5th Edition D&D is boring

[SpineFish]

Cookie cutter classes with no customisation barring extremely simple multiclassing.....

Game looks sweet but.

[Knightspace]

Originally posted by Cirrus:

Originally posted by Knightspace:

I mean, it is, but Wizards wouldn't let anyone do it with previous editions.

Who would want to even do that?

5th edition is most popular ever. If wotc gives choice to do more popular edition or much less popular why would aaa-game company select smaller target audience?

To promote a better system, but a company is a company, so greed comes first.

[Cpt_Weisemann]

It is not boring, but not detailed like 3.5, 4.5 or Pathfinder. I play a 5e campaign with my friends and we are having fun. But I agree with OP, that there is not much customability with character building. The general proficiency is the problem imho. It doesn't allow specilization much. In old systems there were weapon focus and specilization. They add small bonuses but you can make a fighter with hammer or axe or bastard sword. There were lots of feats and class specific feat gains, for example fighters get an additional feat every 2 even levels, etc.
There are good and bad points in both systems.
I like 5e because it is easy to manage and players can focus on the roleplaying without boggling down with the numbers, rules, etc.
I like old systems and especially Pathfinder because they allow us to tailor a detailed characters. I really like planning charters in old systems. This one is easy to manage in computer games but hard on table top.
Nevertheless as long as story and side characters are good, the system is not much important for me at least. And if it is not good in BG3, there are 2 Pathfinder games I can delve to make interesting builds.

[Spardacus]

You all bought the horse armor from Oblivion and ruined the gaming forever, so STFU.

[⇧⇨⇩⇩⇩]

Originally posted by Hi.standard:

actually, I kind of agree.

DND rule set is largely unintuitive. bar a lot of flexibility and a lot of things that should make sense, just dont. This is largely due to the fact that is is shackled to the original set of rules with str, dex, charisma, etc.

I think they should get rid of the 2 ability score points equal 1 bonus point thing for 1, it is just..dumb. just make it a flat bonus

Most casters are really hard to multiclass with

something needs to be worked out to make multi classing work a lot better because some class combos will never really work due to the ability score requirements and optimizations.

What is it you think would be better by having a flat bonus? You want to change the math around so that a str 13 gives a +3 bonus isntead of a +1? Why? What does that acomplish?

And what do you mean by casters being hard to multiclass? casters are in general easier to multiclass than martial classes because most caster classes have another class that use the same primary stat for their casting, and even if you want to dip into another casting class that uses a stat you didnt put points in you can still solve that by picking spells that dont rely on your spellcast modifier. Lots of support spells have the exact same effect regardless of your spellcast modifier. Or you could simply find a magic item that sets a stat to an acceptable level for multiclassing.

it sounds like you would to well to go watch some multiclass character build guides for 5e. There are tons of them out there since pen and paper players have been making videos about the topic for almost a decade by now. Go check out treantmonk if you want some guidance for how to multiclass effectively.

[Foolswalkin]

Pathfinder 2e looks amazing. The tabletop game, not Owlcat’s 2nd game. I’ll be looking into finding a Roll20 session to join when I get the time this fall. Among countless other changes, they’ve broken feats up into class, general, ancestral (5e’s “race”), and skill, so you have a lot of decision points that go into making your character distinct without boiling them all down into “a pile of +1’s to the only thing you care about, or traps.”

But 5e’s character-build shortcomings are not going to stop me from enjoying the hell out of BG3. It seems like Larian has put RP choices mattering mechanically on the menu, opening up whole new ways to diminish your character to empower them via tadpole and durge and who knows what else.

See you all on the other side of release day.

[Hi.standard]

how many classes multiclass well with druid , wizard, or bard?

and the idea of just dipping in for one or two levels just isnt cool

[Dinvan]

Originally posted by Marine Ops Specialist:

Originally posted by RobeRonin:

trolls will troll

not really, 5e may be popular but it has 0 customization options compared to 3.5e and 4e, combat is also really mediocre compared to old editions

We don't talk about 4e.

[Ezenkrul]

Only boring people get bored

[⇧⇨⇩⇩⇩]

Originally posted by Hi.standard:

how many classes multiclass well with druid , wizard, or bard?

and the idea of just dipping in for one or two levels just isnt cool

That is an incomplete question. What would offer a good multiclass depends on what you want to acomplish. If you dont like to just "dip" then dont.
Do you have a goal in mind? If not you need to figure that out first. If you dont know then just start playing one class and watch what other classes in your party does. When you learn a bit about what abilities are possible to gain you might get a more firm idea of what you would like to try. Then you can start picking levels in that other class, or you can just respec into a build you want to try.

