LeStryfe79
President Spartacus
I have an Unearthed Arcana in pretty good shape. I bought it off a drug addict for $5.
-
Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.
"This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.
D&D 5E Discussion
- Thread starter Alchemist
- Start date
ProphetSword
Arcane
My Player's Handbook is starting to fall apart, with pages falling out. It's not the first printing, though, so that's not surprising. My Monster Manual, on the other hand, is as strong as the day it was printed.
Keldryn
Arcane
Is your PH one of the orange-spined reprints, or still with the original cover art?
Wish I'd kept my original 1e books. I got them in 1987 from a flea market. I don't know what printings they were, but they were the original covers, and they were all in near-mint condition. They were still in really good shape when I sold them in the early 90s (along with so much 1e and BECMI stuff... sigh).
I did finally get a 1e DMG and MM a couple of years ago from a local gaming shop. They're in decent shape, but they're the orange-spined versions. I couldn't find a PHB that wasn't absolutely disgusting (cigarette stains, sweat stains, food stains...) and smelly, so I ended up buying the premium reprint that WotC did. Would have been nice to buy the complete set, but they were way too expensive.
It's amazing how well put-together those early AD&D hardcovers were though. Most of the mid-80s 1e books and 2e hardcovers that I see among the used D&D books are falling apart, while those late 70s hardcovers could withstand a nuclear fallout.
LeStryfe79
President Spartacus
For the record, the new PHB is far more durable than that piece of shit 4e one was.
Dangersaurus
Novice
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2007
- Messages
- 49
There's no such thing as an Unearthed Arcana in good shape. The binding sucked too.
ProphetSword
Arcane
it's the orange spined reprint, which is why it's starting to fall apart, I think. I should probably seek out a copy that's an original print. Wonder how much they sell for these days?
Here you can check every edition of the old D&D and AD&D 1E books: https://www.acaeum.com/
Is the Codex planning to have anyone review the 5E sourcebooks? Inquiring lurkers want to know.
So I sat down and had a game yesterday with my buds. We ran a one-shot for level 5 characters. I was DM, my players were Barbarian, Rogue, Sorcerer and Cleric respectively. We had the party get accused of a murder, a chase sequence as they were run out of town, tracing the real bad guy to the place he was going to sacrifice the supposed murder victim, evading his traps, killing the minions and returning back to have their names cleared. Prior to meeting, everyone had gotten their hands on a more-or-less legal copy of the PHB (for the record, mine was legal and bought at Faraos Cigarer in Copenhagen), read it over and rolled up their characters.
So without further ado, here's the first part of my review of 5E as it currently stands.
1: Presentation
Good - but not perfect - grades here. The book is hardcover as you'd expect, the spine seems solid but i noted with some dismay that the pages are glued into it instead of sewn. Having my 3E books fall apart while my AD&D endured shows the kind of wear and tear a good RPG book needs to stand up to. That said, we'll probably have a new edition in a couple of years anyway the way Wizards is milking the license. This may be a moot point. The pages seemed a bit wawy and warped when you look at the closed book from above. As if they had gotten wet at some point. I checked multiple copies of the book in the store and they all displayed this. It may have been a bad batch or it may have been the paper being too thin for the amount of ink they soaked into each page. This is a minor issue, although I would have liked slightly thicker paper for the pages.
The layout is decent. The text is set so it's easily to read, the slightly off-yellow colour of the pages actually made them easier on my eyes. The index could've benefited from an additional page or two. It's the part you'll be constantly referencing as a new player, and the text was so small you'd have to strain your eyes in the dimly lit gaming room. Having an alphabet letter heading for each section to break it up would also make it easier to find what you were after in a hurry. The part/chapter text at the bottom of every page could also have done with being more visible when you're trying to navigate to a paticular part of the rules in a hurry.
The graphics were good. We've a long way from the epic oil paintings of the late AD&D era, but at least we're past the goadawful "dungeonpunk" of late 3.5-4E editions. Everyone at the table were pretty pleased with the larger illustrations - especialy the full-page ones dotted throughout the book. there's room for improvement but it is a giant leap in the right direction.
