5e sucks

[bdng09]

literally no character development/choices beyond 1st level. Why is 5e a thing? Bring back 3.5

[drager55891]

Originally posted by Kyutaru:

Originally posted by drager55891:

Still more than 5e too often level up as click to to continue or pick new class.

Should have seen 2nd edition. Oh wait, you CAN by playing Baldur's Gate 1 and 2. Here's what Fighters get upon lvling up: more hitpoints and a better THAC0. That's it. Unless you were a spellcaster, you didn't get jack for special abilities. Oh except for Thief who did get skills in traps and lockpicking and other stuff. It was the most basic basic basicness you could ever basic. 5e is a huge improvement from it.

It is a flaw but how old is 2e and how old is 5e?

[Pan Darius Cassandra]

5e = Chad

3.5 = Chud

[Kyutaru]

Originally posted by drager55891:

It is a flaw but how old is 2e and how old is 5e?

Oh they're separated by decades. Thing is, no other RPG does the complexity D&D and Pathfinder did in the 2000s because it's not good for RPG tables. It's unbalanced and leads to meme combat, it's more for people who focus on character building than actual tactics. Vampire the Masquerade has pretty basic character building too, Shadowrun has similar, GURPS too, Call of Cthulhu too. Pretty much every tabletop RPG is streamlined and has simple character building with fewer options than anything 3.5 brought around. Because that's what's healthy for game balance, a tightly controlled system that can be measured and controlled, especially for DMs looking to create balanced but challenging fun. Even card games restrict themselves when they get too bloated, restricting old sets, banning broken cards and combos, and limiting players to modern era deckbuilding to control the playing experience and prevent wildly broken shenanigans from disrupting the gameplay.

[Snuptik]

Originally posted by drager55891:

There problems with all of the editions of DnD.

I like role playing through the game play and 5e is not good at that.

roleplay has nothing to do with the rulebook u are using. u can rp all the same doesnt matter which u use if its dnd, shadowrun, pathfinder whatever. group dm+player define the roleplay and nothing else.

to the main topic. mostly people over 40+ crying about 5e and want older stuff back, but if u rly into the stuff u will understand fast 5e is better for playing as lets say 3.5. becauce u can focus more on actual playing and dont have to look into tons of different books to min max the perfect char with feats and multiclassings. its easy written so basic school english is enough to understand it and to use the rulebooks. newcomer can easy get into it. dunno why it should be bad. for videos on the otherhand its not easy to implement. we have bg3 and solasta both did a good job but if we are honost a video game cant beat the creative choices players would do in a live round.

[Vorpal Spoon]

Originally posted by GM Morgan:

Pathfinder is basically 3.5+
Kingmaker and Wrath of the Righteous are both CRPGs based on it and now that they’ve fixed 90% of the bugs

Did your nose just get longer?

[drager55891]

Originally posted by Kyutaru:

Originally posted by drager55891:

It is a flaw but how old is 2e and how old is 5e?

Oh they're separated by decades. Thing is, no other RPG does the complexity D&D and Pathfinder did in the 2000s because it's not good for RPG tables. It's unbalanced and leads to meme combat, it's more for people who focus on character building than actual tactics. Vampire the Masquerade has pretty basic character building too, Shadowrun has similar, GURPS too, Call of Cthulhu too. Pretty much every tabletop RPG is streamlined and has simple character building with fewer options than anything 3.5 brought around. Because that's what's healthy for game balance, a tightly controlled system that can be measured and controlled, especially for DMs looking to create balanced but challenging fun. Even card games restrict themselves when they get too bloated, restricting old sets, banning broken cards and combos, and limiting players to modern era deckbuilding to control the playing experience and prevent wildly broken shenanigans from disrupting the gameplay.

There nothing wrong with reducing the bad complexity but 5e also gotten rid of too much good complexity. as a some said if you do not multi-class if pick your role at the start and have only a few switch you can ride the railroading to.

[TequilaZaire]

Originally posted by w.f.schepel:

Originally posted by not harvey:

having never played dnd 5e before, I have a *lot* of issues with this game, and while I dont know if I would actually like other versions of Dnd, it does sound like 5e is just about the worst.

That is a matter of opinion. I have also played the recent pathfinder games extensively and honestly, it is mostly the illusion of choice. Most of the choices are made for you due to penalties left right and center for not having this or that. 5e saves you the bother. Alignment? Generally irrelevant. Stay in character and you won't even notice its absence. If anything, 5e does a good job allowing you to RP rather than be an accountant with a calculator and a devil's contract worth of feats to remember. Of course, if that is what makes your horns curl the right way and all that, sure, 3.5 is the way to go. For all non lawful evil persons out there: 5e is a vast improvement IMHO. YMMV.

This. If you want to play DnD as a strategy game, 3.5 and Pathfinder scratch that itch. If you want to dive deeper into role playing a character and enjoy variety, 5e allows for a lot. It's honestly nice having the options these days for all of them.

