[5e] Thorough explanation of why it's terrible?

[OgreBattle]

Worst parts sounds fun for a 1 shot

[Prak]

Feels like this is where this might fit-




Someone asked one of the designers if giving Paladins a ranged style that lets them ranged smite would be broken. Said designer said yes.

I went and took a look just to make sure I knew how things were working, and responded (this is on tumblr, the above images are from a tumblr that compiles designer feedback on this kinda stuff, called Sage Advice. Which is so fitting, because the advice continues to be just as bullshit) with my take, that it would be fine to give the Paladin a fighting style that literally just said "you can use your paladin stuff with a ranged weapon." Cue response from someone who seemingly knows 5e, but... gets several things wrong?


I'm ProbablyEvilRPGIdeas

I also pointed out how the ranged smite compares to a wizard and a warlock of the same level. And... the wizard is better. As usual. Without getting into any special shit for the Wizard, their basic spell is just better.

Like... this is why 5e is bad. Because the designers still don't know what they're doing, and the players who will make pronouncements about what's balanced or not don't seem to consider average damage, to hits, or comparing to what the basic wizard can do.

I know, I stanned for 5e in the Rick and Morty thread, but that was for the social aspect of the new environment, the mechanics are "functional" in much the same way that using duct tape and some nails to repair a cracked turn signal level is functional. It gets the job done, but it's not the proper way to do shit.

[OgreBattle]

They're viewing Paladin in Diablo video game terms, and not as a role player that can imagine a paladin that's not a heavily armored sword and shield dude

[WiserOdin032402]

Okay, so uh...technically speaking archery style/sharpshooter is incredibly broken but not in the way that people think. Archery style gives +2 to-hit over literally all other styles in a game where to-hit bonuses are considered broken and not a thing that should be readily available, meaning that archers hit more often, and the penalties for sharpshooter are dramatically lessened by this rogue +2. However, the thing is, this was built into the game.

Paladin is mediocre by the standards of 5e. Fighter literally outstrips the paladin in DPR past very low levels. Paladin would be better if it could expand its critical hit range due to smite doubling its damage dice on a critical hit and paladin being able to declare smite after they hit.

Hilariously, that already exists as the Hexblade Warlock, because you can customize Warlock, a full caster, into a melee gish that uses its casting stat for to-hit and damage and always drops spells from its highest level slots, and recovers its small amount of spells on a short rest. And none of this really gets in the way of Warlock's trick of Eldritch Blast with Cha to Damage, meaning they'll always have a ranged option that eventually advances to 4d10+20 damage.

Edit: Oh right, and the Hexblade Warlock can also smite with their +1 bow which they can get through invocations, and their smite knocks the target prone when it hits.

[Lago PARANOIA]

End-of-life 4th Edition (errata, math fixes, all of the options) is better than 5th Edition as it currently stands. There, I said it.

Sure, 4th Edition was a broken mess with no rules except for combat mechanics, but the tactical minigame for 4th Edition is much more interesting than 5th Edition. 5th Edition's big innovation over 4th is that it runs faster and has a shorter Character Generation time, but it achieves this by stripping out most of the options.

[Prak]

Note- I didn't take a look at Fighter fighting styles, I literally was just thinking a style that lets Paladins to use their smite et al at range, not the Fighter Archery style.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Paladin is mediocre by the standards of 5e. Fighter literally outstrips the paladin in DPR past very low levels.

Also, this is extremely wrong. Paladin damage starts and stays strong. They get much better long-term and ongoing damage boosts and a number of superior accuracy boosts. Now, single-classed Fighters do make better archers than single-classed Paladins, but Paladins make much better melee fighters. And of course they can always grab two levels of Ranger for the Archery fighting style and Hunter's Mark to close the gap.

The real reason why paladins can't smite with ranged attacks is because it'd make the fighter completely superfluous, even the Eldritch Knight/Battlemaster.

