D&D 5E Which 5e Should I Propose to My Group?

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

• Behind the screen, you can do anything you want.

Although you're advised to keep your pants on.

 

[Distracted DM]

I thought there was little difference between the 3. I thought a casual game could have PCs from each and none of them would be overpowering.

There's a big difference between 5e/ToV, and Level Up. Level Up has A LOT more features for characters- from minor to major; that, and if your players are the kind that develop good system mastery/optimize, A5E martials (mostly berserkers+fighters) can go nuts. Overall the A5E characters will have more power than either 2014 or ToV.

For OP: You could mix and match, but I'd recommend that if a player makes a ToV, 2014, A5E character- all of their origin and class stuff comes from that one book/version. And you'll need to choose what book you're using as a core system, that is which book you're pulling feats, spells, equipment, mechanics, etc. from.
That's how I do it:

I use A5E as the core system; if someone wants to make a 5e14 character to keep it simple they can, they'll use 5e race+background+class, but they'll be using A5E feats, spells, n' equipment. A5E uses the d4-d6-d8 dice chain for Expertise.

I don't want my players finding the most powerful/broken combos by mixing and matching heritages and classes and feats and features between all these different versions of 5e, so I keep it as simple as possible while trying to provide them a variety choices. Even so, I do get headaches for it

 

[Burnside]

FWIW, my company's actual play of To Slay a Dragon using Level Up: A5E. You can see how Strife, Supply, Fatigue, Maneuvers, and some of the different spells and magic items, etc. work.

In general, Level Up characters are stronger than 2014 characters, but not so much so that you can't use 2014 5E adventures - just make sure you use the Level Up versions of monsters, which are also stronger than their 2014 counterparts.

Actual Play YouTube playlist:

Spotify podcast version:

FWIW, I really like Level Up, but I would caution you that I don't think it's a great fit for casual/inexperienced/somewhat drunk players. There are a lot more moving parts to track than there are in 2014 5E, and a lot more abilities to remember that your character has & how to use them.

 

[Distracted DM]

In general, Level Up characters are stronger than 2014 characters, but not so much so that you can't use 2014 5E adventures - just make sure you use the Level Up versions of monsters, which are also stronger than their 2014 counterparts.]

FWIW, I really like Level Up, but I would caution you that I don't think it's a great fit for casual/inexperienced/somewhat drunk players. There are a lot more moving parts to track than there are in 2014 5E, and a lot more abilities to remember that your character has & how to use them.

All very well put, especially the parts I bolded

 

[Corinnguard]

There's a big difference between 5e/ToV, and Level Up. Level Up has A LOT more features for characters- from minor to major; that, and if your players are the kind that develop good system mastery/optimize, A5E martials (mostly berserkers+fighters) can go nuts. Overall the A5E characters will have more power than either 2014 or ToV.

A character class in Level Up has more features (outside those given by the archetype you pick) because each one covers all three pillars of gameplay-Combat, Exploration and Social Interaction. Classes in 5e/ToV tend to focus on one or two of them. Fighters in 5e/ToV, for instance, deal more with the Combat pillar. Put them outside of a combat situation and they don't feel as useful as the Ranger (who is the Exploration expert) or the member of the party who serves as the party's face (the Bard, the Paladin or the Rogue). In Level Up, the Fighter can socially interact with other martials at a tavern, the town guards, and the local militia for a number of purposes (gathering information, having a good time, etc.) With the Exploration pillar, they pick up lore about monsters and weapons/armors that will prove useful for the rest of the party.

 

[NN]

Cons: I've repeatedly run into issues with encounter balance, poorly designed enemies, little guidance about awarding treasure. My players complain that there's not enough combat options and that play is boring.

I think youve got a software problem rather than a hardware problem. I think we should be recommending what 5E adventures to buy.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

In Level Up, the Fighter can socially interact with other martials at a tavern, the town guards, and the local militia for a number of purposes (gathering information, having a good time, etc.) With the Exploration pillar, they pick up lore about monsters and weapons/armors that will prove useful for the rest of the party.

Do you feel a 5e Fighter can’t do/try these things? Or is it that the 5e rules are not as codified as Level Up so the player is less (or not at all) likely to have their Fighter try these things?

 

[Corinnguard]

Do you feel a 5e Fighter can’t do/try these things? Or is it that the 5e rules are not as codified as Level Up so the player is less (or not at all) likely to have their Fighter try these things?

A player role-playing as a Fighter could try to aid their party by exploring or socially interacting with others during an adventure. There is nothing stopping the player from doing anything with these two adventuring pillars. However, the player is left with the question, how does the Fighter go about exploring or socially interacting with others compared to the other classes? Level Up tries to address this question by providing class features that cover those two pillars in addition to the combat pillar. Often in a class specific way. A Fighter is going to do things for the exploration pillar that are different than how a Ranger goes about using the same pillar. They are also going to socially interact with other folk who are like them in some way, thus making them at times, the party's face in certain situations.

Level Up uses the same set of rules as 5e does. It just offers the players something extra while fixing issues that weren't addressed in 5e.

 

[Burnside]

The 2024 rules also offer Fighters some more utility options out of combat, including Tactical Mind (for all Fighters) and Commanding Presence and Tactical Assessment (as Battlemaster options). Alternately, the Eldritch Knight is now not restricted to Evocation/Abjuration magic, so they can bolster their exploration/rp options with spells. For any fighter, you throw in the free feat at level 1 allowing you to easily pick up Skilled (plus an additional Feat if you're Human) and it's not hard to build a fighter who is at least going to be solid/reliable with social and/or exploration stuff, even if they're not necessarily great at them.

 

[Distracted DM]

Do you feel a 5e Fighter can’t do/try these things? Or is it that the 5e rules are not as codified as Level Up so the player is less (or not at all) likely to have their Fighter try these things?

My players usually don't try to be overly social unless they're playing a character with decent charisma and/or the skills for it, because they'll inevitably push for something that'll require persuasion and It would've been more "mechanically advantageous" if they had just had the face character try it instead.

Whereas, yeah, with A5E your Berserker might be able to use Constitution for all their persuasion checks, or the fighter might get a +d4 bonus to interacting with soldiers.

Yes you as the GM could throw them such a bonus when you make the call for a check, but if the player knows they have this bonus beforehand, because it's a feature they chose, they're more likely to try in the first place.