Looking for opinions before I dive in.

[Beowulf DW]

So, I've been hearing quite a few things about the new addition, some of it sounds great, and some of it sounds lousy. I like what I'm hearing about the new incarnations of the various classes, but I've also seen a few complaints about HP bloat with even nominally weaker adversaries. Additionally, I've been hearing that with the tweaks made to AC, mobs of low CR opponents are capable of overwhelming higher level PCs more easily than in previous editions.

Personally, I feel that most systems should be played before coming to a final judgement, but unfortunately some of my friends (specifically, the ones who will actually roll some dice with me) tend to hold on to the opinions they form quite stubbornly. This means that they tend to write systems off before we even play them, which is quite aggravating.

So, to anyone that's actually played 5e, have these issues surfaced? If so, did your group make any adjustments, or feel forced to make adjustments? Most importantly, is 5e fun?

[TheSethGrey]

Personally, I feel that most systems should be played before coming to a final judgement, but unfortunately some of my friends (specifically, the ones who will actually roll some dice with me) tend to hold on to the opinions they form quite stubbornly. This means that they tend to write systems off before we even play them, which is quite aggravating.


Find a group that plays over the internet, that'll help you try the waters, or go down to your FLGS and try Encounters?

[pwykersotz]

I'm actually a fan of the HP bloat. It's harder to take out threats in a single shot. This has made my 5e games a LOT more intense and a ton of fun.

[rlc]

I've...seen a few complaints about HP bloat with even nominally weaker adversaries.this is a thing, but it's mostly just the monsters that are supposed to be sacks of hp. there are also monsters with less proportional hp that have stronger abilities. for example, the ogre with a cr of 2 has a higher average hp than the spectator with a cr of 3. for reference, the tarrasque has only about 11 times the hp of an ogre on average with 15 times the cr.
Additionally, I've been hearing that with the tweaks made to AC, mobs of low CR opponents are capable of overwhelming higher level PCs more easily than in previous editions.yes, this was one of the design goals. it's actually pretty realistic, if you think about it.
Most importantly, is 5e fun?this is obviously subjective, but my answer is yes.

[Chaosvii7]

I'm actually a fan of the HP bloat. It's harder to take out threats in a single shot. This has made my 5e games a LOT more intense and a ton of fun.

Lower AC plays into this too; The potential for high-level characters to be swarmed by low-level mooks keeps things like Kobolds a more consistent threat, no help from Tucker required. It brings mortality back into a reasonable level for just about everything.

[Beowulf DW]

I'm actually a fan of the HP bloat. It's harder to take out threats in a single shot. This has made my 5e games a LOT more intense and a ton of fun.

More intense, but not dragging it out, then. Sounds good.


this is a thing, but it's mostly just the monsters that are supposed to be sacks of hp. there are also monsters with less proportional hp that have stronger abilities. for example, the ogre with a cr of 2 has a higher average hp than the spectator with a cr of 3. for reference, the tarrasque has only about 11 times the hp of an ogre on average with 15 times the cr.yes, this was one of the design goals. it's actually pretty realistic, if you think about it.this is obviously subjective, but my answer is yes.


Lower AC plays into this too; The potential for high-level characters to be swarmed by low-level mooks keeps things like Kobolds a more consistent threat, no help from Tucker required. It brings mortality back into a reasonable level for just about everything.

So enemies that can take a lot of damage can't really dish it out as well? That sounds fair. All in all, it sounds like players are required to actually think a bit during combat, rather than trusting their builds and abilities to carry the day. Is that about right?

[Chaosvii7]

So enemies that can take a lot of damage can't really dish it out as well? That sounds fair. All in all, it sounds like players are required to actually think a bit during combat, rather than trusting their builds and abilities to carry the day. Is that about right?