Of course, that's just on offense. Paladins also get access to a number of key defensive spells (like Wrathful Smite and Protection from Evil And Good) that by itself gives them a defensiveness that Fighters can't touch. When you throw on Aura of Protection (best non-spellcasting ability in the game) and one of the better Paladin Subclass auras like the one from Oath of the Ancients, you get a character that completely obsoletes the Fighter.

[Prak]

Also, I need to say- I screwed up. I forgot that humans can have a bonus feat at first level in 5e. Which is bullshit in 5e because of how feats work, but, fine. I also screwed up in that "weapon like spells" aren't a thing in 5e. Which is also bullshit, but, also, fine, that's how the game works.

However. Setting aside the fact that the table experience of the players is the thing that actually matters... a Paladin could also just have Great Weapon Fighting (reroll 1s and 2s on two-handed weapons), and Great Weapon Master (+10 to a two handed weapon damage if you take a -5 to hit), and do more average damage.

So, like, sure, I screwed a couple things up, but also... fuck, if you care about damage output as a paladin, just get a maul.

[jt]

End-of-life 4th Edition (errata, math fixes, all of the options) is better than 5th Edition as it currently stands. There, I said it.

Sure, 4th Edition was a broken mess with no rules except for combat mechanics, but the tactical minigame for 4th Edition is much more interesting than 5th Edition. 5th Edition's big innovation over 4th is that it runs faster and has a shorter Character Generation time, but it achieves this by stripping out most of the options.

That's hardly fair, you're pitting 4E - an actual game - against 5E, which is just the outer shell of a game. It has a short character creation system that feels like it belongs to a real game, and basically nothing else. 5E is closer to one of those image macros where you choose a superpower but each of the other superpowers goes to someone else who hates you or whatever. It's closer to trying to roleplay as a character generated by Superfight.

Hell, take any 3.X build, toss out all the actual rules of 3.X, replace each character class with a Risus cliche with that class name and dice equal to the level, replace each feat and class feature with a Fate aspect with that name, and you'll get a better game than 5E.

[WiserOdin032402]

Where would be the best place to talk about the 5e Artificer? It's uh...fairly interesting in terms of how hard it eats the Ranger's lunch.

[TheGreatEvilKing]

Where would be the best place to talk about the 5e Artificer? It's uh...fairly interesting in terms of how hard it eats the Ranger's lunch.

Just post it here.

I'm not going to lie, my cousin was telling me all about his Artillerist Artificer and I was looking at it trying to figure out what the hell that subclass brings to the party. You are a half caster with a list full of evocations and some shitty turrets with bad DPS. What are you doing with your life?

[WiserOdin032402]

It brings pseudo magic items in at level 2, getting easy access to two third level spells via the cap of water breathing and the sending stones, and access to magic weapons to bypass the DR of literally everything in the monster manual. These infusions can also be swapped out every time the artificer levels up, and the artificer upgrades from 4 infusions known and 2 active to 12 infusions known and 6 active over the course of leveling.

As for the subclasses, The artillerist brings a bonus action gun and cantrip spam to the table, which eventually evolves into two bonus action guns and cantrip spam. It actually does a lot of DPR mainly due to the Ballista options doing force damage. Other than that uh....it has fireball?

The Battlesmith bring an Iron Defender, an extra attack, int to hit and damage, and a weird Crusader-style ability to the table to the table, which the 2d6/4d6 (depending on level) healing/damage on hit only works int modifier times per long rest, which is weird considering how low it is, it should probably be short rest. But the Iron Defender is great because it's healed with a cantrip, has a boatload of HP, can do a bunch of things without the Battlesmith's bonus action to command it to attack (Move, dodge, take a reaction to impose disadvantage on an adjacent enemy, and it can't be surprised) it can be revived with a 1st level spell slot and a minute of time, and the Battlesmith itself can make use of all the nifty infusions to buff a shield or weapon and have a bag of holding for free too.

The Alchemist gets a bunch of supportive spells and gets to eat shit over the fact that its main mechanic is a potion that is used once per day, has a piddly little effect, and the effect itself is purely RNG determined until they start spending spell slots to get more.