The writing seems to assume you're familiar with previous editions of d&d. While this isn't a problem for my group - and we were grateful we didn't have to read through dozens of explanations for comcept swe were familiar with - the book may not be the best way to learn the game for a complete newbie.
2: Character Generation
Oh god, where to begin. Breaking this up into logical sections is a bit tricky, since character generation feeds into combat and vice versa. Out of combat roleplay is - as is the standard for d&d - mostly an afterthought. There's been a lot of "streamlining" here and I am not a fan of most of it.
Character generation follows many of the same steps we know from previous editions, although some parts have been streamlined for better or worse. You roll (or point buy. Mos people seme to point buy these days) your ability scores, pick a race, pick a class name your little dude and decide whether or not he has a penis etc.
2a: Races
Races are the standard ones you know from 3.xE with a few additions. Humans, Dwarves, Gnomes, Halflings, Elves, Half-Orcs and Half-Elves are joined by two relative newcomers. The pants-on-head-retarded "Dragonborn" abominations from 4E are still around. Some token attempt to give them some background lore has been made, but they're still incredibly off-putting. They're joined by Tieflings - an old favourite from planescape. No aasimar though. Races no longer have penalties. Gone are the days of having to worry about one of your attributes being lowered (especially painful for elves since everyone wants high CON). Now it's only bonuses for races. You genrally have a main race which gives you a +2 bonus to oneof your attributes and a subrace that gives you a +1 to another attribute. Humans on the other hand get +1 to EVERY attribute because apparently we're awesome. Strangely, there is a hard cap on attributes now. Players can only ever have 20 in any attribute. And you gain more attribute points as you level than in previous editions. So by the time you're in the mid levels, you can expect to have every attribute that matters to your class maxed out.
Every race has 3-4 pages of text describing its rules, but also how it generally views other races, common names, personality traits and a quote from one of the D&D books about a character of the race. The presentation is good but I can't help but feel humans are more than a little OP given the hard caps on attributes lowering the value of racial bonuses.
2b: Classes
The classes are the same as we're used to from 3.xE (No 4E-style Warlords. Which is a shame, because I kind of liked those). The warlock also managed to sneak in. Most (if not every) class has seen a lot of changes though.
- BAB is gone. As are skill points. Everyone has a "proficiency" bonus, which is the same for every class. If you're "proficient" with the weapon or skill you're using, you get to add your proficiency bonus to the roll. A Barbarian and a Wizard with the same STR who both swing a club at an orc have the same chance to hit and will do the same damage when they connect. You can also no longer dabble in skill sby having only a few points in some or saving up skill points for a multiclass. They're all-or-nothing have it or don't things. With proficiency bonus going from +2 at level 1-4 to +6 at level 17-20, there's also plenty of room for a level 1 greenhorn outperforming a superheroic level 20 cheeselord due to the whim of the dice.
- Saving throws are no longer tracked individually. Every class gets to add add their proficiency bonus to 2 different ability scores when rolling saving throws with that score. Yes, Fort/ref/Will have been replaced with straight ability checks. Also, you can't end up with funky saving throws by multiclassing anymore.
- There's no longer a standard class progression that tells you you get a feat every 3rd level and an ability point every 4th. Instead, there are "Ability Score Improvement" class features for every class. These usually come every 4 levels (Fighter being a notable exception that gets a few more). Ability score improvement allows you to raise an attribute by +2 instead of the +1 we got in 3.5E. But these hav a hard cap. You cannot raise any attribute above 20 in this fashion. You can forego your +2 to an ability score to get a feat. This is the only way you'll get any feats in 5E, and you're not getting your first feat until level 4. And every time you get a feat, you're giving up a +2 bonus to an ability score. Characters in general will have way, way fewer feats with which to customize themselves.
- Classes all get a minor customization feature. It has a different name for every class, but the concept is the same. You get 4 powers. One at around level 1-3, one at 4-6, one at 10-11 and one at 14-16. They're all sort-of thematically bound together and they're the main way you get to customize your character. Wizards get the full gamut of spell schools for their feature, but most classes are stuck with 2-3 options.
-Squishy characters are less so. Classes with a d4 hit die get a d6 now. D6'es get a d8. D8+ are unchanged, but all characters get the option of taking half their hit die rounded up in hp instead if they rolled poorly during level-up.
