What's Next?

[Storm11]

I think the things that leave a bad taste in my mouth about 5th are the at will magic is never gone abilities and the amount of crazy player character races that I would have to put up with. I really don’t like the monsters to be players. I never have.
It’s also more skills heavy than I like. In that respect it’s very their edition. And from what i Have read the magic doesn’t last very long at all.
But then there are things that intrigue me to it, like ritual castings and not level limits.

[Rex]

I like 5e, but the video game/superhero feel is very real. My biggest problem with it is you can be in the fight of your life, making death saves and after one days rest you are all better. The first game I ran was a very straightforward test run and a group of kobolds TPKed the party so it isn't that it isn't dangerous it just feels off. We have switched to the 8 hours is a short rest and a week is a long rest and it has helped and as an added benefit has brought the magic a little better under control. Still looking at the hardcore rules Dave posted and may start incorporating those in as well. The races are an easy fix, just don't allow what you don't want. I wish it was quicker to make a PC but that may just be me. Overall I like it, just need to find the right tweaks for me to be more comfortable running it.

[dmw71]

I think the things that leave a bad taste in my mouth about 5th are the at will magic is never gone abilities

Are you talking about cantrips here? If so, I will respectfully disagree. I love, love, love how each spellcasting class has a useful list of always available cantrips. For instance, a 1st-level wizard (or magic-user) is no longer completely devoid of options after casting their single 1st-level spell. Now, as long as they can satisfy the components, they will always have a reliable option. Ritual magic is great, too! Other spell-related updates, too.

and the amount of crazy player character races that I would have to put up with. I really don’t like the monsters to be players. I never have.

I absolutely agree with you here. Always have, and always will. But, a DM can impose limits on what's available in their game. The only different/new races in the 5e PHB that aren't in the 2e PHB are Dragonborn and Tiefling. I have never allowed Tiefling, and normally don't allow Dragonborn either (though, I have). It all depends on the game.

It’s also more skills heavy than I like. In that respect it’s very their edition.

This, too, is up to the DM. Chapter 8 of the DMG does a great job detailing how these skills can be used, and also how dice can be used (or not).

I'll submit for you the "Finding a Hidden Object" section of the 'Perception' skill (which is routinely abused!):

• "In most cases, you need to describe where you are looking in order for the DM to determine your chance of success. For example, a key is hidden beneath a set of folded clothes in the top drawer of a bureau. If you tell the DM that you pace around the room, looking at the walls and furniture for clues, you have no chance of finding the key, regardless of your Wisdom (Perception) check result. You would have to specify that you were opening the drawers or searching the bureau in order to have any chance of success."

Most DMs are not such sticklers, but they could be, and would be perfectly within their rights to do so. One "problem" with this is, not all players are agreeable to these new school rules. They want to 'search' a room, make a single roll, and find anything hidden anywhere within that room if their roll is high enough. Most DMs (myself included more times than not) will let this happen. The game is meant to be fun; not a source of frustration. I don't even think the 10-foot pole is even a thing in 5e anymore.


The point being, using just the core rules, a 5e game can be run in very different ways with DM prerogative.

My biggest problem with it is you can be in the fight of your life, making death saves and after one days rest you are all better.

I'm kind of with you here. I don't really have a problem with a night of rest fully restoring someone. (I could very easily be on board with the 'Gritty Realism' variant rule in the DMG (which it sounds like you might be using)).

My problem with healing or recovering from damage is more the immediacy of it. A character gets knocked down to 0 hit points and is unconscious. If they receive a single point of healing, they can immediately take their full turn (movement, action, bonus action, etc....). That has always bothered me.

Unless I'm remembering it incorrectly, this can be true in AD&D as well. If an unconscious player is given a potion of healing, or has 'cure light wounds' case upon them, they're healed, and can act on their next turn.

The "problem" with 5e are the increased number of healing options.

[Storm11]

We will have to disagree about the magic. There needs to be a time when spellcasters are exhausted and run out of magic. It’s a shame ritual magic still takes a spell slot, because that’s would otherwise be a really elegant way to ensure magic users aren’t without magic, but that it takes time to enact and needs ingredients.
I think the other things are definitely DM dependant, it that then becomes the problem with the game. If you say you will play 5e you kinda have to be ok with all the stuff because it could very well be in there.

My friend plays it at the moment and he was livid the other week. The was telling me there was a PVP moment in game. The ranger (The DMs crush irl) had a mask the party needed to complete their quest. It gave her some magical bonuses and she didn’t wanna give it up. They found out she had it. He asked her about the mask. She rolled a bluff type check which was high and said she didn’t know what mask he was on about. My friend said “I saw you wearing it in the last fight,”. She got all “you have to believe I don’t because my bluff skill beats your perception skill” (or whatever rolls are opposed). My mate was like “I believe you don’t know which mask i was on about, but I am clarifying the mask I just saw you wearing”

The DM was like “well you can beat her bluff skill so you believe it’s not the mask!” My mate was like “it doesn’t matter if her bluff skill was a million, my PC saw the exact mask we were looking for ON HER FACE, about five Minutes ago!”
This type of nonsense i just can’t get on board with. I didn’t like it in 3rd edition and it’s not been much better since. I mean, if you say you are looking in the draws and there is a key there, why on earth do you need to roll the perception check in the first place. You going to miss the fact your hand touches a key?