[drager55891]

Originally posted by Snuptik:

Originally posted by drager55891:

There problems with all of the editions of DnD.

I like role playing through the game play and 5e is not good at that.

roleplay has nothing to do with the rulebook u are using. u can rp all the same doesnt matter which u use if its dnd, shadowrun, pathfinder whatever. group dm+player define the roleplay and nothing else.

to the main topic. mostly people over 40+ crying about 5e and want older stuff back, but if u rly into the stuff u will understand fast 5e is better for playing as lets say 3.5. becauce u can focus more on actual playing and dont have to look into tons of different books to min max the perfect char with feats and multiclassings. its easy written so basic school english is enough to understand it and to use the rulebooks. newcomer can easy get into it. dunno why it should be bad. for videos on the otherhand its not easy to implement. we have bg3 and solasta both did a good job but if we are honost a video game cant beat the creative choices players would do in a live round.

Please note I said role playing through the game play as in role playing through the rules themselves.

I do not get this high and might ideal "Roll playing is about being pretending to be the character and nothing else."

[Nordil(Hun)]

Originally posted by Kyutaru:

Originally posted by drager55891:

Still more than 5e too often level up as click to to continue or pick new class.

Should have seen 2nd edition. Oh wait, you CAN by playing Baldur's Gate 1 and 2. Here's what Fighters get upon lvling up: more hitpoints and a better THAC0. That's it. Unless you were a spellcaster, you didn't get jack for special abilities. Oh except for Thief who did get skills in traps and lockpicking and other stuff. It was the most basic basic basicness you could ever basic. 5e is a huge improvement from it.

If i recall well they got weapon proficiency. OR something like that. Like you could place points or what to weapons useage. But maybe on every second level only?

[Kyutaru]

Originally posted by Nordil(Hun):

If i recall well they got weapon proficiency. OR something like that. Like you could place points or what to weapons useage. But maybe on every second level only?

True, but that's an alternate rule that wasn't core to AD&D, and all it adds is more damage with the weapon you're picking. It restricted you to using certain weapons rather than being anything beneficial. It's the early form of weapon specialization. But EVERY class had that, even the wizards. It wasn't adding new abilities, it was just ensuring you only ever used one weapon type ever.

[Drake]

Originally posted by Nordil(Hun):

Originally posted by Kyutaru:

Should have seen 2nd edition. Oh wait, you CAN by playing Baldur's Gate 1 and 2. Here's what Fighters get upon lvling up: more hitpoints and a better THAC0. That's it. Unless you were a spellcaster, you didn't get jack for special abilities. Oh except for Thief who did get skills in traps and lockpicking and other stuff. It was the most basic basic basicness you could ever basic. 5e is a huge improvement from it.

If i recall well they got weapon proficiency. OR something like that. Like you could place points or what to weapons useage. But maybe on every second level only?

Yes fighters had weapon masteries and where monsters because of that.

Ad&d 2E was old school. You didn't get many things on level aside from spells with casters. Instead if was all about character creation.
Baldur's gate didn't have it in game, but as part of char creation you were supposed to pick non weapon proficiencies and traits, which were pretty much skills and feats. Except you chose them all at lv 1 and they used your ability scores for efficiency.

[Pinhead Larry]

Originally posted by bdng09:

literally no character development/choices beyond 1st level. Why is 5e a thing? Bring back 3.5

While we all agree that 5e is middling at BEST and a step above trash at worst, I'd like to remind everyone that we DO still have access to the Owlcat Pathfinder games which are near 1:1 recreations of the tabletop pathfinder 1e rules. Y'know, if anyone wants to scratch that itch.

[Coldhands]

5e is pretty mechanically boring. It's great as a group storytelling device at the table, because of how easy it is to run, but BG3 is really highlighting its limitations as a game.

But, what are you going to do? 5e is the edition WotC's currently trying to sell, so there's no way they're greenlighting a new D&D game that doesn't use it.

[DeathStroke]

yep 5E is the absolute worst , i hadnt played this version in pen n paper , i knew it was bad but so wasnt aware just how bad it was , WOTC have been losing their minds for years , in order to create pointless " balance " and cater to every single person on the planet they have made a game so dumbed down and simplified its barely even a shadow of what it was. DnD isnt a competitive game , you play against made up people , so why should there be ANY balance at all?? They have completely destroyed spell casting , only one constant concentration spell at a time? who the hell thought that was a good idea? wizard is basically reduced to fireball and thats about it , honestly will avoid anything related to 5E rule set going forwards , its designed to cater to morons , DnD isnt a board game , nor is it competitive , and shouldnt be treated as such , its a narrative platform for role play , you arent versing each other , nor the DM. I will be uninstalling this game once ive finished . Its just not enjoyable at all and its a pretty average game on top of the poor mechanics imposed by the current 5E rules.

[Beornvig]

5e does, indeed, suck.