The 'real' purpose of the class itself is to have all of the tool proficiencies and expertise with them, to Int mod times per day give someone a bonus on a check equal to the Artificcer's intelligence modifier, the ability to make imitation magic items to save you from 5e's horrible fucking DR and magic item system, and then at level 10 start printing common or uncommon magic items, since it takes them only a quarter of the time to craft them (1 day for common, 5 days for uncommon [Normally 4 for common, 20 for uncommon]), and half the gold investment (So 50 gp for common items and 250 GP for uncommon items).

So basically the second you hit 10th level all that useless gold the artificer has goes to get everyone who wears a suit of medium or heavy armor a suit of adamantine armor (turns critical hits into normal hits), boots of flying (literally the best flying item in the game), a +1 Sentinel Shield or +1 Weapon of Warning (Advantage on initiative checks and basically fuck off surprise or stealth characters), gets your warlock a Rod of the Pact Keeper +1 (+1 on spell attack rolls and DCs, one free spell back per day), gets your Sorcerer multiple pearls of power (get one spell up to 3rd level back, since magic items can be attuned over a short rest get a bag and attune a new one every short rest), Headbands of Intellect (Makes your Int 19 if it isn't already 20, trust me Int saves are rare but devastating), etcetera.

Future Wiserodin: I completely forgot that Bracers of Archery exist (+2 to damage with bows) and that +1 arrows are uncommon and stack with +1 bows, so your artificer is best friends with your archer friend. They can also make potions of greater healing (bonus action 4d4+4 HP gain), potions of hill giant strength (21 strength for 1 hour if you need it), and spell scrolls of 1st (Common), 2nd (Uncommon), and 3rd (Uncommon) level. So feel free to make those and mind goblin the fuck out of them and never use them.

Also the artificer gets an extra attunement slot. Well, they actually get three extra on the trip to level 20, meaning they can have six items attuned at once, and at level 20 they get a +1 bonus to all saves per magic item they have attuned.

For other fun shit, artificers can also store spells in items like simple and martial weapons (only a 1st or 2nd level spell, though.) and then the item can cast it a number of times per day equal to twice the artificer's intelligence modifier. So an artillerist at level 11 would have 10 scorching rays or shatters just on tap.

By no means is it something crazytown like a Warlock, Bard, or Cleric, but give it like a book with more common and uncommon magic items in it and maybe a new subclass and some more infusions and now we're cooking with gas. But it's definitely a solid utility.

[WiserOdin032402]

Oh my god I just described a Fighter that has access to actual magic and some way to contribute to a party.

[Avoraciopoctules]

That artificer does sound like it might be genuinely fun to play. I've been running a wizard in a low-level 5E game, and with a fairly liberal DM you can do some really nice things with cantrips. It sounds like an artificer would be a great addition to the party, they'd do stuff I can't accomplish.

I appreciate that it lets you do real crafting at midlevels, I might have to read through in a bit more depth. My main note when I skimmed Rising From The Last War was that Artificer seemed like it would be best used in a campaign where the DM was heavily restricting access to magic, but that skill check buff seems like a BIG deal with Bounded Accuracy on people's rolls.

[deaddmwalking]

I thought this might fit here best. Five Thirty Eight has a weekly puzzle. This week's puzzle asks readers to explore a variation on 5th editions Advantage/Disadvantage system. This kind of puzzle might be fun for people on this thread. Next week they'll post an explanation of the answer so I'll link to it as well.

[OgreBattle]

Without knowing the maths, I think rolling advantage twice and keeping the lower result would result in a higher number

[angelfromanotherpin]

Disadvantage-of-Advantage has the highest average result, yes.

[Omegonthesane]

For extra credit,

"Disadvantage-of-Advantage" has the highest chance out of the three proposals of reaching any specific target number of 13 or below. If you need to roll 14 or above, then 1d20 has the highest probability to do so.

[Grek]

The useful insight here is that since DoA picks the higher number twice and the lower number once, it produces higher results than picking the lower number twice and the higher number once (AoD). Picking higher numbers more often produces higher results, even if it superficially seems like advantage followed by disadvantage should be the same thing as doing it in the reverse order. But no matter what you do, mixing advantage and disadvantage tends to centralize the results and produce less outliers, both high and low.

