• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 5E Is 5E Special

The-Magic-Sword

Small Ball Archmage
I've run games up to 20th and never had an issue. It could have been clearer but the rules for encounters in the DMG seem to be based on 4 PCs, no magic, no feats, novice players.

Not sure what you mean by "magic item pain point" but advice (some actually worthwhile) is a forum post away.
After a lot of tinkering with 5e, multiple campaigns worth of play, back to basics tests, discussions with my players, an attempt at a power neutral magic item system, banned feats, a small career as a homebrewer on unearthedaracana, an attempt at the rules in the back of XGTE, I am proud to report we finally fixed it (by switching to pf2e)

Edit: to clarify, i imagine the difference is that i play with players who push character optimization pretty far, fairly consistently.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Warpiglet-7

Cry havoc! And let slip the pigs of war!
I've run games up to 20th and never had an issue. It could have been clearer but the rules for encounters in the DMG seem to be based on 4 PCs, no magic, no feats, novice players.

Not sure what you mean by "magic item pain point" but advice (some actually worthwhile) is a forum post away.
There’s a group of people that don’t like 5e. They think something is “wrong” with the game.

It was the same with 3e and 4e.

It’s just taste and they don’t want to fix it. Which is fine. But they want to talk about 5e. This makes as much sense as me posting on 4e forums. But to each their own.

I did not like 4e. And there was no fix. I don’t think there was anything “wrong” with the game per se, it just was not a love connection.

With as many editions as we have, it’s interesting to watch it play out. I had a period of wishing for 1e but think I am past it.

Some people are sad it’s not 3.5. Some are sad it’s not 4e. Very different games and goes to show seeing problems is about where you are coming from.

I anticipate I might sound like a curmudgeon when 5.5 comes out. I will try to be graceful but make no promises!
 

Yeah, not a selling point to me. 'Simplicity', bounded accuracy making it so you never feel like you're advancing, and the lack of mechanics beyond advantage are something I find boring.

I respect your point of view on that. But consider this: the bounded accuracy of 5e leads to probably its single best feature, which is that character optimization exists but is not mandatory. You can very much make a ruthlessly min-maxed character in 5e, but you can also play a halfling barbarian with 14 strength and still do cool stuff.

In contrast, I've heard horror stories of people showing up to Pathfinder 1e games and being mocked for having every level in one class, because "everyone knows" you have to have some particular four-class combo to be effective as a melee character. 5e doesn't have that problem. For example, there's pretty much unanimous agreement that the Four Elements monk is one of the worst subclasses in 5e, but I ran a long game with one of those as a player, and he did just fine. I ran another with a supposedly underpowered Champion fighter, and he did just fine. People can just play what they want.

It can't be overstated how important that is to 5e's success.
 


Lycurgon

Adventurer
Yes it is special. The elegant simplicity of the system mixed with enough character options made it an instant success. It brought a lot of players back to the game, and become an instant hit.

People point to Critical Role and say that it was responsible for 5e's success. While it definitely brought new players to the game, I don't think that would have happened if 5e was not as popular and accessible as it is. If 5e was not an instant success, I am not sure the CR group would have been asked to live stream in the first place. And if they were, they probably would not have changed from Pathfinder if 5e was not doing well. If they had stuck with Pathfinder, CR would not have done as well as they have. And 5e would not have had the boost in players because of them. I believe that 5e was a huge factor in CR being successful, which in turn helped 5e. But if the game was more complex and less accessible, CR would not be the phenomenon that it is today.

Without the accessibility that the game has, 5e would have never expanded the way it has. CR, Stanger Things and Covid Lockdowns (combined with online play) have all contributed to the popularity of the game, but if the game was too complex, it would not likely to have had anywhere near as much success as it has. Lots of potential new players would have been put off by a more complex game.
 

The-Magic-Sword

Small Ball Archmage
People suggest pf2E, but its still far on the other spectrum. At each level you gain like 7 features. That's a lot more then 5E's 1-2.
1659401878870.png


Not quite ;)
 



payn

He'll flip ya...Flip ya for real...
People suggest pf2E, but its still far on the other spectrum. At each level you gain like 7 features. That's a lot more then 5E's 1-2.
This is not true. PF2 has greatly silo'd leveling into basically a choice between 3 feats. Adjust your HP and pick spells if you got them. It appears daunting at first glance, but dive in and you will see level 1 is the most choices you will ever make going forward.

Edit; ninja'd by @The-Magic-Sword
 

Reynard

Legend
Supporter
I don't think PF2 is necessarily a good replacement for people that like 5E but want a little "more." They have superficial similarities but are quite different games. LevelUp is 5E with "more", and I would argue that 3.5 with a few house rules would be a better fit.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top