Its worth noting that some multi class concepts have a certain amount of levels needed for the concept to "come online", while others start working immediately. For example a wild shape focused druid can immediately benifit from a level of barbarian for raging. If two classes have an ability you want at lv3 then you need a total level of 6 untill you get both. So you need to figure out in what order you want to pick those levels? Alternate taking one level in each class untill you are lv6? Or take 3 in one class first and then 3 in the other? Or would you prefer getting 4 levels in one class first to get a +2 to your main attribute and then multiclass? Or go straight to lv6 in one class and then respec into a multiclass?

There is a lot to consider so start with getting an idea of what your goal is.

[ACS36]

It's alright. I can definitely see why some people say it's boring. I'd sincerely question anyone who says 5E is better than a 7/10. It' gets the job done but it leaves a lot to be desired.

[RazorChain]

I think Call of Duty is boring. I think playing golf is boring, I find soccer boring. A big part of my job is driving a car so I wouldn't pick up Eurotruck simulator unless somebody paid me to play it. There are still tens of millions of people who like these things. I don't complain about it.

So if you find 5e boring go play the 2 excellent PF games that have been published or some other RPG.

[Hi.standard]

Im just dont like you cant really make a barbarian monk with the current rule set effectively.

also, with the way stats work - you are extremely encouraged to pick a multi class that shares the same main stat ...

like there arent charasmtic fighers, or intelligent clerics? i mean you could be one, but there would be no point with how the current rule and bonuses are set, why would you put points into these stats. I dunno I think i dont like the idea that everyone just maxes 2 stats basically and everything else is just a complete dump.

Perhaps everyone should roughly same base stats, and a class give it a bonus,
so being a fighter gives you say bonus plus 4 str, and plus 2 con from base stats, and bonus is halved when multiclassing..and a level up gives additional bonus in those stats, on top of a free point to put anywhere else...clearly im just speaking off the top of my head, and this would be a whole new set of rules, but just saying after like 40 years of dnd youd think it would evolve even more than it has.

this would encourage multiclassing more than the usual multiclass combos, obviouslly something would have to be worked out for spells and etc..

[Something completely different]

Originally posted by Marine Ops Specialist:

Originally posted by RobeRonin:

trolls will troll

not really, 5e may be popular but it has 0 customization options compared to 3.5e and 4e, combat is also really mediocre compared to old editions

Dunno, sub classes should count as one atleast.

[Gaius]

Originally posted by Marine Ops Specialist:

Originally posted by RobeRonin:

trolls will troll

not really, 5e may be popular but it has 0 customization options compared to 3.5e and 4e, combat is also really mediocre compared to old editions

4e is the worst system in the world, it basically made people either roll back or move to other systems, are you kidding me? It's basically trying to emulate a videogame in the tabletop with wasted hours on the simplest tasks.

I heard good things about Pathfinder 2.0 and would be interested in a videogame based on that. If Owlcat games made me notice one flaw on Pathfinder 1.1, tough, is that buf stack and pre buffing cam make a good system abhorent, can't play those games without a prebuff mod.

[⇧⇨⇩⇩⇩]

Originally posted by Hi.standard:

Im just dont like you cant really make a barbarian monk with the current rule set effectively.

also, with the way stats work - you are extremely encouraged to pick a multi class that shares the same main stat ...

like there arent charasmtic fighers, or intelligent clerics? i mean you could be one, but there would be no point with how the current rule and bonuses are set, why would you put points into these stats. I dunno I think i dont like the idea that everyone just maxes 2 stats basically and everything else is just a complete dump.

Perhaps everyone should roughly same base stats, and a class give it a bonus,
so being a fighter gives you say bonus plus 4 str, and plus 2 con from base stats, and bonus is halved when multiclassing..and a level up gives additional bonus in those stats, on top of a free point to put anywhere else...clearly im just speaking off the top of my head, and this would be a whole new set of rules, but just saying after like 40 years of dnd youd think it would evolve even more than it has.

this would encourage multiclassing more than the usual multiclass combos, obviouslly something would have to be worked out for spells and etc..

You make a lot of statements but do very little to give your reasoning for them?
Why do you think its not possible to make a monk barbarian? Because you would need a to wide set of stats to suport your build? Well guess what, there are items that set certain stats to a specific number so now you actually can make a build like that work.

Charismatic fighter is also possible. Bladelocks can pick an eldritch invocation that let them use charisma for weapon attacks.

And regarding priests you once again dont clarify what it is you want to acomplish. Why do you want a cleric to use intelligence as their casting stat? What becomes better if their casting was based on INT instead of WIS?

No offense but the more you speak the more happy I am that you are not in charge of designing class mechanics for this game. You seem very unaware of whats possible, not particularly interested in researching the classes you are interested in to find out whats possible to do with them and you seem fornd of arbitrarily changing things around with no explanation as to how or why it would improve anything.