D&D 5e has failed

General questions, debates, and rants about RPGs

Moderator: Moderators

Koumei
Serious Badass
Posts: 13871
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: South Ausfailia

Post by Koumei »

Drink more until you think you can play it drunk with no prep. You'd be amazed what sufficient alcohol can convince you is within your reach.
Count Arioch the 28th wrote:There is NOTHING better than lesbians. Lesbians make everything better.
Ed
Apprentice
Posts: 72
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2013 8:13 pm

Post by Ed »

Koumei wrote:Drink more until you think you can play it drunk with no prep. You'd be amazed what sufficient alcohol can convince you is within your reach.
How big is a five foot step, really?
User avatar
JonSetanta
King
Posts: 5525
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: interbutts

Post by JonSetanta »

It's more of a hop than anything.
The Adventurer's Almanac wrote:
Fri Oct 01, 2021 10:25 pm
Nobody gives a flying fuck about Tordek and Regdar.
Whiysper
Master
Posts: 182
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2015 10:43 am

Post by Whiysper »

I actually did run a ~year-long DnD 5e. It was only tolerable because of winging it while pissed - and just using 3.5 rules where they hadn't filled any in.

We found Stealth to be reasonably satisfying... :D.

Just in case I wasn't clear enough, fuck 5e. Don't go there. Lie if necessary. Run 3.5 instead, hide it inside the core books like it's a comic at the library. Or 3e. or add 'house rules' that consist of basically the 3.5 SRD. Or, hell, 4e. It's encounter guidelines are better (not good, but better than 5th), it's simpler, and it's exactly as MTP out of combat as 5e.
User avatar
RobbyPants
King
Posts: 5201
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 6:11 pm

Post by RobbyPants »

D&D 5E: Just play an older edition, or Hero Quest if that's your thing.
infected slut princess
Knight-Baron
Posts: 790
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 2:44 am
Location: 3rd Avenue

Post by infected slut princess »

So a dude from our group said "maybe we should try 5e, I heard it's pretty good!"

I showed him the entry for the Pit Fiend in the 5e monster book.

He no longer wants to play 5e.
Oh, then you are an idiot. Because infected slut princess has never posted anything worth reading at any time.
CapnTthePirateG
Duke
Posts: 1545
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 2:07 am

Post by CapnTthePirateG »

Yea, I'm not really sure where all the love for 5e comes from. People tend to go on about how simplified it is, but really that's code for "the game is barebones and you can't do anything cool."
OgreBattle wrote:"And thus the denizens learned that hating Shadzar was the only thing they had in common, and with him gone they turned their venom upon each other"
-Sarpadian Empires, vol. I
Image
User avatar
Lokathor
Duke
Posts: 2185
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 2:10 am
Location: ID
Contact:

Post by Lokathor »

The group I've been playing 5e with lately managed to introduce themselves to the game. They normally play card games, they were in the games shop, and they saw the starter set for 5e so they just got it on a whim and played a campaign and figured it out with using the online character maker and stuff without any guidance from anyone who'd ever played any previous RPG. I didn't join until they'd already played like 3 weekends of it.

That's pretty good when you think about it.

So, 5e is an okay introduction into the hobby, even if people should move on to better TTRPGs once they're down with the basics (funny shaped dice, adding +2, murder, etc)
Last edited by Lokathor on Sat Sep 09, 2017 3:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
[*]The Ends Of The Matrix: Github and Rendered
[*]After Sundown: Github and Rendered
User avatar
Cervantes
Journeyman
Posts: 129
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2014 10:27 pm

Post by Cervantes »

as a fledgling DM i find DnD 5e's complete lack of rules amenable to a style of "i just make shit up". and the people I DM haven't chosen to just break the system by hiring a bunch of lil guys and/or becoming necromancers

the whole "caster supremacy" part of 3.5e kind of bums me out, 5e managed to mitigate it a bit by just flattening the curve down a shitload (i mean, even though casters are still the best). how do i get up to speed on the whole "advantages of 3.5e over 5e" and "homebrewing patches for 3.5e" thing?
User avatar
Ice9
Duke
Posts: 1568
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Ice9 »

There's a number of people that really don't like talking or even hearing about the game system being less than perfect. If it produces less than perfect results, but it might plausibly be because the group was playing it wrong, that's not so bad. But having it known that the system is definitely flawed ruins their gaming experience, I guess.

