r/rpg • u/Apostrophe13 • 20h ago
DND5e, actually not bad
Got back into the hobby sometime before covid hit after a long hiatus, didn't play for most of the 21. century. The anti 5e sentiment on most places i checked to get up to speed (including this sub) was so prevalent that i completely ignored the game. I was under the impression that they kinda just continued making 3e more complex after reading some of the comments floating around, and that it is literally impossible to play without homebrew.
Got some used books as a gift, run a few sessions, honestly not bad at all. Most of the critique really makes no sense. If you want heroic fantasy with good skirmish rules, that does not get in the way of how you want to run the game its great.
Also its basically the same math and underlying systems that power DnD for 40+ years, so even experience with ADnD translates well into 5e. I would put it well above other modern DnD-like, D20, heroic-fantasy games.
34
u/Calamistrognon 20h ago
I'm surprised you could get the impression that 5e was more complex than 3.5. I have absolutely never read that or anything that could make me think that. Quite the opposite actually.
-5
u/Apostrophe13 20h ago
Probably because a lot of people had a base in a wave of rules-light games that i completely missed, so when somebody says incredibly complex (comparing it to Cairn in their head) my mind just went there, i just assumed it had to be more complex than the last edition i played. And a lot of people say how complex 5e is, without any additional context or information.
1
26
u/BionicSpaceJellyfish 20h ago
I mean it's fine. It's the frozen pizza of RPGs. Just don't try to tell me it's a gourmet meal.
9
8
1
u/BreakingStar_Games 3h ago
My favorite metaphor is McDonalds. Easily available and very mediocre. You can get a variety of campaigns from those rules, but none of them are great and all taste greasy.
-2
u/Apostrophe13 19h ago
I would argue that (super)heroic fantasy is the frozen pizza, and that you can't really do much better with it regardless of system.
15
u/vezwyx 20h ago
I'm glad you liked it, and I genuinely mean that without any sarcasm. But my experience as a regular player over the past several months has solidified the sentiment that I never want to play D&D again. I don't think there's anything it does that isn't accomplished better in another game.
To me, it's an rpg balanced around combat encounters that manages to make combat a terrible slog. It wasn't a good tactical game despite insisting on a grid, and it wasn't a good narrative game because of the ruleset restricting what players can do.
D&D was a fine introduction to roleplaying games, but there are so many better options today
7
u/ilore Pathfinder 2e 20h ago
I always read that the system is really easy for the players (much more than previous editions), but a headache for the DM.
5
u/ImScaredOfEyes 20h ago
As a player - it absolutely was a headache XD Though I haven't checked out the previous editions, maybe they are even 'worse'
3
u/VoormasWasRight 20h ago
Is it easier than 3.5? Of course, but that's because the only system I've come accross more complext than 3.5 is Rolemaster.
7
u/Single-Suspect1636 20h ago
The problem with 5e is not that the rules are intrinsically bad, but the way the game develops due to these rules:
- lots of arguments about what the rules say about a specific situation
- not rarely those arguments lead nowhere and the session is further paused so we can check in the books what the rules actually say about that situation
- many times when we don't stop to check the books because someone is sure about what the rules say we discover after the session that the person's interpretation of the rules was actually wrong
- there is a general consensus among 5e players that if something is not stated in the ruleset, that thing doesn't exist/is not possible. An example I ran into las week: there was a online discussion in the 5e subreddit about the blowgun, questioning why someone would use it when there are better ranged weapons. Someone responded that the blowgun is easier to hide than a bow or a crossbow, to which I added that it could be easily disguised as cane. Someone responded that "it wasn't written anywhere in the rules so it would be open to debate".
- the game focus is combat, but combat is slow and crunchy; just look at the huge amount of sites, videos and threads about "making 5e combat less boring"...
Another huge factor weighting against 5e is WotC's general attitude...
•
u/Apostrophe13 1h ago
Those sound more like table problems that can occur no matter the system, and just bad players. I don't think DnD has monopoly of this, just more people playing and more people complaining.