- Bards became a full caster class, gaining spell sup to 9th level. Bards, Clerics, Druids, Sorcerers and Wizards all have the same # of spell slots at every level. No more sorcerers being one level behind in spell levels known but ahead in spells per day. Everyone has something similar to spontaneous casting like sorcerers used to have as their "thing". You memorize a number of spells every time you rest (Casting ability modifier + level, or all of them if you're a bard/sorc) and you can cast them spontaneously as long as you have free spell slots of the given level left. In lieu of being the spontanenous caster, sorcerers are now the only class who gets to use metamagic. (Since metamagic no longer exists as feats and feats are in fact referred to as an optional rule).
- Also on the topic of magic, spells no longe rbecome more powerful as you level. A level 1 wizard casting Magic missile will do the same damage as a level 20 archmage. You can "power up" certain spells by expending a higher level spell slot when you cast them. The aforementioned Magic Missile would get an additional missile worth 1d4+1 damage for every spell level above first you sacrificed a slot for to cast it. But your low-level spell slots become irrelevant far faster than before since spells don't scale to your level.
- Classes get a feature of some sort on nearly every level (even if said feature is only a new level of spells). There are fewer "dead levels" than in previous editions. But the features every class gets are identical within the class. There's not a lot of room to make the character truly your own. Your rogue is going to play pretty much the same as every other rogue and so forth.
2c: personality and background:
The sole bright spot in our character building was this section. It has the usual height, weight, languages, gender---wait, let me quote that last one verbatim from the book:
Social justice strikes again! All orcs are beautiful!
On a brighter note, you have to choose a background, an ideal, a bond and a flaw. This is like an ultra-light baby's first version of BITs from Burning Wheel. (A vastly superior roleplaying system). Background gives you proficiencies with skills and toolkits as well as some relevant starting gear. More interesting, every background has flaws, bonds and ideals you can roll for, pick on a table (or make up your own). If you play to your ideals, give in to your flaws and bonds and generally try to portray more than a cardboard cutout with a sword, your DM can award you "inspiration". You can use inspiration to get advantage on attack rolls, saving throws or ability/skill checks. (Advantage/Disadvantage is a formalization of the "roll twice, choose better/worse" result rule that's been around in earlier editions). There's 15 pages of example backgrounds, ideals, bonds and flaws. It's probably the most sincere attempt made to get players to do actual roleplaying in a PHB since AD&D. So props for that.
2d: Summary
Wizards streamlined the character building. A lot of the little things you gave your character to customize them are gone. Their mutilated corpses offered up at the altar of BALANCE as a sacrifice. In the few spots where 5E tries to innovate it still plays it too safe and the results are not disastrous but never interesting. All in all we felt like the streamlining really hurt the characterbuilding. It's easier to throw a character together now than in 3.x due to the elimination of many of the fiddly bits like tallying and assigning skill points (and paying double for cross-class unless you were playing pathfinder), calculating your FOR/REF/WIL saves for multiclassed characters etc. On the other hand, many of the twists like adding a pathfinder archetype, picking an unusual feat and the like you'd use to make your character stand out are gone. While 5E may have attempted a well-intentioned clean-up of the rules, the end result has done more harm than good.
I'm out of the house tomorrow night, but I'll try to get a writeup of mygripes with impressions of the combat, magic, items and adventuring done tuesday.
So without further ado, here's the first part of my review of 5E as it currently stands.
1: Presentation
Good - but not perfect - grades here. The book is hardcover as you'd expect, the spine seems solid but i noted with some dismay that the pages are glued into it instead of sewn. Having my 3E books fall apart while my AD&D endured shows the kind of wear and tear a good RPG book needs to stand up to. That said, we'll probably have a new edition in a couple of years anyway the way Wizards is milking the license. This may be a moot point. The pages seemed a bit wawy and warped when you look at the closed book from above. As if they had gotten wet at some point. I checked multiple copies of the book in the store and they all displayed this. It may have been a bad batch or it may have been the paper being too thin for the amount of ink they soaked into each page. This is a minor issue, although I would have liked slightly thicker paper for the pages.