I am not sure what second edition has to say on the back to 1 hit points from zero or less when magically healed, but in first edition of you are brought below 1 hit point and then healed to 1 or more hps and the optional death is at -10 rule is used, you remain unconscious for some turns and then need a weeks worth of bed rest, and are too weak to do more than move from bed to chair with assistance.

[GreyWolfVT]

My lack of still engaging in 5e is that it feels far too much like a video game. I feel more like a superpower than a D&D adventurer.

There is something to that. Characters have class features that give them more powers. With short and long rests it's a lot easier to heal in 5e, which keeps characters alive longer.

That said...

I guarantee you, despite all the extra features characters can get, 5e can be plenty deadly (and a DM doesn't even need Hardcore mode to do it). If monsters were played to their maximum capability, and monsters were controlled as strategically as players do their characters, I can guarantee you your opinion might change.

Having played in one or two of your 5e games I don't doubt that Dave. Outside of those I only played in one local group that didn't last. But what you say is true with the healing due to rest. Seen half a group die to goblins which did have a old school feel to it. (Party dieing to weaker/ish type monsters.) At any rate I don't hate 5th like I do with 3rd to 4th. I like no race restrictions as to what class they can be. That one has always been a thorn in my side. The rest I like how that works as well and have been contemplating a house rule in 2e that could be similar. Always disliked the 1 HP healing from resting. Sure I know that is the "downfall" as most newer edition folk like to point out about older editions having to "house rule" things to make it more "survivable" I suppose is the word I'll use for it.

But having played 2e for over 20 or so years. I still hold it very close. Not really willing to let it go and I really don't know if I have the desire to spend as much time trying to learn and memorize 5th like I have with 2nd.

At any rate trying to stop with the edition "discussions" back to the point I like that someone else other than me decided to run a 2e game on here that I was able to play in lately all I can get in on are LL, 1e & Basic games on here not many 2e DMs starting up games on here lately. So if you decide this on is done no more 2e game I'll definitely bow out.

[Storm11]

Yes no bashing intended of 5th. Just a discussion is what I intended.

At the core I think most people could have fun with any of the editions, and each have a favourite one that they gel with, and things in all of them that they think could do with improving. Nature of Dungeons and Dragons I think. What’s awesome is that they can all be tweaked. That’s one of the things that makes it such a fun game

[Rex]

That is the one we are using Dave and we are also using a house rule for encumbrance, another area that I think 5e doesn't do well. All that said I do like the rules overall.

[dmw71]

We will have to disagree about the magic. There needs to be a time when spellcasters are exhausted and run out of magic.

You'd rather a spellcaster run out of magic completely for a day (rending them largely ineffective) than allow them a few cantrips to have on hand for continual use? Yeah, we'll agree to disagree there.

Let's consider the Wizard class, with their 14 available cantrips:

• Damage Dealing
  Acid Splash (Acid)
  Chill Touch (Necrotic)
  Fire Bolt (Fire)
  Poison Spray (Poison)
  Ray of Frost (Cold)
  Shocking Grasp (Lightning)
  There is a bit of variation in the above in terms of ranges, durations, etc..., but the biggest differentiator between them is in the type of damage the spell deals. Sure, you could load up on offensive cantrips and be able more selective about the type of damage you deal to different opponents, but, typically, you pick one and move on.

• Utility
  Dancing Lights
  Light
  Mage Hand
  Mending
  Message
  Minor Illusion
  Prestidigitation
  True Strike
  Some of these utility cantrips can be super effective, but I'd say they're more helpful than they are powerful. Take Minor Illusion, for instance. The uses for that spell are pretty much endless.

I don't know, man. I think cantrips are a great addition.

---

It’s a shame ritual magic still takes a spell slot, because that’s would otherwise be a really elegant way to ensure magic users aren’t without magic, but that it takes time to enact and needs ingredients.

Actually, ritual spells, when cast as rituals, do not actually utilize a spell slot:

• "The ritual version of a spell takes 10 minutes longer to cast than normal. It also doesn't expend a spell slot."

When cast as a ritual, they do take longer to cast and do require the normal spell components, but the can otherwise be cast anytime, even if you're out of spell slots.


Between cantrips and ritual spells, spellcasters can be pretty creative and take more chances during the spell selection process -- which I think is a good thing.

---

Regarding the mask situation with your friend, that, I have to admit, is a bit of a tricky one.

• Some DMs rely on die rolls to determine the outcome of everything.
• Some DMs largely ignore die rolls unless absolutely required (e.g. combat) and simply make rulings on different situations.
• Some take a middle ground.