[Unity]

There's some weirdness with skills, but unless you pick useless subclasses there's always a lot of options. A lot of the issue people have with skills is willful ignorance and just generally a desire to complain about everything. "Passive investigation" is nonsense, but for the most part you pick whichever skill is closest to what you want to do and roll that skill.

As for characters being boring and samey... A level 8 paladin/2 warlock can smite for mega damage, use an opportunity attack if anything gets close to either smite or use eldritch blast and blast it backward far enough that it can't attack, cast some boring but very useful low level spells several times per day or silent image as much as he wants, is SAD for charisma, tanks like a boss with high AC, etc. etc. I think the reason people think characters have few options is because they just suck at figuring out which options are good.

So basically, if you pick a shit class and shit feats your character will be shit. Which is true in 3.X as well. If you pick better classes you can do plenty of things. Rogue is hella boring and progressively less useful as he gets eclipsed by casters, and again that's just like 3.X. So, champion fighters are going to be boring and useless, but fifth level battlemaster fighters can disarm an opponent, take their weapon, trip them to give everybody else advantage, then use an action surge to get a total of four attacks plus one bonus one if they have polearm master, then get a sixth attack if something gets close. In one round.

Complaining about fightery-types not being able to contribute outside of combat? Please, tell me all about what a single class fighter can do to help explore a dungeon or spy on the grand vizier. The main difference is that now something like a battlemaster fighter/assassin rogue or mounted paladin can murder the hell out of casters if they're not careful. Because the casters don't have seven defensive spells up at all times. Also, disarming. Disarming is actually really useful now, especially since casters can be disarmed of their spellcasting focus.

The real reason 5e is disliked so much here is because everything is. This board exists only to shit on every TTRPG ever except maybe one version of maybe three different games.

[Mechalich]

I think the reason people think characters have few options is because they just suck at figuring out which options are good.

So basically, if you pick a shit class and shit feats your character will be shit. Which is true in 3.X as well. If you pick better classes you can do plenty of things.

The existence of shit classes, shit feats, and shit character options in general is one of the bigger problems with 3e and it was well and thoroughly recognized as such during the production run of 3e. The fact that the same game, two whole editions later, is still struggling with that problem is not a point in the favor of the new edition.

Having to figure out which character options are good is not good game design. It has many problems including but not limited too: creates system mastery related barriers to entry that disadvantage and discourage new players, renders a significant amount of published product the fans are expected to pay for as waste paper because it introduces material not actually viable in play, and renders certain fluff-concepts that are purported to be supported non-viable because they are substandard and will not actually survive play.

The real reason 5e is disliked so much here is because everything is. This board exists only to shit on every TTRPG ever except maybe one version of maybe three different games.

Most TTRPGs ever produced have very severe internal problems. That's just the reality of the hobby. It's not surprising - producing a TTRPG is extremely difficult, far harder than a video game RPG due to the vast array of inputs and outputs such games attempt to juggle - and most RPGs are produced by people with extremely limited mathematical and statistical backgrounds who in many cases aren't actually interested in things like balanced mathematics or world-building verisimilitude. To be fair, neither is a huge portion of the player-base - VtM didn't become the second most popular TTRPG ever made based on good mechanics or fluff - but some people would like to aim higher.

The Den tends towards a negative reactionary viewpoint in part out of a corrective to an online commentary base that is otherwise largely comprised of relentless boosterism that leads to designers - like the designers of 5e - building the exact same mistakes into their games that were identified literally decades earlier.

[MGuy]

Dismissing criticism of skills as weirdness and willful ignorance is an interesting counter argument when arguing against criticism that were elucidated more clearly on page one of the thread. I'd have tried to demonstrate how the detailed criticisms fit into that counter ramble. As is it just looks like there's no real counter argument.

I suspect this is the case because "these issues people are complaining about were issues two editions ago" actually is a bad thing if you think about it.