The layout is decent. The text is set so it's easily to read, the slightly off-yellow colour of the pages actually made them easier on my eyes. The index could've benefited from an additional page or two. It's the part you'll be constantly referencing as a new player, and the text was so small you'd have to strain your eyes in the dimly lit gaming room. Having an alphabet letter heading for each section to break it up would also make it easier to find what you were after in a hurry. The part/chapter text at the bottom of every page could also have done with being more visible when you're trying to navigate to a paticular part of the rules in a hurry.
The graphics were good. We've a long way from the epic oil paintings of the late AD&D era, but at least we're past the goadawful "dungeonpunk" of late 3.5-4E editions. Everyone at the table were pretty pleased with the larger illustrations - especialy the full-page ones dotted throughout the book. there's room for improvement but it is a giant leap in the right direction.
The writing seems to assume you're familiar with previous editions of d&d. While this isn't a problem for my group - and we were grateful we didn't have to read through dozens of explanations for comcept swe were familiar with - the book may not be the best way to learn the game for a complete newbie.
2: Character Generation
Oh god, where to begin. Breaking this up into logical sections is a bit tricky, since character generation feeds into combat and vice versa. Out of combat roleplay is - as is the standard for d&d - mostly an afterthought. There's been a lot of "streamlining" here and I am not a fan of most of it.
Character generation follows many of the same steps we know from previous editions, although some parts have been streamlined for better or worse. You roll (or point buy. Mos people seme to point buy these days) your ability scores, pick a race, pick a class name your little dude and decide whether or not he has a penis etc.
2a: Races
Races are the standard ones you know from 3.xE with a few additions. Humans, Dwarves, Gnomes, Halflings, Elves, Half-Orcs and Half-Elves are joined by two relative newcomers. The pants-on-head-retarded "Dragonborn" abominations from 4E are still around. Some token attempt to give them some background lore has been made, but they're still incredibly off-putting. They're joined by Tieflings - an old favourite from planescape. No aasimar though. Races no longer have penalties. Gone are the days of having to worry about one of your attributes being lowered (especially painful for elves since everyone wants high CON). Now it's only bonuses for races. You genrally have a main race which gives you a +2 bonus to oneof your attributes and a subrace that gives you a +1 to another attribute. Humans on the other hand get +1 to EVERY attribute because apparently we're awesome. Strangely, there is a hard cap on attributes now. Players can only ever have 20 in any attribute. And you gain more attribute points as you level than in previous editions. So by the time you're in the mid levels, you can expect to have every attribute that matters to your class maxed out.
Every race has 3-4 pages of text describing its rules, but also how it generally views other races, common names, personality traits and a quote from one of the D&D books about a character of the race. The presentation is good but I can't help but feel humans are more than a little OP given the hard caps on attributes lowering the value of racial bonuses.
2b: Classes
The classes are the same as we're used to from 3.xE (No 4E-style Warlords. Which is a shame, because I kind of liked those). The warlock also managed to sneak in. Most (if not every) class has seen a lot of changes though.
- BAB is gone. As are skill points. Everyone has a "proficiency" bonus, which is the same for every class. If you're "proficient" with the weapon or skill you're using, you get to add your proficiency bonus to the roll. A Barbarian and a Wizard with the same STR who both swing a club at an orc have the same chance to hit and will do the same damage when they connect. You can also no longer dabble in skill sby having only a few points in some or saving up skill points for a multiclass. They're all-or-nothing have it or don't things. With proficiency bonus going from +2 at level 1-4 to +6 at level 17-20, there's also plenty of room for a level 1 greenhorn outperforming a superheroic level 20 cheeselord due to the whim of the dice.
- Saving throws are no longer tracked individually. Every class gets to add add their proficiency bonus to 2 different ability scores when rolling saving throws with that score. Yes, Fort/ref/Will have been replaced with straight ability checks. Also, you can't end up with funky saving throws by multiclassing anymore.
- There's no longer a standard class progression that tells you you get a feat every 3rd level and an ability point every 4th. Instead, there are "Ability Score Improvement" class features for every class. These usually come every 4 levels (Fighter being a notable exception that gets a few more). Ability score improvement allows you to raise an attribute by +2 instead of the +1 we got in 3.5E. But these hav a hard cap. You cannot raise any attribute above 20 in this fashion. You can forego your +2 to an ability score to get a feat. This is the only way you'll get any feats in 5E, and you're not getting your first feat until level 4. And every time you get a feat, you're giving up a +2 bonus to an ability score. Characters in general will have way, way fewer feats with which to customize themselves.