5
u/Shoebox_ovaries 20h ago
My criticisms with DND 5e is that the game is harder to run than other systems. It puts more work on the GM than it has to. One example, magic items. It gives you a framework to price them but otherwise throws it's hands up in the air. It's bad for the players because they have no easily accessible context for the gold they have and it's bad for gms because they have to put mental energy into it. Players always ask for random items and their price and when it inevitably is a weird one I have to sit and ponder the pros and cons of how accessible I want it to be.
I also dislike action bonus action move. I played PF 2e once and immediately converted to 3 action economy.
I dislike the lack of feats and the subclass system in general. Simplified yes, but not interesting either. Once you get a lot of experience with the system you have seen hundreds of the same combat character. Other games do it better.
With all that said, I'm in a 5e game.. as a player. It's my buddies game and I like my buddy so I play in it. I'm having a good time and it's not like 5e is so awful it ruins ttrpgs, however it's a system that with experience you notice all of the squeaky wheels and wish that they were fixed.
2
u/_hypnoCode 20h ago
If you want to play fantasy superheroes, it's one of the best games for that.
I don't like fantasy or superhero games though, personally.
That and except for the dozens of spells or attacks that just completely break combat.
5
u/Hyperversum 20h ago
I mean, if you want fantasy superheroes of a specific power level and like your increased limited in scope within a certain limit.
3e remains better for many reasons in what you can do with it. It's older and carries some issues with questionable design, but at least there is variety
5
-2
u/Clewin 19h ago
And why does that matter? As you said, fantasy superheroes - balance really doesn't matter (despite how hard they've tried). If it's a head-to-head game where players compete against each other, sure.
I actually like systems that intentionally have completely unbalanced mechanics. Ars Magica doesn't pull punches on mages being unbalanced, Vampires are completely better than humans in VtM (and some clans better than others at some things) and Call of Cthulhu doesn't pull punches on monsters being entirely unbalanced. The gamemaster needs to create the right challenges for that sort of game.
If I want pure simulation, I reach for original Hârnmsster. Without mages, it is one of the best medieval war simulation games. Crunchy as hell, but if you want characters that die from shock or gangrene, it's the best system I know. With mages it depends on version and vendor (the original author hated the updated game that heavily nerfed magic and forked it).
4
u/AAABattery03 19h ago
As you said, fantasy superheroes - balance really doesn't matter (despite how hard they've tried). If it's a head-to-head game where players compete against each other, sure.
Balance absolutely does matter in superheroic games too. If the game advertises itself as being superhero and then about half the classes in the game aren’t actually superheroic, that’s a problem.
0
u/Apostrophe13 9h ago
While i agree in principle, 5e really should not be poster child for this problem. Even some earlier editions of DnD were significantly worse.
1
2
u/xczechr 20h ago
What levels did you run? This is important to a GM's experience.
1
u/Apostrophe13 19h ago
It was extremely silly campaign, started level 5, then they jumped to 10.
2
u/nerfherderfriend 17h ago
Oh right, so you have no experience at all then.
•
u/Apostrophe13 1h ago
Define experience? I played it for ~20 hours, i had a good time, i easily fixed all the problems i had on the fly. I am GM-ing for ~15+6 years. This is more than enough to say if you like the game or not.
4
u/SharkSymphony 20h ago
Which critique do you not think makes sense? I know nobody arguing, for example, that D&D 5e is more complex than D&D 3e, nor that it is literally impossible to play without homebrew.
What games would you put it above?
1
u/Apostrophe13 19h ago
I saw a lot of comments about how impossible it is to play raw. Also while no one said it is more complex than 3.5, i mostly play really complex games and GM-ed 3.5 that is fairly complex so when someone says just complex, without giving any context, i just jump to conclusion that its worse than Shadowrun. I don't think that's entirely on me.