[Emerald]

As for characters being boring and samey... A level 8 paladin/2 warlock can smite for mega damage, use an opportunity attack if anything gets close to either smite or use eldritch blast and blast it backward far enough that it can't attack, cast some boring but very useful low level spells several times per day or silent image as much as he wants, is SAD for charisma, tanks like a boss with high AC, etc. etc. I think the reason people think characters have few options is because they just suck at figuring out which options are good.

No, it's because classes literally do have fewer options than in 3e (even just considering comparable options that exist in both and ignoring the broad swath of mechanics and options 5e just doesn't have), and the options they do have are less impressive.

The above paladin/warlock, for example, is basically a 3e psion, but less so, and slower. A 3e Psion 5 is the king of blasting for his level, can do cool things with AoOs, can deal a bunch of damage and push people pretty far, tanks really well, and is Int-SAD...and then has 7 other powers he can pick (plus Expanded Knowledge for more if desired) which can come from a huge selection of utility powers that only cost 1 or 2 PP out of his 35-PP daily allotment so he can spam them pretty well. Yes, the paladin can prep from the whole paladin list as is standard for 3e divine casters instead of having limited spells known like the psion, but it has a grand total of 10 3rd-level spells (vs. the psion's 22 3rd-level powers before considering the discipline lists) and the spells they do get are just...eh.

If you go for equivalent level and compare a Psion 10, well, he now has 10 more powers (of a higher level than the paladin/warlock can access) and ~70 more PP, and the gap just continues to grow. And that's without even getting into gishy psion PrCs, ACFs for utility like Mindsight and at-will shapechanging, psion-boosting items like quori shards or psicrowns (and the ability to quickly and automatically create them himself, as opposed to 5e's lack-of-crafting-system), and more.

Another example:

So, champion fighters are going to be boring and useless, but fifth level battlemaster fighters can disarm an opponent, take their weapon, trip them to give everybody else advantage, then use an action surge to get a total of four attacks plus one bonus one if they have polearm master, then get a sixth attack if something gets close. In one round.

Literally any 3e character can pick up Improved Disarm and Improved Trip, not just fighters; Haft Strike and Hold the Line match Polearm Master (in addition to, not replacing, an ability boost or actual class feature) and Combat Reflexes ensures the 3e character gets more extra attacks out of the latter; and any TWF-spec martial character can have 4 attack all day every day at 6th--which, yes, is later than 5th, but is the level that the equivalent to Extra Attack comes online for full BAB characters, and TWF/Flurry of Blows /Rapid Shot/etc. can allow 2 attacks per round starting at 1st, so 3e characters are still ahead in general.

For a more direct comparison, a Warblade 5 has 8 maneuvers and stances known compared to the Battle Master's 3, and both Disarming Strike and Mighty Throw are accessible at that level, plus either Steel Wind or Wolf Fang Strike for 2 attacks on a standard action to match Extra Attack. Warblades are built for single larger attacks rather than number of attacks so they can't get 4 attacks per round (every other round, all day, every day, mind you, not X/day) until warblade 9 with Dancing Mongoose, but in those intervening 4 levels a Warblade is dealing more damage in 1 or 2 attacks than the Fighter is in 4 thanks to maneuvers like Insightful Strike or Bonecrusher and higher-level maneuvers put anything the Battle Master can do at 12th+ to shame.


Essentially, the top-tier 5e builds people rave about are fairly pedestrian by 3e standards, not just because the numbers are lower in an absolute sense but because 3e offers more options (and offers them faster) than 5e. There's just not that much there there in 5e.

[OgreBattle]

I haven't actually given a thorough take on D&D5e in this thread so here I go.

I sometimes teach RPG design classes, including intro to RPG's, and there's a lot of legacy mechanics in D&D5e that make it harder to get into.