- Classes all get a minor customization feature. It has a different name for every class, but the concept is the same. You get 4 powers. One at around level 1-3, one at 4-6, one at 10-11 and one at 14-16. They're all sort-of thematically bound together and they're the main way you get to customize your character. Wizards get the full gamut of spell schools for their feature, but most classes are stuck with 2-3 options.
-Squishy characters are less so. Classes with a d4 hit die get a d6 now. D6'es get a d8. D8+ are unchanged, but all characters get the option of taking half their hit die rounded up in hp instead if they rolled poorly during level-up.
- Bards became a full caster class, gaining spell sup to 9th level. Bards, Clerics, Druids, Sorcerers and Wizards all have the same # of spell slots at every level. No more sorcerers being one level behind in spell levels known but ahead in spells per day. Everyone has something similar to spontaneous casting like sorcerers used to have as their "thing". You memorize a number of spells every time you rest (Casting ability modifier + level, or all of them if you're a bard/sorc) and you can cast them spontaneously as long as you have free spell slots of the given level left. In lieu of being the spontanenous caster, sorcerers are now the only class who gets to use metamagic. (Since metamagic no longer exists as feats and feats are in fact referred to as an optional rule).
- Also on the topic of magic, spells no longe rbecome more powerful as you level. A level 1 wizard casting Magic missile will do the same damage as a level 20 archmage. You can "power up" certain spells by expending a higher level spell slot when you cast them. The aforementioned Magic Missile would get an additional missile worth 1d4+1 damage for every spell level above first you sacrificed a slot for to cast it. But your low-level spell slots become irrelevant far faster than before since spells don't scale to your level.
- Classes get a feature of some sort on nearly every level (even if said feature is only a new level of spells). There are fewer "dead levels" than in previous editions. But the features every class gets are identical within the class. There's not a lot of room to make the character truly your own. Your rogue is going to play pretty much the same as every other rogue and so forth.
2c: personality and background:
The sole bright spot in our character building was this section. It has the usual height, weight, languages, gender---wait, let me quote that last one verbatim from the book:
"You can play a male or female character without gaining any special bebefits or hinderances. Think about how your character does or does not conform to the broader culture's expactations of sex, gender and sexual behaviour. For example. a male drow cleric defies the traditional gender divisions of drow society. You don't need to be confined to binary notions of sex and gender. The elf god Corellon Larenthian is often seen as Androgynous or Hermaphrodite, for example, and some elves in the multiverse are made in Corellons image. You could also play a female character who presents herself as a man, a man who feels trapped in a females body, or a bearded dwarf female who hates being mistaken for a male.
On a brighter note, you have to choose a background, an ideal, a bond and a flaw. This is like an ultra-light baby's first version of BITs from Burning Wheel. (A vastly superior roleplaying system). Background gives you proficiencies with skills and toolkits as well as some relevant starting gear. More interesting, every background has flaws, bonds and ideals you can roll for, pick on a table (or make up your own). If you play to your ideals, give in to your flaws and bonds and generally try to portray more than a cardboard cutout with a sword, your DM can award you "inspiration". You can use inspiration to get advantage on attack rolls, saving throws or ability/skill checks. (Advantage/Disadvantage is a formalization of the "roll twice, choose better/worse" result rule that's been around in earlier editions). There's 15 pages of example backgrounds, ideals, bonds and flaws. It's probably the most sincere attempt made to get players to do actual roleplaying in a PHB since AD&D. So props for that.
2d: Summary
Wizards streamlined the character building. A lot of the little things you gave your character to customize them are gone. Their mutilated corpses offered up at the altar of BALANCE as a sacrifice. In the few spots where 5E tries to innovate it still plays it too safe and the results are not disastrous but never interesting. All in all we felt like the streamlining really hurt the characterbuilding. It's easier to throw a character together now than in 3.x due to the elimination of many of the fiddly bits like tallying and assigning skill points (and paying double for cross-class unless you were playing pathfinder), calculating your FOR/REF/WIL saves for multiclassed characters etc. On the other hand, many of the twists like adding a pathfinder archetype, picking an unusual feat and the like you'd use to make your character stand out are gone. While 5E may have attempted a well-intentioned clean-up of the rules, the end result has done more harm than good.
