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

[Yaarel]

Things that can be simpler, should be.

Arbitrary micromeasurments feel unhelpful, like 10 feet versus 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, ... 90, 100, 120, ... etcetera.

I would much rather ballpark all weapon and spell distances to roughly 3 (melee), 10 (reach), 30 (move, throw), plus "far".

I prefer theater of the mind.

Rules for a more chess-like grid game can be added separately for minis.

 

[Lakesidefantasy]

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.

That actually sounds like a great discussion to be had.

 

[Ancalagon]

Troika is just a modified advanced fighting fantasy, right?

there is a lot packed in "just a modified", but yes.

 

[Aldarc]

As a longtime roleplayer, 5E hits my sweet spot for complexity. But having introduced 6 or 7 noobs to the game in recent years, about half of them struggled with the complexity. And these are not dumb people.

I think a simplified edition of D&D looks a lot like Shadow of the Demon Lord:

• Four ability scores
• Four more derived stats
• d20 and d6; no other dice
• DC10 saving throws for everything
• No initiative
• Classes designed to start simple and get more complex

DC 10 was something that I had in mind earlier.

I would also add that D&D ability scores consistently IME trip people up. Or rather, it's the issue of the ability score vs. the modifier PLUS its interaction with the proficiency score.

Compare this with SotDL where a 12 Strength means that you add +2 to your melee attack rolls and a 13 Strength means that you add a +3 to your melee attack rolls.

Or Fantasy AGE where the +3 Fighting means that you add that to your melee attack.

 

[Thunder Brother]

Things that can be simpler, should be.

Arbitrary micromeasurments feel unhelpful, like 10 feet versus 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, ... 90, 100, 120, ... etcetera.

I would much rather ballpark all weapon and spell distances to roughly 3 (melee), 10 (reach), 30 (move, throw), plus "far".

I prefer theater of the mind.

Rules for a more chess-like grid game can be added separately for minis.

I would love if the rules for combat worked like this. Using exact distances doesn't feel good in theater of the mind, as it imposes a grid regardless of one's intentions. Also I've found, as an American playing with Germans, that some players struggle with Imperial units. Having to convert units mid-session gets tiresome.

DC 10 was something that I had in mind earlier.

I would also add that D&D ability scores consistently IME trip people up. Or rather, it's the issue of the ability score vs. the modifier PLUS its interaction with the proficiency score.

Compare this with SotDL where a 12 Strength means that you add +2 to your melee attack rolls and a 13 Strength means that you add a +3 to your melee attack rolls.

Or Fantasy AGE where the +3 Fighting means that you add that to your melee attack.

Another intuitive change that D&D would benefit from. Having an odd Ability Score feels bad 95% of the time, and some new players struggle with the difference between the Ability Score and the Ability Score Modifier. Having the equation be AS - 10 instead of (AS - 10) ÷ 2, would help a little.

I've found the use of "natural language" to be inconsistent. Spell descriptions often feel too long and D&D insists on using terms like AC and DC when Defense and Difficulty would work just as well, respectively.

"My Attack Roll of 17 beats their Defense of 16".

 

[Yaarel]

I would love if the rules for combat worked like this. Using exact distances doesn't feel good in theater of the mind, as it imposes a grid regardless of one's intentions. Also I've found, as an American playing with Germans, that some players struggle with Imperial units. Having to convert units mid-session gets tiresome.

Yeah. Also, the ballpark distances:

• 3 feet, 10 feet, 30 feet, far

Handwaives into:

• 1 meter, 3 meters, 10 meters, far



Probably go by yards for easy international use:

• 1 yard, 3 yards, 10 yards, far

 

[Eubani]

A person who finds 5e too complex is going to have greater problems in life to worry about than 5e.

 

[MasterTrancer]

If I wanted to simplify 5e to introduce it to new players, I'd be inspired by the Basic (from BECMI) approach and to the following:

• Fewer classes, probably only Fighter, Cleric, Rogue, Wizard
• Each Fighter is a Champion, Clerics are Clerics of Light or maybe Light, Rogue are Thieves, Wizards are Evokers
• Pre-gen characters, to be chosen based on description of archetypes
• Limited spell selection, with more to be introduced as the game progresses
• Human-only characters, with other races to be introduced during play

In short, start with less options and build them up as things get more advanced.

On the other hand I honestly struggle with looking at other systems for this job; I fail to see what's helpful in playing DnD while using totally different rules: if those are more appealing to me, I would just use them (also because the jump to full DnD would be meaningless at that point).

 

[Plaguescarred]

D&D 5E is simple enought to me. Anyone is free to houserule or remove things they don't find simple enought in the game to make it even simpler to them. The game is designed to be customizable easily ex remove background or feat, or limit specific race, class etc..

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

A lot of 5e design is actually like that, at least in theory. You get bardic inspiration and higher levels just increases the die size or subclass features let you do more with it. Same with paladin's aura, or cleric channel divinity, or druid wildshape. The problem comes with the need for every level to add something and with exception-based design. So now you can use one of those resources with your reaction to give every ally within a 30' sphere advantage against charm and level x 5 temporary hit points for your prof mod in turns (made up example). And now the table is tracking 3-5 extra things every round, and every character has abilities that are like that. I have no idea how people playing with Tasha's rules keep track of anything in their game, for me it would be a nightmare

Indeed.

At least since Tasha's we've seen a lot of of classes use the Prof per Long Rest model, which help standardize a little.

I usually play with PHB only, without feats and no multiclass (I dont think my players know it exists anyway ), I'll probably convert most of the X mod per day of the PHB to the new Tasha's model.

My big changes will probably dealing with extra attack to make it closer to The 13th Age, Movement Zones and Spell Points for everybody.

Smaller changes includes:

• Barb's Rage will be a die that count as extra damage and THP at the start of the turn. Remove the restriction of keeping rage on.
• 4E Monk uses elemental Disciplines as seen in the old UA mystic instead of their short list.
• Rangers are spell-less but still mystical (pretty easy to do).

etc