5E makes it easier to insist that any flaw comes from the GM and/or players, by making a lot of rules vague and repeating "The GM can rule anything in any way!" loudly and often. That's a selling point to some people.

You can see Paizo trying this too, with the whole "This isn't a change, it's just a clarification of how the rule should have always been interpreted" thing they do with errata. But having inherited the crunchy rules environment of 3E, they can only do that to a limited extent.

TBH though, while I think 4E is a better system than 5E, I would be more likely to play a 5E game if those were my only choices. If I'm not going to be happy with the system anyway, at least 5E is less work on my part, and it has a few spells with amusing usage potential, albeit with that "GM can shut you down at any time!" clause.
Last edited by Ice9 on Sun Sep 10, 2017 8:43 pm, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
Dogbert
Duke
Posts: 1133
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2011 3:17 am
Contact:

Post by Dogbert »

5E's success only proves how far you can get by spending your development budget in payola instead of hiring an actual game designer.

The emperor is naked and everyone knows it, but Mearls' payola is somehow making everyone think the naked king looks like a naked Charlize Theron instead of a naked Mike Mearls.
Last edited by Dogbert on Mon Sep 11, 2017 3:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
Cervantes
Journeyman
Posts: 129
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2014 10:27 pm

Post by Cervantes »

okay yeah i get that dnd 5e suffers from "let's put the onus on the GM to mind caulk our thin system"

but is there a more detailed explanation somewhere? the thinness of dnd 5e means that i don't really have to learn that much to get a game going; 3.5e has a higher ceiling for sure but it seems like it also has a higher floor
User avatar
OgreBattle
King
Posts: 6820
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 9:33 am

Post by OgreBattle »

So between 4e or 5e, which one's bare bones mechanics would be a better launching point for a heartbreaker focused on dungeon crawling?
shinimasu
Master
Posts: 230
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 7:04 am

Post by shinimasu »

Cervantes wrote:okay yeah i get that dnd 5e suffers from "let's put the onus on the GM to mind caulk our thin system"

but is there a more detailed explanation somewhere? the thinness of dnd 5e means that i don't really have to learn that much to get a game going; 3.5e has a higher ceiling for sure but it seems like it also has a higher floor

That's just kind of it when you get down to it.

"Higher floor higher ceiling" is just kind of the trade off between rules light and rules heavy. Rules light systems are easier to learn, faster to run, and generally more flexible. Rules heavy feels more like an actual, you know, game. Rules light is basically there to provide some kind of framework to more or less free form RP in order to prevent "Well I pull out my infinity plus one sword and instakill all of you" in some fashion.

I feel like 5e wound up in "rules medium" where it's not quite crunchy enough to work without GM patchs, but not light enough to be a breezy easy to pick up system. In a true rules light game it doesn't really matter if the math is good or not so long as the math is there, but obviously DnD's mechanics were meant to be more engaging that this because initially the mechanics were the entire point.
User avatar
RobbyPants
King
Posts: 5201
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 6:11 pm

Post by RobbyPants »

OgreBattle wrote:So between 4e or 5e, which one's bare bones mechanics would be a better launching point for a heartbreaker focused on dungeon crawling?
Heroquest. It actually is a barebones dungeon crawler that does what it's supposed to and is fun and easy to play.