I'm out of the house tomorrow night, but I'll try to get a writeup of my
ProphetSword
Arcane
Interesting read. I don't agree with some of the points, but I do look forward to seeing the next half of the writeup.
tuluse
Arcane
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2008
- Messages
- 11,400
That ability score inflation doesn't sound good.
The non-scaling spells sound down right terrible. Like bad enough, I don't want to move from pathfinder.
Ulm, are the feats interesting at all? It seems like a wizard for example, would max Int pretty fast and not really need other attributes so they could grab feats.
The non-scaling spells sound down right terrible. Like bad enough, I don't want to move from pathfinder.
Ulm, are the feats interesting at all? It seems like a wizard for example, would max Int pretty fast and not really need other attributes so they could grab feats.
Mrowak
Arcane
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2008
- Messages
- 3,952
I've skimmed through the book and to be honest, I don't see a reason to switch from Pathfinder, which is put together better and Player's Handbook alone outclasses its D&D 5.0 equivalent with customisation options. While Pathfinder felt like vastly improved rendition of D&D 3.5, D&D 5 feels like Pathfinder's poorer cousin.
The only thing I would like to see carried over from current D&D to Pathfinder are the illustrations and artwork in general.
The only thing I would like to see carried over from current D&D to Pathfinder are the illustrations and artwork in general.
The illustrations and artwork in Pathfinder are horrible enough that I wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole, regardless of rules or whatever.
Alchemist
Arcane
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2013
- Messages
- 1,439
Ulminati makes it look pretty grim - but keep in mind we don't really have the full set of rules yet. A lot of the optional rules modules which will add options and extra crunch will likely be in the DMG. 5E as it stands now is definitely stripped down compared to something like Pathfinder - and personally I like that as a change of pace and WotC trying something different, and a bit more old-school. There are less moving parts to tinker with for sure. I can understand that fans of 3.5 / Pathfinder would find it lacking. It is hard to compete with the sheer amount of options those versions have built up over the years, straight out of the gate.
I have no doubt that extra rules and character options will be coming with the DMG and other books they'll sell. These initial releases (Basic and PHB) are clearly aimed more at fans of older editions who don't want all the rules bloat. 5E has been pretty well-received in the grognard / OSR scene. With the DMG I think they'll pull in more of the Pathfinder fans, with tactical combat options and stuff like that.
And just for the record I like the complexity of Pathfinder too, when I'm in the mood for it.
I have no doubt that extra rules and character options will be coming with the DMG and other books they'll sell. These initial releases (Basic and PHB) are clearly aimed more at fans of older editions who don't want all the rules bloat. 5E has been pretty well-received in the grognard / OSR scene. With the DMG I think they'll pull in more of the Pathfinder fans, with tactical combat options and stuff like that.
And just for the record I like the complexity of Pathfinder too, when I'm in the mood for it.
Mrowak
Arcane
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2008
- Messages
- 3,952
d20pfsrd.com has the rules with none of the illustrations.
Also, sneak preview of my next rant:
- Crit ranges are gone. All criticals happen on a natural 20 now (no second roll to confirm). Critical damage is +1 weapon dice (don't double enchantment, strength , whatevs) regardless of weapon.
- Since weapons have less stats to differentiate them, there are only simple/martial weapons now. All exotic weapons haver been purged from PHB. Monks weep.
- Armor check penalty is gone. Some armors impose disadvantage (roll twice, pick worst) on Dexterity (Stealth) checks, but that's it. Wanna swim, climb, run and jump in full plate? No worries. N openalties. You don't even get a 20ft movement speed for wearing heavy armor now.
ProphetSword
Arcane
I agree that the review seems very grim. I enjoyed the read, but it is definitely slanted from the point of view of someone who prefers a more crunch-heavy system like Pathfinder. There's nothing wrong with that and I respect the review for what it is, but everyone reading it should understand that it's just one side of the equation. In order to understand the game, you have to play it to see how it works at the table. It won't be for everyone.
