agree, but again I am of the mindset that the stealth actually grants invisibility and silence so it's supernatural and pretty cool for a barbarian to me. (Thieves' hiding in shadows and moving silently actually grant invisibility and silence in all of the campaigns I've played.) If the stealth is something less than this, of course it should be longer, but again it's like taking the rogue's ability to me, and the tracking ability of the ranger, too, if it goes too long and the party doesn't feel they need a rogue or ranger to do most of the stealth or tracking. The book has it unlimited if I read it correctly. I just think that is over-powered given these points.

Retaliation now, it's really something I need to re-examine after analyzing the fighter's abilities. Retaliation is something that was unheard of as such before, and I think if anyone can do it, it should be the fighter. I would hate to think the monsters can retaliate. That practically changes the tone of combat in D&D, if so. I mean, you take turns attacking, and if they can attack back on your turn that would be an awesome surprise or a shock. Everyone would want to do it then, and I don't see why other characters couldn't try it. I wouldn't have introduced such a maneuver with the barbarian. That implies it's something primal, whereas I think it should have to be more of a finesse maneuver. It's big, so I put it this way.

Of course, I am just throwing darts at a board. I hope to engender discussion from others who can make suggestions. Paraxis, the Jester, Zardnaar, and steeldragons are just a few of the people I know who are experts with the mechanics and at DMing.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top