D&D 5E D&D 5e Post-Mortem

[nevin]

When I first played it it was my favourite edition, but the more I play it the less I actually like it. Some of the things at first feel good, but I believe in my case it was only that the lack of fiddly things was refreshing coming from 3.5 and PF1.

The system was allowed to get stagnant. They never did anything with it. Pretty much no books. No new classes. No Tome of Battle. Nothing. Half hearted campaign setting books that wasted pages on unwanted adventures. What happened to pure campaign setting books? What happened to class splat-books?

Splat books hurt 3rd edition more than they helped it. Initially they were all pretty good but as WOTC started reaching more and more into the clouds they got really out there. I quit DM'ing for awhile because I got tired of arguing with players who wanted to bring in nutjob things from the books. The one that always sticks in my head, probably because it was with a close friend was the argument that came close to blows over whether or not his "kit" first level barbarian out of the barbarian's handbook could have the 10hd battle cat. To this day saying "WOTC said so, takes any player right to the edge of no game at all."

The biggest problem with any system is every new book introduces some new change to rules. Everyone that gets the rules to theplace they want them is then forced to stay behind, go to a new system, or do what they don't want to do. I'd much rather see modules and adventures than splat books. Players often ask for stuff they find in them but they don't feel entitled to them like they do with a "rules supplement".

 

[Jaeger]

It's the stories that matter, not the system for some people.

If the system really didn't matter then they wouldn't keep insisting on only D&D...

The hard truth is that the majority of people that play D&D will only ever play D&D.

They feel "invested" in D&D, and that learning "other games" will be work.

It's really not. The time spent really learning the differences between Adventures in middle earth, and base 5e; you could just have easily already been playing The One Ring as well...

But they don't care.

People like their D&D the way they like it, and they will not play anything else.

It has been that way in the hobby since the beginning.

 

[Oofta]

If the system really didn't matter then they wouldn't insist on D&D...

The hard truth is that the majority of people that play D&D will only ever play D&D.

They feel "invested" in D&D, and that learning "other games" will be work.

It's really not. The time spent really learning the differences between Adventures in middle earth, and base 5e; you could just have easily already been playing The One Ring as well...

But they don't care.

People like their D&D the way they like it, and they will not play anything else.

It's the way it is in a lot of cases. Groups like mine are outliers.

I happen to like 5E but if 5E hadn't come out I would have switched from 4E to something else because I had burned out on it.

If people don't switch it's because the game works for them. I don't play other games (other than the occasional one shot) because I already have something that suits my needs.

Why would I switch? It doesn't buy me anything.

 

[edosan]

I like Fifth Edition, I appreciate that it tries to strike a middle ground between the faster play of earlier versions while adding a bit of flavor and crunch but not going as far as 3 and 4. I want that kind of simpler, faster play than I had under 3.5. It’s not perfect, but nothing will be. I only wish the books were written better and also have the adventures be less of the adventure path model

 

[Warpiglet-7]

I like Fifth Edition, I appreciate that it tries to strike a middle ground between the faster play of earlier versions while adding a bit of flavor and crunch but not going as far as 3 and 4. I want that kind of simpler, faster play than I had under 3.5. It’s not perfect, but nothing will be. I only wish the books were written better and also have the adventures be less of the adventure path model

The game is easier to play than they made it out to be.

DMing more now I am amazed at how much they get in their own way with the presentation of the game…

 

[EzekielRaiden]

5e has learned a good lesson: Make your game approachable. Avoid unnecessary impediments, as those create quit moments. Aesthetics are very important. The human element is even more important.

It has also fallen prey to easy traps of those lessons. The easiest way to make a game approachable is to make it shallow, because it's easy to learn to play something if there's almost nothing to learn. Avoiding all impediments is easier than avoiding unnecessary ones, but that leads to an experience that you slide into...and slide right back out of. Good aesthetics elevate good mechanics into a great experience, but even great aesthetics can't paper over mechanical problems (at least not forever.) You do, in fact, need real human involvement to bring the game to life--but demanding everything from that human element and throwing them to the wolves with a "you figure it out, you're the DM!" merely exacerbates long-standing issues (dearth of DMs, young DMs learning bad habits, higher rates of group dysfunction because folks don't know what they want or don't know how to get it).

In various important ways, 5e has done good. To say otherwise would be foolish. But to look on what it has done and say, "Welp, job well done boys, let's pack it in" would be equally foolish. We can, and should, expect things to get better.

 

[Neonchameleon]

5e has learned a good lesson: Make your game approachable. Avoid unnecessary impediments, as those create quit moments. Aesthetics are very important. The human element is even more important.

It has also fallen prey to easy traps of those lessons. The easiest way to make a game approachable is to make it shallow, because it's easy to learn to play something if there's almost nothing to learn. Avoiding all impediments is easier than avoiding unnecessary ones, but that leads to an experience that you slide into...and slide right back out of. Good aesthetics elevate good mechanics into a great experience, but even great aesthetics can't paper over mechanical problems (at least not forever.) You do, in fact, need real human involvement to bring the game to life--but demanding everything from that human element and throwing them to the wolves with a "you figure it out, you're the DM!" merely exacerbates long-standing issues (dearth of DMs, young DMs learning bad habits, higher rates of group dysfunction because folks don't know what they want or don't know how to get it).

In various important ways, 5e has done good. To say otherwise would be foolish. But to look on what it has done and say, "Welp, job well done boys, let's pack it in" would be equally foolish. We can, and should, expect things to get better.

I think I'll build on this. 5e has done an excellent job of creating a good player side experience from levels 1-5, and OneD&D does a good polishing job of further enhancing this strength by, for example, putting all subclasses on level three making the level one choice not overwhelming and ensuring that level three has further character growth - and by making the feats better than the cookie cutter ASIs at level 4 so everyone has a choice to make when they level up (except at level 5 when the martials' second attack is enough they don't really care). Strong aesthetics, character growth with many but not overwhelming choices, and the cleanest ruleset of any D&D in history is all good stuff and both draws newbies in and doesn't drown them.

The starting levels for the new players are the most important part and 5e did well and One D&D is going to almost certainly do better, polishing the pain points. But I'm unhappy with the game outside what is the most important quadrant. After level 5 and entering Paragon tier the only mechanical character growth choice made by any martial who doesn't multiclass is which feat/ASI to pick once every four levels, and the game seems to have no vision of what a fighter, barbarian, or rogue even is after paragon tier (to be fair it does for the monk with their Level 14: Proficient in all saves and spend a ki point to reroll being character defining to the point I think it should be spread around more).

And then we reach the DM's side of the table where you are basically left to sink or swim. And the DM needs at least as much support as any player and probably as much as all the players combined. There are almost no tools and ones like the quick monster creation don't wokr, thanks to Weapon Finesse, thrown weapons, and spells in melee the non-legendary monsters are tactically bad when they aren't just hp pinatas, and the playstyles aren't supported.

 

[Zardnaar]

honestly I think the only thing 5e really brought to DND that was innovative was the Advantage /Disadvantage thing. Other than that it's a slimmed down easy play version of what came before. Though the Easy play thing that makes it boring so some seems to be the big selling point to most.

Advantage mechanic was in 2E.

 

[Oofta]

Advantage mechanic was in 2E.

It's been a while but I don't remember it. Some splat book or article?

 

[payn]

Advantage mechanic was in 2E.

And Pathfinder after that.