It really depends on the kind of game you're interested in. If you enjoy complexity in character builds and running games that have tons of fiddly +2 conditional bonuses that allow you to gain an advantage over your opponent, then this may not be the system for you. Some people like the deep tactical play of 3.5 or Pathfinder or even 4th Edition. Good for them. I imagine Paizo will have them covered for years.
If you're like me and you remember the days of Basic D&D or 1st/2nd Edition and the faster resolution of things, you may prefer 5E, which is like a much improved 2E. They've removed a lot of the fiddly conditional bonuses and such in favor of faster gameplay and quicker resolution, but they kept a lot of smart bits from 3rd/4th.
In addition, the bounded accuracy idea, which keeps the overall numbers low, helps the gameplay quite a bit. I recently ran a game where a bunch of 10th level characters were confronted by a large group of goblins and kobolds. Sounds like a sure win for the party, right? Wrong. Two people went down within the first few rounds as the goblins and kobolds overwhelmed them. Eventually, the party rallied and won the fight, but the players learned not to underestimate enemies just because they were easy to defeat in a previous edition once you reached a certain level. Those kobolds and goblins might not have a lot of hit points, but they can still hit you (and they will still be able to hit you even when you're 20th level). They are still dangerous in huge numbers.
Bounded accuracy also fixes some issues with skills. When we played Pathfinder, the climbing DCs made some things impossible. For example, our rogue had a stealth that was ridiculously high (lets say +25). Other members of the group only had a stealth score around +6. Because of the way that challenge DCs rise, some characters didn't even bother to try to stealth because they could never hit a DC of 30, no matter what they rolled, while the rogue could hit it easily. In 5E, on the other hand, our rogue has a +10 to his stealth, and others might only have a +4. He still has a clear advantage, but since DCs don't climb, they might only need to hit a 13 or 15 to successfully stealth. Even a +4 can hit that, though it is tougher to do (and that's fair). Those numbers don't go up as you level.
A strong wooden door that has a DC of 13 to bash at level 1 is still a DC of 13 to bash at level 20. Why did the door get stronger just because the character's went up in level? How do they ever feel an improvement with those extra +1 and +2 bonuses if the DC of things you do skyrockets as you get better, creating a situation where you're just barely making it if you kept up with your numbers? It's one of the things I don't miss that 5E has completely eliminated.
And finally, I wanted to address the take on spell slots. They are a great addition to the game. Low level spells that are usually forgotten continue to be useful as you go up in level. As an example, if a character has the "Magic Missile" spell and they cast it from their first level slot, they get three missiles that do 1d4+1 damage each. However, for each slot above the first that they cast that spell, they get to add a missile. So a "Magic Missile" spell cast from a 7th level slot will produce 9 missiles. Not only does it power up the spells, it gives more flexibility to the spellcasting and offers more choices. Only have a 4th level slot left? In previous editions, that meant you were only casting a 4th level spell. Now it can be a spell anywhere from 1st to 4th, depending on what you want to do and how you want to use that slot.
Our party Cleric will frequently cast "Cure Wounds." This spell gives him 1d8 of healing (plus his Wisdom modifier) in a 1st level slot. If he casts it from a 7th level slot, it would be 8d8 of healing (plus his Wisdom modifier). As a result, he only has to know one Cure spell, so he is free to keep other spells that will help him do other things.
In the end, everyone has to make their own decisions about the edition. Some reviews will be positive and some will be negative. Just realize there will be two sides. I'm just glad that in most cases the reviews seem overwhelmingly positive. And that being said, I'm still looking forward to the next part of the review.
First part (what I wrote before I decided it was time for sleepsies) definitely has a negative slant. It deals with character building, which did take a huge amount of streamlining for the worse. Things get a bit better once we get to combat. It feels a lot more "gamey" a la 4E, but it does resolve faster. At lower levels at least. Due to the changes in character building there is a severe amount of hp bloat later on.
ProphetSword
Arcane
What I find interesting is the perspective of players based upon their experience and their interests. I have read threads on a lot of forums that are talking about 5E, and this is what you typically hear if folks are complaining:
3rd/4th fans who dislike what they read will say the game is too streamlined and lacks crunch. They don't like the lack of options.
