Community

Feb 22, 2013 -- 12:47PM, Authw8 wrote:

There are a lot of things I don't like about 5e, but I am nevertheless excited by certain things. Here's what I like: Bounded accuracy is a great idea. I actually feel like it is a 4e idea though. 4e had bounded accuracy except for the fact you added half level to everything. And I often liked the idea of simply removing the half level addition from 4e. Faster combat is a big plus. The biggest daily of 4e is how long it takes to run fights. If the game needs to simplify to run faster, that is a perfectly reasonable trade-off to me. I like that it's not going back to 3e's simulationist weirdness. I hate having to build NPCs like PCs, and I love having open and easy monster design. I also like the attitude in the DM guide that the rules are meant to be fun and not a strict simulation of the universe. I like at-will spells. I really like generic cleric deities and domains as opposed to specific deities. I like that martial characters have stuff to do besides full attack. I like backgrounds, and the skill system in general.

1. Bounded accuracy certainly bears some resemblance to 4E's +1/2 level to most everything. It's something I really can't get excited over because it does involve significant trade offs. The big tradeoff is has a negative effect on the feeling of progression as you gain levels. One thing that is at the heart of D&D, something no other RPG has ever been able to match, is the sense of progression as you play the game and level up. Over the course of a campaign you get to watch your character become more powerful. There is a lot of satisfaction in that, and bounded accuracy detracts from it. I'm not saying its a bad tradeoff, its just not some amazing miracle of a new idea as a result.

2. Faster combat is a good improvement over 4E, but 5E has gone overboard and neutered combat to the point where nothing interesting happens, just a quick brainless grind and then over. 5E needs to find a balance between the two poles, and balance speed of play with tactical depth and having enough meat to combat for interesting things to develop.

3. I can second you on the lack of a return to 3E-style sim. Good riddance. 5E monsters are boring sacks of HP though.

4. At-Will magic was a 4E thing. I view its continued existence  as the absence of a negative.

5.  I'm kind of meh on the Cleric domain thing. I don't hate it, but it doesn't really inspire.

6. I completely disagree on Fighters. The current(and previous if you look at earlier playtests) design is just at-will spam in disguise. Fighters don't get anything climatic or strategic to play with, and that is a problem. 

7. I'm not real big on the skill system. They seem to change it with every new iteration and none of them really grabbed me.