A big one is the 6 attributes and modifiers.
"Ok I have strength 15, I then look up a chart or do a formula to figure out my ACTUAL important number"

Wisdom, Intelligence, Charisma is just what Gygax & Arneson & Pals threw together in the 70's, it's a very specific take on broad 'real world' and 'story tension' concepts. D&D5e attribute gains then requires thorough knowledge of value vs feats and so on. The way they sell it is "Yeah you don't have to POWER GAME..." but what the hell is the game designer's job then? It really sucks when a new player THINKS they've created their clever strong smart sneaky guy but then the DM has to go fudge the dice every time to keep up that Wizard of Oz illusion.

Having saves tie to all 6 attributes further confounds this. A slimely brain eating monster shoots a "1960's infographic of radio waves" ray at you, is it going to pop you in the INT WIS or CHA ...or maybe CON? For how much 'The Fandom/Creators' say it's about roleplay over roll... it's very much a game about remembering the meta of what your good and bad rolls are.

Most of the players guide is devoted to spells. The spells have levels that are not related to character levels, they should use a different word like Rank or Circle. Many spells interact with the environment in a specific way, but you reference the spell instead of a "how to interact with the world" section like Shadowrun 4e.

Skills, illusion, stealth, plenty of threads here and there of people reading the same thing but not reading the same thing. 5e's most robust writing is movement and hit point damage, that's what MS-DOS turn based RPG's also do well.

What 5e actually sells is nicely formatted books with art that's enough to inspire imagination, short stories to inspire imagination, and then a bunch of words to write down on your character sheet and ignore when not dealing hit point damage or being hit by one of hundreds of spells.

*I am pretty lenient with grading RPG design projects because... honestly if the RPG's that make money can evoke rule 0 and have non functional stealth rules it would be unfair to my students to put them at a higher standard than paid professionals. I also tell them all this stuff about people not really following the rules so they should probably take an art class or pay their art major friends if they really want to be an RPG pro.

[Unity]

I sometimes teach RPG design classes, including intro to RPG's, and there's a lot of legacy mechanics in D&D5e that make it harder to get into.

A big one is the 6 attributes and modifiers.
"Ok I have strength 15, I then look up a chart or do a formula to figure out my ACTUAL important number"

Concur. This has bothered me for decades. It's the 21st century and I think we all deserve a system where a person with one more point of strength is one point better at lifting or punching things regardless of whether they have an even or an odd number of points.

No, it's because classes literally do have fewer options than in 3e (even just considering comparable options that exist in both and ignoring the broad swath of mechanics and options 5e just doesn't have), and the options they do have are less impressive.

...

Essentially, the top-tier 5e builds people rave about are fairly pedestrian by 3e standards, not just because the numbers are lower in an absolute sense but because 3e offers more options (and offers them faster) than 5e. There's just not that much there there in 5e.

And that's fine. There's less disparity between a bad DPS and a good DPS. And there are less options in 5e than 3e, because power creep and dumpster diving were taken to insane levels in 3e. If you want to spend all of your free time dumpster diving and theorycrafting to make a magic archer who can shoot planets in half while getting three spells off per turn, cool, that's fine too. If so, you're going to want to play 3e rather than 5e.

If you want to just have four people get together and play a campaign and have everybody able to contribute, that's a lot easier with the lower power disparity of 5e. You can still spend a lot of time designing a character and have her be awesome and feel good about that, but it's easier for newcomers to pick something out-of-the-box and still be a useful part of the team. It's also possible to make character choices for reasons other than MMORPG-style optimization and, while they're not going to be very good, an 8th level fighter who picked feats with no combat utility can still dish out and take enough damage to make them not completely superfluous in a party with a "top tier" build melee DPS.

But what really matters is that since tabletop RPGs are a dying hobby, any system that makes it easier to get newbies to the table has a place. You want a ton of crunchy and complicated options with 30 base classes and 200 optional classes and 1000 spells? No matter how fun it would be, good fucking luck finding a new group of people willing to learn it. The platonic ideal of "the one half-decent TTRPG" that is frequently sought around here would be pointless even if could be found, because it is so far from what the dwindling pool of new players wants that nobody would ever play it. Meanwhile in the real world, we have things like 5e which are, if nothing else,
at a place on the continuum between "customizable" and "usable" that there are still people willing to learn it.