D&D 5E Why Don't We Simplify 5e?

[GMMichael]

Back in the D&D Next days, my impression of the new edition was that the game would be streamlined and/or have its bumps ironed out. WotC would produce something more accessible to the masses, and maybe even ride the popularity of some lighter-weight games at the time (looking at you, Savage Worlds). Crunch would be Pathfinder's thing, and more power to Paizo.

But here we are with regular rules discussions from WotC, and regular rules discussions here (now in the helpful format of How To articles). A "basic rules" document. An advanced 5e on the way from ENpublishing, and a full-on battle royale thread about the plethora of DMG options. Several threads are about adding more rules to make an aspect run better or more realistically.

And here I thought 5e was about the rulings that the DM would make, not the rules. Players make their characters from the book, and the DM does the rest, right? Why don't we see more discussions here about simplifying D&D?

 

[Stormonu]

Because 5E is already simplified, to a large extent. Most of the changes being proposed add nuance and options that have been stripped out of the base game to make it run at a universal level. 5E is more of a skeleton to add bones and flesh to, not to strip to the marrow.

 

[Mort]

Can't speak for anyone else, but for me, 5e is quite simplified already - to a level I like and am comfortable with. I ran 3e through high level play and it was exhausting. 5e has been significantly easier. Sure there are rules discussions/ambiguities but they are smaller AND 5e is much more up front with the just make a call and go with it approach (not that I was hesitant with that in earlier editions, but it's explicit in 5e).

 

[DemoMonkey]

Come up with universally agreed on definitions of Simple and Complex.

Then we can talk.

 

[Wolfram stout]

Yep. After 40ish years of gaming, I didn’t realize how complicated (or maybe in-depth is better) 5th edition was; not until I thought about introducing my son and his friend to playing. Both have ADHD to different levels, and trying to figure out how to introduce the game and to what level was eye opening. There are a lot of helpful blogs, hacks, and articles on the web on how to introduce the game (to kids, to beginners, etc.), and they are by and large awesome. But it still remains that D&D 5th is not a light and easy game.

Heck, even the old group of players I have played with since 1st ed don't have all the rules fully under their belts.

I am thinking of stepping out of my comfort zone and diving into some more narrative games.

 

[Umbran]

Why don't we see more discussions here about simplifying D&D?

Because there's not a lot of desire among our posters for something simpler?

A path to a pretty simple game is already present. PHB only, don't use feats. Just have the GM wing it on the DCs of skill checks. And... you're basically done.

You could perhaps have a slightly longer discussion about reducing map-dependency to better support theater of the mind play - maybe make up a Zone scheme for ranges and maps, and the like.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Why don't we see more discussions here about simplifying D&D?

'Cause most of the suggestions that are given that would simplify D&D have been debated to death and are holdovers from previous editions (alignment, racial ASIs, expanding class identity, etc), and 5e is already simplified to the point that new players can get it easily enough (and if for some reason they can't, they can always play a Sidekick from Tasha's or a Survivor from Van Richten's).

If you want to play the most simple, mechanically boring character ever, be a non-Variant Human Champion Fighter in a game without Multiclassing or Feats. You'll have one important mechanical choice when creating the character (your Fighting Style), and no others for the rest of the time you play the character. If you want to play the most mechanically-complex character possible at the same table (again, ignoring Feats and Multiclassing), be a Moon Druid (any race would work, but Simic Hybrids are a bit more complicated than most races).

IMHO, D&D doesn't really need further simplification. If anything, it needs to do a better job at supporting both mechanically simple and mechanically complex styles of play better (like allowing players to make important mechanical decisions while playing any of the Martial classes).

There are very few parts of D&D 5e that I've looked at and said "that needs to be more simple". They are there, but they are few and far between (I'm looking at you; Four Elements Monk), and most of them boil down to strange Rules as Written (Melee Weapon Attack vs. Attack with a Melee Weapon, Natural Weapon vs. Unarmed Strike vs. Simple Weapon, and the whole "you can cast spells that require S and M components with both hands full if you're holding a spellcasting focus, but not spells that just require S components" issue).

 

[iserith]

For my part, I think D&D 5e is at the sweet spot for simplicity and complexity. I also play in the odd OSE, Mork Borg, and Dungeon World game, as well as some other rules light systems. My takeaway from those experiences is that they are good for short run games, but I find anything longer than one or two sessions to be boring for the lack of options. At the other extreme, I really liked D&D 4e and would play it still but for the discontinuation of the old digital tools, but again, only sometimes in short runs when I really wanted to scratch that tactical game itch (plus I love skill challenges).

Talking about how to interpret rules or publishing additional options in my view doesn't actually make the game more complex unless those things are adopted at the table. And for any DM, I would advise being judicious in what you add or take away from the base game to make sure it's actually serving the vision you have for the adventure or campaign. You don't need to include every single option from every book that's out there. Have a clear idea of what your game is supposed to be and choose the options that push that idea at all times.

 

[schneeland]

I personally would welcome a much simplified D&D. Personally, I find even Savage Worlds to be relatively crunchy. But then people seem to enjoy their feats and class powers a lot, and a version of D&D that simplifies it to a level of modern OSR games might not have the broad appeal that 5e has.

 

[Wolfram stout]

To elaborate on my previous post, the core engine is pretty simple. But to get to the engine you have to go through character generation which is what made me go Blah! when thinking about walking a new player through it.

Select a Race: get various abilities, skills, and stuff
Select a sub-race, get more stuff
Select a Class: get various stuff some with unique sub-systems
Select a Background: get stuff
Select a Sub-Class at some level: get more stuff

Put that all together, then remember to explain Inspiration, Hit Die healing, and leveling up, it adds up.

Even if you go Basic and have only 4 races with sub-race chosen and 4 classes with only one sub-class, that is a lot of info for a new player to absorb.