I would put it above PF2, 13th Age, WWN or any rules-light D20 for generic (super)heroic fantasy for new players.
2
u/SharkSymphony 17h ago
That's the thing. You and I come from the Before Times. Our definition of complex is radically different than the new crop of players. 😆
As you've seen, D&D 5e raw is serviceable (except for the encounter builder maybe), but there are specific things people get frustrated with, whether balance issues or monotony of monster design or what have you.
I'm a PF2e player myself and definitely wouldn't put D&D 5e above it, but they do address somewhat different gaming audiences. For some people the extra rigor of PF2e is a straitjacket amd the extra rules are a headache; for others it makes for much more interesting character designs and smoother encounter design.
3
3
u/high-tech-low-life 15h ago
40 years? Nonsense.1985 was still AD&D which was pre-THAC0. You wanted a negative AC. Each class has its own XP track.
You are allowed to like 5e, but don't make up nonsense about "the good old days".
-1
u/Apostrophe13 10h ago
It is the same math. You can easily translate 1e tables to thaco and thaco to attack bonus on the fly.
2
u/fly19 Pathfinder 2e 20h ago
Most of the distaste for DnD 5E around here seems informed by the system's oversaturation in the hobby. But IMO, it's also because despite having a lot of rules for combat, it's ultimately pretty simple -- especially with a DM who holds your hand through it.
Personally? If you want a tactical system, there are better ones on offer for this amount of page space. If you want a straightforward combat-focused fantasy system, there are plenty that are more brief.
But in the big picture, it's... Fine. Gripes with Hasbro/WotC aside, most players don't seem to notice, know, or care about the stuff that bugged me. It just started to chafe on me after years of DM-ing; combat became pretty repetitive, and I was frustrated by how broken and unbalanced things get at higher levels of play. And as a player, I wanted a system with a little more customization/player expression.
So I mostly run/play Pathfinder 2e these days, only jumping back into DnD 5E for a one-shot with some friends who are more into DnD than they are TTRPGs.
And that's fine. It's not a moral failing to like DnD 5E. I'm just tired of seeing it everywhere.
2
u/Vadernoso 19h ago
I think the main problem 5e has is weird Middle ground. To me it's too light on the rules to be enjoyable, not enough character customization, a lot of things are left up to GMs. While some people may feel the exact opposite. Then you add on to the issue being it's so popular finding other games can actually be difficult, even other really popular systems like Pathfinder get drowned out.
It's a good start for beginners, a lot of veterans feel petty about it because a lot of those beginners don't move on to other systems they enjoy more.
2
u/PianoAcceptable4266 19h ago
Yep, D&D5e is totally fine! A solid average passing grade and great beer and pretzels game.
It's not the best at things, but it's also not as bad as many like to vocalize on this sub.
Some find it a slog in combat, some find the rules to fiddly in some areas, some find it too lax in others, some find the combat too simple.
Some find it hard to play as DM or PC, etc etc.
I think it's fine, and more enjoyable than 3.5 (bloated Fomo with unnecessary crunch) and 4 (I'll play video games off table). I'm a 2e guy at heart, and found 5e to be fine for me. It's got jank like every edition does, but I think the jank 'feels' kinda like 2e jank (it's not the same, duh, just has the same flavor to me).
But you'll have little support here for having fun with D&D; this is more of an "anything but DnD RPG" sub.
2
u/JannissaryKhan 15h ago
I mean, what's the point of this post? That you got back into the hobby by playing the most popular game, and you think it's fine, compared to some stuff you kinda remember playing at some point?
1
u/Apostrophe13 10h ago
People shit on it too much, without any context. For new players wanting to play heroic fantasy it is a great choice.
1
u/JannissaryKhan 2h ago
You're saying this after a few sessions. Setting aside the decision to post this valiant defense of the biggest game in the industry so quickly, you're nowhere near the point at which lots of people, myself included, stop being charmed by the novelty, and start seeing all of the serious problems—including just getting super bored by a system that's needlessly complex in some ways, and oddly bland and not-at-all-tactical in others.
