D&D 5E Why does 5E SUCK?

[doctorbadwolf]

...any homicide detective will tell you, look at the S.O. first...

Lol I’m leaving it.

 

[pogre]

It does suck...

the money right out of my wallet!

 

[SkidAce]

why did this thread come back.....

 

[UngeheuerLich]

...and my dex and wisdom is at 18 currently, thanks to racial and rolling decently, i do plan on spending my first ASI for a feat to improve my ac, its the dragonborn scales.

Dragon hide? That won´t work. It sets your AC to 13+dex... in your case at 17. Sorry.

 

[houser2112]

Dragon hide? That won´t work. It sets your AC to 13+dex... in your case at 17. Sorry.

This is one thing I hate about 5E, the move away from bonus-based calculations. If you wear armor (or have Wisdom so strong it acts as armor), making your skin itself be resistant to damage should do something for you, but here we have a feat that does just that (I'm not familiar with the feat, so I'll take your word that it works as you say), and yet it doesn't do anything for this character. Natural armor (this feat, the barkskin spell, and draconic sorcerer scales) should be additive with artificial armor.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

This is one thing I hate about 5E, the move away from bonus-based calculations. If you wear armor (or have Wisdom so strong it acts as armor), making your skin itself be resistant to damage should do something for you, but here we have a feat that does just that (I'm not familiar with the feat, so I'll take your word that it works as you say), and yet it doesn't do anything for this character. Natural armor (this feat, the barkskin spell, and draconic sorcerer scales) should be additive with artificial armor.

I disagree wholeheartedly. Stacking bonuses is what ultimatively broke 3.x for me.

 

[Ragmon]

Sounds like you should look into Pathfinder 2.

The goal wasn't to make 3.5 but better.

They made something much better than they would have been.

I agree with some of those complaints, but the background part is nonsense, IMO.

Are there details out on PF2's system? If yes please link it.

Yea I get that, but what I was saying is that they should have just improved the 3.5 formula, but for reals this time (PF tried but it was really just D&D 3.75).

I guess they did, a lot of people love it. Is it better? I personally think its a rigid system, with very little character customization, specially post creation. But hey thats just me. If it appeals to new players and people who were scared of 3.5 "complicated" system, I'm all for it.

The background section is a joke.
The rules are (try to make it fit your character):
*Choose 2 Skills to gain proficiency in.
*Choose 2 languages, 2 tools or 1 of each to be proficient in.
*Make up feature that doesn't effect the game mechanically but help the character out in situations that are not all that important.

This would fit in as a side note. Then just give a huge list of example on 1 or 2 pages. Instead of just wasting pages on stuff that people would come up with, them self.

ALSO the Background section should be before Classes. Why? Cause now you have to flip back and forth between what class skills you get and what skill the backgrounds grant you (overlapping skill selection is what i'm getting at).

Eh, w/e. I'm not playing 5e any way....back to Shadowrun.
Just choose some background skills then move onto the class skills

 

[houser2112]

Are there details out on PF2's system? If yes please link it.

You can go to the Paizo Pathfinder 2 Playtest forum, or the Pathfinder forum here at EN World for more information.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Are there details out on PF2's system? If yes please link it.

Yea I get that, but what I was saying is that they should have just improved the 3.5 formula, but for reals this time (PF tried but it was really just D&D 3.75).

I guess they did, a lot of people love it. Is it better? I personally think its a rigid system, with very little character customization, specially post creation. But hey thats just me. If it appeals to new players and people who were scared of 3.5 "complicated" system, I'm all for it.

The background section is a joke.
The rules are (try to make it fit your character):
*Choose 2 Skills to gain proficiency in.
*Choose 2 languages, 2 tools or 1 of each to be proficient in.
*Make up feature that doesn't effect the game mechanically but help the character out in situations that are not all that important.

This would fit in as a side note. Then just give a huge list of example on 1 or 2 pages. Instead of just wasting pages on stuff that people would come up with, them self.

ALSO the Background section should be before Classes. Why? Cause now you have to flip back and forth between what class skills you get and what skill the backgrounds grant you (overlapping skill selection is what i'm getting at).

Eh, w/e. I'm not playing 5e any way....back to Shadowrun.
Just choose some background skills then move onto the class skills

Couple things:

You can make your own background, no need for DM permission on anything but the ribbon benefit if you want a unique one. So, anyone who didn’t get what backgrounds are/why they’re in the system can do exactly what you susggest.

Because class skill choices are more rigidly limited, it makes sense to do the class stuff before background.

3.5 wasn’t all that great, 5e is as similar to it as it needs to be.

There are classes that are on rails, and classes that aren’t. Other than feats, 3.5 was pretty much entirely on rails unless you had spells, after level 1. At least 5e adds backgrounds, subclass, and every class has at least 1 subclass with more frequent choices. The only point where 3.5 had more customization was having more feats.

 

[Warpiglet]

Couple things:

You can make your own background, no need for DM permission on anything but the ribbon benefit if you want a unique one. So, anyone who didn’t get what backgrounds are/why they’re in the system can do exactly what you susggest.

Because class skill choices are more rigidly limited, it makes sense to do the class stuff before background.

3.5 wasn’t all that great, 5e is as similar to it as it needs to be.

There are classes that are on rails, and classes that aren’t. Other than feats, 3.5 was pretty much entirely on rails unless you had spells, after level 1. At least 5e adds backgrounds, subclass, and every class has at least 1 subclass with more frequent choices. The only point where 3.5 had more customization was having more feats.

Yeah, other than 1e, 3e is the only experience I had before 5e. We played 4e, once.

To the point, I see more choices within class for 5e (for good or ill depending on your opinion). Much more choice.

5e did away with the overly prescriptive niche prestige classes. Why? Becasue you can tailor your characters at a MORE granular level with 5e and with a small refluffing make yourself into almost anything.

I do not recall different paths or totems or whatever for barbarians in 3e. Am I wrong? And warlocks in 5e can be very very different from one another with pacts patrons invocations race feats and backgrounds.

I haven't even exhausted warlocks much less the other 5e classes...