D&D has a lot of bloat. There's no reason to include that if it's not part of your end goal.
Last edited by RobbyPants on Mon Sep 11, 2017 2:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Pixels
Knight
Posts: 430
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 9:06 pm

Post by Pixels »

RobbyPants wrote:Heroquest. It actually is a barebones dungeon crawler that does what it's supposed to and is fun and easy to play.
And that's why Heroquest is so great!
User avatar
JonSetanta
King
Posts: 5525
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: interbutts

Post by JonSetanta »

Awesome review, but I was already sold on the concept for the last 22 years!
The Adventurer's Almanac wrote:
Fri Oct 01, 2021 10:25 pm
Nobody gives a flying fuck about Tordek and Regdar.
Pseudo Stupidity
Duke
Posts: 1060
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 3:51 pm

Post by Pseudo Stupidity »

Ice9 wrote:There's a number of people that really don't like talking or even hearing about the game system being less than perfect. If it produces less than perfect results, but it might plausibly be because the group was playing it wrong, that's not so bad. But having it known that the system is definitely flawed ruins their gaming experience, I guess.

5E makes it easier to insist that any flaw comes from the GM and/or players, by making a lot of rules vague and repeating "The GM can rule anything in any way!" loudly and often. That's a selling point to some people.
As someone who plays in a 5e game, it is not easy to blame the GM/players for the bad rules. "Expert" characters perform worse than untrained people with the worst possible stat like, 10 or 20% of the time. It's fucking stupid if my 19 Int wizard has to ask the goddamn fighter how a spell works. Knowing spells is literally my entire class and build. Christ. And fuck using social skills, they fail half the time even with the Sorcerer so I'm just going to charm everyone forever.

My main issue with the game is it makes everyone bumblefucks. We're a 5th level adventuring party that you could obviate with like, 10 random dudes armed with bows.
Last edited by Pseudo Stupidity on Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:06 am, edited 1 time in total.
sandmann wrote:
Zak S wrote:I'm not a dick, I'm really nice.
Zak S wrote:(...) once you have decided that you will spend any part of your life trolling on the internet, you forfeit all rights as a human.If you should get hit by a car--no-one should help you. If you vote on anything--your vote should be thrown away.

If you wanted to participate in a conversation, you've lost that right. You are a non-human now. You are over and cancelled. No concern of yours can ever matter to any member of the human race ever again.
User avatar
Ice9
Duke
Posts: 1568
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Ice9 »

Pseudo Stupidity wrote:As someone who plays in a 5e game, it is not easy to blame the GM/players for the bad rules. "Expert" characters perform worse than untrained people with the worst possible stat like, 10 or 20% of the time. It's fucking stupid if my 19 Int wizard has to ask the goddamn fighter how a spell works. Knowing spells is literally my entire class and build. Christ. And fuck using social skills, they fail half the time even with the Sorcerer so I'm just going to charm everyone forever.
You would think that, it does seem pretty obviously the fault of the rules there. But according to many 5E fans, the correct thing to do is that the high-skilled character shouldn't even have to roll most of the time, based on some metric that the GM pulls out of their ass creates with the power of "Rulings, not Rules". And since any good GM would obviously do that, any complaints about it are just "white-room theorycrafting".

And if the problem happened in an actual game ... well, that's still just one data point, stop trying to theorycraft from it! And besides, it probably made perfect sense IC and you're just whining about it because you're a munchkin. :tongue:
Last edited by Ice9 on Tue Sep 12, 2017 7:00 am, edited 5 times in total.
User avatar
RobbyPants
King
Posts: 5201
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 6:11 pm

Post by RobbyPants »

Ice9 wrote:You would think that, it does seem pretty obviously the fault of the rules there. But according to many 5E fans, the correct thing to do is that the high-skilled character shouldn't even have to roll most of the time, based on some metric that the GM pulls out of their ass creates with the power of "Rulings, not Rules". And since any good GM would obviously do that, any complaints about it are just "white-room theorycrafting".

And if the problem happened in an actual game ... well, that's still just one data point, stop trying to theorycraft from it! And besides, it probably made perfect sense IC and you're just whining about it because you're a munchkin. :tongue:
How do these dickholes respond when you ask them why they paid money for a book full of rules when the "correct" action is to use rulings?
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Username17 »

Cervantes wrote: the whole "caster supremacy" part of 3.5e kind of bums me out, 5e managed to mitigate it a bit by just flattening the curve down a shitload (i mean, even though casters are still the best). how do i get up to speed on the whole "advantages of 3.5e over 5e" and "homebrewing patches for 3.5e" thing?
Caster supremacy in 3.5 means exactly the same thing it does in 5e. Players who have a suffiicient amount of system mastery can make spellcasters that make warriors feel small in the pants. Also too, the higher level monsters are well out of reach of all but the most finely tuned warrior builds to do shit about.