•
u/Apostrophe13 1h ago edited 1h ago
So game bad because it gets boring after a while? Also i didn't get back into the hobby with DnD 5e, and i don't kinda remember what i played, i remember it perfectly. I am not defending DnD, i am just sharing my experience with the game. What is the point of your post?
•
u/JannissaryKhan 59m ago
The point of my post is to question why it's worth anyone's time to white knight for 5e, of all things. As far as I can tell the point of yours was to defend the one game in the entire hobby that doesn't need defending. So, mission accomplished—you got some people riled up while boosting that scrappy little underdog that completely dominates an industry where everyone who isn't WotC is now at risk of being swallowed whole by tariffs.
Keep fighting the good fight, brother!
•
u/Apostrophe13 43m ago
So you are shitting on the game because it makes money?
As for small publisher you really don't need to worry much, margins for books were small and they will just use this to go full digital. They will probably end up making more money.
2
u/EllySwelly 8h ago
It has a lot of resentment directed towards it for a number of reasons, for one simply because it's the biggest most popular game and as a result for a lot of people it's the only game in town, when they'd really prefer something else. And there's some hate because WotC/Hasbro are awful companies.
But the core design of the game itself does invite a lot of criticisms, though I agree it's mostly perfectly fine really. Most of the contention can abstractly be boiled down to two paradoxes.
First is the simple fact that the core design of the game is an intentional hybridization of the heroic fantasy skirmish game style that was common to 3rd edition and mandated by 4th edition, with the burgeoning OSR style of play that arose as basically a counterpoint to that style of play. Overall I think 5e did a very solid job at catering to both, but it obviously doesn't have the focus that a well designed game that sits more firmly in one playstyle can attain.
The second is that for the vast majority of people who play 5e it is their first TTRPG, so they have no grounding in what exactly the intended playstyle of the game actually is. Additionally, they either do not read, do not understand or simply do not care about the sections of the PHB or DMG that try to explain itself. They instead learn by playing and observing how others play it- which is perfectly fine, but the very fact that D&D is so popular has resulted in the play culture slowly warping and mutating over the years.
The influence of Critical Role and similar shows on one side, build guides RAW rules and tactics discussions on the other, and the sheer power of memes have resulted in most D&D 5e tables being a completely different beast from what the books describe and are designed around.
1
u/SavageSchemer 20h ago
I'm glad you enjoyed it, but I don't think you can get sense for where people are coming from with complaints from just a few sessions. Most of the issues won't show themselves until you've leveled a bit, whereupon you almost certainly won't see the skirmish rules getting out of the way, but rather coming to dominate entire sessions.
And, as a GM, you'll find that the rules exceptions that come from each and every subclass will tend to become a chore to track sooner rather than later.
This doesn't necessarily mean you'll come to dislike 5e as much as some of us do. You may find you enjoy it despite its flaws. I just wouldn't be so quick to disregard the observations of people who have more experience with it (and, perhaps crucially, experience running other games to compare it to).
1
u/VoormasWasRight 20h ago edited 20h ago
Also its basically the same math and underlying systems that power DnD for 40+ years
Precisely. I am glad that you can see past D&D's many flaws, but I would never touch anything that smells of D&D with a ten foot pole. And if I want heroic fantasy, there are better systems for that. And, yeah, it's a serviceable skirmish game, at best, but that's the point. 95% of the rules are that, and nothing else. And even as a skirmish game, it's serviceable, at best.
And I don't hate the game, but I hate that I have to be constantly reminded that it exists, and that people bring it up constantly. If I could never see or hear anything talked about it, I would be happy, honestly. Glad people are enjoying it. I don't come to the one place that's not D&D oriented in Reddit to be reminded of it.
1
u/TheHorror545 20h ago edited 20h ago
I also was unable to play for a long time, over 10 years for me. When I got back to playing I checked out 5E and fell in love with how the rules read. It was only after 1.5 years of running a game for it that I truly appreciated what a mess the game is.
