Tactical wise, i mean the depth of combat and options, they are all there.
Actually, they removed weapon speed and casting speed, so even that is lacking...
Now to the points you think 2E is superior too it sums up to one thing, smaller numbers and less power and its true . An end game 5E character is not nearly as powerful as a 2E one but neither the monsters .
Numbers have little to do with it. It is much more about play-style. For instance, a first level enchanter in D&D could make political schemes by putting politically powerful 0-level people under his influence. This is something completely gone in 2e until very high levels. The game seems much more geared to following a campaign with set adventures made by a GM than to messing around with the gameworld and maybe trying to garner power in it.
It's a party game not a solo powertrip. In 5E an horde of low level is deadly , you wont take a village by yourself.
Which is again another problem, since several older high level adventures expected this kind of power. So if you want to play them, you need to tweak them until they work yourself. I have nothing against systems where the characters don't change in power levels so much. I quite like a lot of those, in fact. But I appreciate the kind of power disparity there is in D&D as well.
A mage wont be god like in 2E but fighter is not lackluster meatbag anymore .
This was some serious flaw , who would want to play the fighter class in those conditions .
Plenty of people did. Besides, as I mentioned, it is expected that the fighter will try actions that go beyond what is clearly defined by the rules, which is actually part of what makes RPGs fun! Not that I don't think the model in 2e can't be improved; but improving how the fighter plays doesn't mean you need to remove what makes playing magic users fun. In fact, I would say DCC RPG did a pretty good job there, while making mages pretty fun to play (I just disliked they used the sorcerer learning mechanics, but that can be easily fixed).
Clerics have several domains too, i dont understand why you are saying you are stuck into the healing role,
Sorry, I should have been more clear in my comparison. 5e does give you a choice of domain, but the domains are just a part (not insignificant, but not as important as spheres) of the cleric class. In particular, each domain has 10 spells it provides. In 2e, each divine spell was under a sphere, and the spheres you choose determined your whole spell list. That meant that a cleric with only elemental spheres would be completely different from one that had no access to those.
a sorcerer with divine soul (snip...)
(snip...) Missing the leveling scheme really ? who would really miss that, does that really bring anything to the game ?
For one, it makes some classes much more difficult to traverse, making the bet you are making with that particular character more appropriate to what he can do. Keeping a magic user alive shouldn't be easy. For another, as I said, it lent itself to what I believe is a better multi-class system. In 2e, you don't get one level on the thief class; you at best become a level 1 thief. By not having everything stack like 3e, there was a lot less focus on character building (which, fun as it may be, is something that doesn't match well with every kind of game).
.12 is an illusion there's not such thing as varied characters everyone would aim for the best .
What is best for the stats you roll varies with what you rolled. Besides, there is also what kind of character you want to play to take into account.
Having characters lagging behind in the power curve ,the huge xp grind and playing accountant with treasure xp , its a waste time better used for something else.
Well, then do away with levels entirely. In fact, skip to the end of the campaign, most efficient role-playing ever.
For a tabletop system its ton better to just award levels after main parts of the story.
Well, you are assuming there is "the story" here. Maybe you want to give out xp after the dungeon. Or maybe after the PCs complete the next job they took, or whatever. When you give xp, though, is not that important. What is really important is how xp is doled out. Is it for gold collected? Or maybe spent? Is it for creating a magic item? Is it for good role-playing? Etc.
That is the future for tabletop rpg, some push that even further like Shadow of the demon lord, with a very interisting modular class system and much lower level ceiling.
The future of tabletop RPGs is a boot with a coloured, danger hair wig stamping on the PCs faces forever. But really, what does this have to do with whether or not it is easy to replicate the 2e experience with 5e?