1st/2nd fans who have read the rules and didn't care for it will say that it's got too much 3rd/4th edition in it. There are too many choices and options.
Players who have played a mix of editions usually like that it takes the best of all editions and puts them together. Just enough options, and just enough streamlining. Sometimes, they don't like it either. It can vary widely, but I expect that in this day and age. There are a lot of choices when it comes to how you play D&D these days, even when it's not called D&D (Pathfinder, Castles & Crusades, OSRIC, 13th Age, etc).
Again, there's nothing wrong with any of these opinions. I'm always curious to hear why people don't like certain things, which is why I did enjoy the review and look forward to the next part of it. It gives me a clear picture why a certain kind of player has an issue with some changes. If no one was negative, we wouldn't ever have our way of thinking challenged.
3rd/4th fans who dislike what they read will say the game is too streamlined and lacks crunch. They don't like the lack of options.
1st/2nd fans who have read the rules and didn't care for it will say that it's got too much 3rd/4th edition in it. There are too many choices and options.
Players who have played a mix of editions usually like that it takes the best of all editions and puts them together. Just enough options, and just enough streamlining. Sometimes, they don't like it either. It can vary widely, but I expect that in this day and age. There are a lot of choices when it comes to how you play D&D these days, even when it's not called D&D (Pathfinder, Castles & Crusades, OSRIC, 13th Age, etc).
Again, there's nothing wrong with any of these opinions. I'm always curious to hear why people don't like certain things, which is why I did enjoy the review and look forward to the next part of it. It gives me a clear picture why a certain kind of player has an issue with some changes. If no one was negative, we wouldn't ever have our way of thinking challenged.
nikolokolus
Arcane
- Joined
- May 8, 2013
- Messages
- 4,090
5th ed. definitely feels like it's trying to walk a fine line between styles: rules-heavy vs. rules light, meticulous character building vs. quick and dirty, etc. I've been reading through the PHB for about a week and while I like a lot of it, I can't say that it's inspiring me all that much to run anything with it. If I want rules-lite, sandbox, fantasy gaming I'd go with Swords & Wizardry Complete, if I wanted a lot of cruch I'd use Magic World/BRP and for a medium amount of rules, D&D 5th still doesn't hold a candle to the far more imaginative and evocative DCC RPG for me.
Long story short, I've been playing D&D off and on for 25 years; from the Mentzer set, to WotC's 3rd ed., and very briefly 4th (which is what lead me in search of other games) and after reading through 5th I think I like it, but it feels like it would be my second place choice for just about any style of game I'd care to run. I'm going to give it a fair shake this fall and winter with a mini campaign when my gaming group comes back together in about a month, so maybe my mind will change?
Long story short, I've been playing D&D off and on for 25 years; from the Mentzer set, to WotC's 3rd ed., and very briefly 4th (which is what lead me in search of other games) and after reading through 5th I think I like it, but it feels like it would be my second place choice for just about any style of game I'd care to run. I'm going to give it a fair shake this fall and winter with a mini campaign when my gaming group comes back together in about a month, so maybe my mind will change?
Graphicwhore...
Not sure it's fair, for PnP the incline starts with evocative artwork.
That said, from what I read I'm quite sure I'd prefer the Pathfinder system (was an AD&D player but always felt it needed some adjustments, and I don't like at all the things listed here by Ulminati about 5e).
As a GM it's a no brainer. Pathfinder is incredibly easy to manage, balance and find reference for. I don't think I ever needed to houserule less than in my actual PF camapaign, but I'm playing with a custom setting, so arguably that could be considered "house rule"
All my players, 30+ old guys with experience with 1°-2°-3°-3.5° AD&D (and old D&D) love it and find the system familiar enough to relate to yet tweaked and "streamlined" enough to appear fresh. Still we're at our first campaign, low level oriented, so my opinion could vary in a year or so. I don't think it will
Alchemist
Arcane
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2013
- Messages
- 1,439
Low level Pathfinder runs pretty smooth. Issues start to appear in high-level play - such as some builds requiring a spreadsheet to manage all their combat modifiers, and hours-long combat encounters. Not saying that can't be fun, but it can get old sometimes.
As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.