If you're going to rely on die rolls to determine outcomes, you need to be prepared for situations like what happened in your friend's game to happen. The two players (your friend and the ranger) in question have conflicting goals so, no matter what, you're almost guaranteed that one player at the table is going to leave disappointed, or angry.

In that situation, if the exact mask was definitely seen the previous day... I don't think any amount of bluffing would be possible. Or, even if you want to give the player with the mask a chance, have them perform their bluff check at disadvantage. I've been guilty of deeming a task as impossible and not allowing a roll at all -- and it's not fun for the requesting player to be told they don't have a chance to do something. Now, I'm at least trying to allow a roll in most situations, but make the attempt more challenging by imposing disadvantage (or some such penalty).

Circling back to your friend's situation, I think that was more of a DM issue than a 5e issue. That said, putting myself in the DMs position, I can totally see how a roll was called for. It's normal (especially in a player-versus-player contest) to let the dice determine the outcome instead of simply making a ruling and exposing yourself to allegations of favoritism. Call for rolls, but when details (e.g. the mask was previously seen) would make the contest more difficult for one side, give that side disadvantage. Or the other side advantage. Or both.

But no one is perfect. The role of DM is not easy, especially in circumstances like that.

Regardless, I think it's equally important that the player that comes up on the losing side of the equation to just accept it and move on. Shit happens.

I am not sure what second edition has to say on the back to 1 hit points from zero or less when magically healed, but in first edition of you are brought below 1 hit point and then healed to 1 or more hps and the optional death is at -10 rule is used, you remain unconscious for some turns and then need a weeks worth of bed rest, and are too weak to do more than move from bed to chair with assistance.

I do remember 1e rules being painful (pun intended). How many games actually followed those rules as written? I mean, seriously, what's the fun in requiring a full week of total rest to be able to function again? Maybe if that player has multiple characters readily available and just swap in a different one, but that realism is really disruptive to gameplay and fun at the table.

Maybe, in AD&D, just stick with the death at 0 hit points and it's no longer a problem.

[Storm11]

I think those cantrips are crazy overpowered. Yes a wizard should be out of magic at times. It’s a common enough trope. Gandalf after the battle with the Balrog at the doors of the tomb, as an example. With ritual magic not taking a slot they aren’t useless anyway, and it’s over kill x100 to have never exhausted magic on hand I think. It’s A shame 5th went in that direction twice, I think it’s double dipping to be frank. The cantrips in 3rd edition I can get behind. They had a finite source as well but were much more accessible than 2nd and first.

We absolutely use the weeks rest in our face to face first edition games, always have. It A) makes us retreat more readily, B) try and be more careful as a group, C ) provides the other PCs time they need to do in town stuff, which can be just as much fun as out adventure stuff, and D) makes the game feel more Immersive and helps it feel less like a video game. The game just seems to get less and less skilful and dangerous with each new iteration to some degree. I think that’s pretty sad.

I am totally good with us disagreeing on this. I do really love the ritual magic however, and think it would make the complaints about useless wizards moot in any edition of the game, and was a really good idea of fifth edition. What I love most about it is it adds the traditional concept of magic to the game for the very first time, something vancian magic never ever did in my opinion. Bravo to them for that for sure.

[dmw71]

I am totally good with us disagreeing on this.

Same.

I've had a blast discussing this, and think it's been a great conversation. It's interesting to learn the different ways different people play.

[GreyWolfVT]

Going back to a prior piece you mentioned about cutting down to 4-5 players Yes I also have found running a group of more than 6 is a bit crazy to track DM side. I've found the sweet spot for me is between 4-6 players max. That being said I just realized I am in a good 11 or so games counting this one. I will be more than happy to bow out for others to play, or stay in if there is room for it. Totally understand from the DM aspect.

[Rex]

That was my biggest driver Ed, I am up to 23 games and pondering starting one of my own. I should probably hold off on joining more for a bit.

[dmw71]

I am up to 23 games

Wait... what?! Dude, that's crazy.

[Darklin2]

That was my biggest driver Ed, I am up to 23 games and pondering starting one of my own. I should probably hold off on joining more for a bit.

Damn that is crazy. I am in 6 and I spend an hour each morning going through them. 23 would take all day.

[GreyWolfVT]

I think including running 2 i am in 13.

[dmw71]

Honestly, though, even if you provide thought out and detailed responses for your character; keeping on top of things as a player is really not that difficult. For a handful of games.

You're next-level when you're talking 20+ games.

[Rex]

Dave, you have an issue with buying RPG stuff and I have an issue with joining games apparently (actually I probably have an issue with buying RPG stuff too). I spend an hour in the morning and an hour when I get home most days. Crappy weather when I don't feel like walking the dog I spend a bit more. I am also one of those people who manage just fine on minimal sleep (5-6 hours most nights), if I get more than 6 I start feeling like crap.

[Storm11]

Well I think that is pretty impressive. If it’s what you love then you should indulge. Good for you dude.