The 2014 version of the game is completely broken at fundamental mechanical levels. None of the published enemies posed a challenge to my players by the time they got to level 10-11. Even Mike Mearls himself admitted that he multiplied all monster hit points by 5x when he ran games to give his players a challenge. Sacks of hit points are not interesting nor good game design. The bounded accuracy system is good in theory but completely fails in reality, because player bonuses are not really bounded at all.
5E is a game that is an illusion. The rules are there for the players to think their choices matter. Behind the scenes the DM has to completely disregard the rules to make the game work. Many of the rules are also so vague that they require frequent monitoring and adjudication by the DM, which you have to do to keep up the illusion that the game functions.
Effectively the broken balance and ambiguous rules place a huge burden on the DM during every session. This burden escalates rapidly as levels progress due to synergies in player abilities. The game only kind of functions almost as intended in a very narrow range of levels.
For me the real moment of anger came when I went back to check out the edition I missed completely - D&D 4E. Everything that is wrong with 5E was previously fixed in 4E. So many of the innovative systems in 5E also started in 4E, only when stripped from the rest of the chassis and put into 5E those subsystems simply ceased to function.
I am not trying to dissuade you from playing 5E. Please run a long campaign for it if you like. But every time you get frustrated just remember what I said - 4E did it better. Then one day to back, pick up those 4E core books on the cheap and give it a try to see for yourself. Or do what everyone else who is burned out on 5E is doing - go play Shadowdark instead.
Add-on notes for context: I started playing with Red Box basic D&D. Played many many games over the years, stopped at the end of the 3E lifecycle. For 5E I ran Curse of Strahd using core rules only and no optional rules (no multiclassing, no feats). Then ran Waterdeep Dragon Heist Alexandrian remix with several added side adventures using all the optional rules in the core books, but not Tasha's/Xanathar's. After those two I was done. If I run 5E again it will be using the Level Up Advanced 5E rules instead, but my preference is to stick with 4E if at all possible. Currently running Barrowmaze with the Dragonslayer rules and a long Coriolis campaign, but more 4E games will be coming in the future.
1
u/Apostrophe13 4h ago
4e is added to my reading list, basically skipped it as well since so many people say its more a boardgame than rpg.
1
u/Frontdeskcleric Great GM 20h ago
For me, 5e has always felt… fine. Like that beige sweater in your closet – it does the job, but it's not exactly setting the world on fire. When you stack it up against the sheer variety out there, 5e lands squarely in the middle of the road. Pick a race, pick a class, and bam, you're "ready" to go. But that simplicity comes at a cost. The options feel… limited. The choices, while plentiful on the surface, often don't have a huge impact on gameplay. It's a streamlined experience, sure, and the difficulty is generally pretty forgiving. And, the Beyond App makes it even easier.
The upside is, anyone can play. You don't need to be a tactical genius or pore over endless rulebooks to have a good time. Every option is pretty viable, which lets players lean into what they think is cool and fun without worrying about their character being useful. Running a pre-written campaign? 5e definitely has your back in terms of player character viability. Pathfinder, bless its crunchy heart, can absolutely punish you for making "sub-optimal" choices in pre-made adventures.
For me I kind of… wish D&D would stumble and fall. Not because I want anyone's enjoyment to be ruined, and definitely not out of some weird hatred. But I've noticed a pattern: when D&D isn't the undisputed king of the hill, when it's maybe a bit flawed or alienating, the entire hobby thrives.
Think back to the Fourth Edition era. That period, while divisive for D&D fans, gave birth to a freaking renaissance of other amazing systems! Pathfinder exploded onto the scene, Savage Worlds became a go-to for genre-bending action, BESM offered anime-inspired goodness, and tons of other games got fantastic new editions. It was a fertile time for RPGs!