But in both systems if you just take a bunch of Wizard levels and learn Fireball and shit, you're not going to outshine a Fighter who selected useful feats.

-Username17
CapnTthePirateG
Duke
Posts: 1545
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 2:07 am

Post by CapnTthePirateG »

FrankTrollman wrote: Caster supremacy in 3.5 means exactly the same thing it does in 5e. Players who have a suffiicient amount of system mastery can make spellcasters that make warriors feel small in the pants. Also too, the higher level monsters are well out of reach of all but the most finely tuned warrior builds to do shit about.
Mind elaborating a bit on the warriors? I vaguely remember high level monsters being disappointingly boring sacks of shit that could be owned trivially by a necromancer or a diviner.
OgreBattle wrote:"And thus the denizens learned that hating Shadzar was the only thing they had in common, and with him gone they turned their venom upon each other"
-Sarpadian Empires, vol. I
Image
MGuy
Prince
Posts: 4774
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 5:18 am
Location: Indiana

Post by MGuy »

RobbyPants wrote:
Ice9 wrote:You would think that, it does seem pretty obviously the fault of the rules there. But according to many 5E fans, the correct thing to do is that the high-skilled character shouldn't even have to roll most of the time, based on some metric that the GM pulls out of their ass creates with the power of "Rulings, not Rules". And since any good GM would obviously do that, any complaints about it are just "white-room theorycrafting".

And if the problem happened in an actual game ... well, that's still just one data point, stop trying to theorycraft from it! And besides, it probably made perfect sense IC and you're just whining about it because you're a munchkin. :tongue:
How do these dickholes respond when you ask them why they paid money for a book full of rules when the "correct" action is to use rulings?
They say the rules are fine for the most part but "everyone's table is different" so any problems are clearly table specific and not indicative of a failure of the game as a whole.
The first rule of Fatclub. Don't Talk about Fatclub..
If you want a game modded right you have to mod it yourself.
User avatar
Sir Aubergine
Apprentice
Posts: 74
Joined: Sun Oct 13, 2013 2:53 am
Location: The corner of your eye.

Post by Sir Aubergine »

CapnTthePirateG wrote: Mind elaborating a bit on the warriors? I vaguely remember high level monsters being disappointingly boring sacks of shit that could be owned trivially by a necromancer or a diviner.
"Don't melee it stupid," is alive and well. If you don't have very high AC or damage resistance (both is preferable), you will get cut down like a dog wading into melee with high level monsters. They are more accurate and hit harder than you do, and their attacks often get rider effects, while you get: A magic weapon and a magic shield! :roll:
The Denner’s Oath
The Denner, The Denner’s reflection: [in unison] A Denner is unhelpful, unfriendly and unkind.
The Denner’s reflection: With ungracious thoughts...
The Denner: ...in an unhealthy mind.
The Denner’s reflection: A Denner is uncheerful, uncouth and unclean. Now say this together!
The Denner, The Denner’s reflection: I'm frightfully mean! My eyes are both shifty. My fingers are thrifty.
The Denner: My mouth does not smile.
The Denner’s reflection: Not half of an inch.
The Denner: I'm a Denner.
The Denner’s reflection: I... am a Denner.
The Denner: I'm a Denner!
The Denner’s reflection: That's my boy. Now go out and prove it!
CapnTthePirateG
Duke
Posts: 1545
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 2:07 am

Post by CapnTthePirateG »

No, no, the game is balanced around no magic items at all! You get like 3 ever! Go you!
OgreBattle wrote:"And thus the denizens learned that hating Shadzar was the only thing they had in common, and with him gone they turned their venom upon each other"
-Sarpadian Empires, vol. I
Image
Post Reply