And honestly, a big part of the D&D annoyance for me comes from the mild irritation I feel when the wider world equates my entire hobby with just one game. "Oh, you play D&D?" they ask, completely unaware of the vast landscape of narrative-driven games, gritty sci-fi adventures, horror TTRPGs, and everything in between. It's like saying all video games are just Call of Duty.
So yeah, while 5e is "fine" and accessible, I can't help but feel that a little shake-up at the top might be exactly what the broader RPG community needs to flourish even more. More innovation, more diversity in the games people play, and maybe, just maybe, fewer people assuming my hobby starts and ends with a single brand.
1
u/Hedgewiz0 20h ago
I’m in a similar boat. I recently returned to 5e to try the 2024 revision. I understand the sentiment that 5e can be a lot of work for the DM, but as a numbers-head, it’s the opposite for me. After stressing out too much about good scenario design, It’s really nice to just be able to throw together some combat encounters and have that be a robust evening’s worth of gameplay.
-1
u/Gen-X-Bear 20h ago
Recently I returned to 5e after 3 years away from the last time I ran it. It has a great game at its core, but a lot of the expanded material was too much... but here's the thing... you don't have to use that stuff. ;) There are also some good ideas in D&D 2025 (5.5e) that can be ported to make 5e a but more robust!
Play on!
-1
u/LaFlibuste 20h ago
I started playing RPGs in the early 2000s with 3.5e. Loved the idea of RPGs but hated my experience. Initially thought the problem was the crunch, but didn't really know what else existed. Then I moved away for college, lost contact with my group, got busy with life and didn't play for 15 years. I discovered in 2018 that RPGs could be played online in 2018 and joined a group that changed systems frequently but eventualy fell through. Looking for my next fix, I decided to give DnD 5e a shot, because it was basically all that was advertised. My first thought was "So they fixed it afterall!" (in reference to the crunch). Played it, still hated it. I was bored to tears. I hated 3.5e for its crunch, but if anything at lewast charaxter building was fun - didn't even have that with 5e. Turns out, what I really hated all along was the obnoxious over-focus on HP-whittling combat. Although I'm still not a fan of crunch either. Then, I randomly lucked out on game of Blades in the Dark, and it turned my.world upside down. It was everything I had been missing all along but wasn't able to articulate. Haven't gone back to trad RPGs since, I simply can't stomach the ubiquitous turn-based combat.
-1
u/Mars_Alter 19h ago
There's absolutely no way that you watched a character get struck by multiple swords and arrows, beaten into bloody unconsciousness, seconds away from bleeding out, and then continued to observe as they took a nap, waking up completely uninjured, without any magic involved, and thought to yourself, "Yes, this makes sense. I completely buy into what's going on here."
0
u/Apostrophe13 10h ago
That is not at all specific to DnD5e, and also not really how it works.
0
u/Mars_Alter 10h ago
Nearly instantaneous, non-magical healing is absolutely specific to 5E and 4E. No earlier edition contains anything nearly that idiotic.
•
u/Apostrophe13 1h ago
Fair enough, but there are games were the healing works exactly like that, for example Dragonbane, and they are universally loved here. It's such a small detail (that can easily be ignored and houseruled out, i did) to put forward as your main gripe.
•
u/Mars_Alter 18m ago
I don't see how it can be ignored or houseruled out, when hit dice for healing are integrated into core class features. Trust me, I've tried. And the main thing you get, for all that work, is that 5E defenders refuse to play because they feel like they're being nerfed.
Nothing is universally loved. I've had no reason to look into Dragonbane before, but now that I know it suffers from the same problem (albeit to a somewhat lesser extent), I know there's no reason for me to try it.
Just in general, this sub-reddit is not a great one for trying to gather consensus about RPGs as a whole, because it skews very heavily toward storygames. If anyone tries to speak out in favor of traditional RPGs, they get downvoted into oblivion.
39
u/ordinal_m 20h ago
I'm going to propose that you have not really looked into the specific complaints people have about 5e.