Really the idea is that both players and monsters can retain relevancy without having to be needlessly pumped up with class levels, like in 3.5(or racial hit die as the case may be). Their design intent definitely leans towards what you suggested, save the iconic monsters that you typically encounter as bosses, like Tarrasques and the older Dragons. There's big meaty monsters to take you on while their hordes are still able to make a meaningful impact upon you.

If you're familiar with 4e terminology, it's just like the idea of Minions from 4e, except they're not actually limited to 1 hit point. They're creatures that are designed to be easy to deal with but still have an impact upon the combat.

The idea also transcends to higher levels as well; You can reliably toss a few ogres at a party of 10th level adventurers for a challenge. They're gonna take a few hits apiece to kill even at high levels, and the ogres with 2d8 plus some per attack is still great damage at those levels.

[TheOOB]

First and foremost, note that we only have 1 of 3 core rulebooks out, and the DMG in particular is going to have a lot of optional and variant rules that will address many of the complaints I've seen around, if any of the spoilers and leaks are to be believed.

Honestly, this system is one of the cleanest games systems I've every played. It's defiantly the simplest edition of D&D to get into, even more streamlined than 4e, but with more meaningful customization than 4e, and almost as much as 3e.

AC, accuracy, and d20 rolls in general have a much more narrow range than in previous editions. This means that characters don't eventually become gods at everything, and low level foes can still be threats at high levels. HP does scale quicker than damage, which does mean fights will last longer at high levels, but while your level 20 hp is around 20 times higher than your level 1 hp, your damage will likely be at least 5-6 times higher, so it's not like encounters will take hours at later levels.

[Sir_Leorik]

So, I've been hearing quite a few things about the new addition, some of it sounds great, and some of it sounds lousy. I like what I'm hearing about the new incarnations of the various classes, but I've also seen a few complaints about HP bloat with even nominally weaker adversaries. Additionally, I've been hearing that with the tweaks made to AC, mobs of low CR opponents are capable of overwhelming higher level PCs more easily than in previous editions.

Personally, I feel that most systems should be played before coming to a final judgement, but unfortunately some of my friends (specifically, the ones who will actually roll some dice with me) tend to hold on to the opinions they form quite stubbornly. This means that they tend to write systems off before we even play them, which is quite aggravating.

So, to anyone that's actually played 5e, have these issues surfaced? If so, did your group make any adjustments, or feel forced to make adjustments? Most importantly, is 5e fun?

Why don't you sample the Basic Rules before buying the books? (http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/basicrules)

Personally, I'm not sure I've seen these specific issues in 5E. AC is generally lower, but that's true for monsters as well (The Tarrasque has an AC of 25!).

What specific issues do your fellow players have against 5E, other than that it's new? Would showing them the Basic Rules change their minds?

[Lokiare]

The general measuring stick is:

If you want a toned down less fiddly and slightly more balanced 3.5E, then you will like 5E.

If you want a simpler 4E with quicker combats, you won't like 5E because its not even close.

If you liked 0E you will hate 5E because you hated the 3 editions after it and its mostly a mix of the three centering somewhere around 2.75.

If you liked 2E you may not like 5E because it adds all the things that made 3E bad, almost no negative effects for spells, feats(which are optional supposedly), a wider gap between casters and non-casters, etc...etc...

Or you can look at it from the fun type view:

If you like a consistent fantasy world with high mortality and dirt farmers turned hero across 20 levels then you will probably like 5E.

If you like a tactical game of mythic proportions where at level 1 you are already a step above even trained people in your field, then you likely won't like 5E.

[Cambrian]

I'm actually a fan of the HP bloat. It's harder to take out threats in a single shot. This has made my 5e games a LOT more intense and a ton of fun.HP bloat is not really an issue if the game flows more quickly thanks to the streamlining. It might mean it takes more turns to resolve the encounter, but if those turns all go by more quickly then the game is still flowing. And with more turns each player will be acting more often which helps keep them engaged.

Also is there actual HP bloat compared to previous editions? Or is it just an effective HP Bloat since characters all deal relatively less damage?

If you liked 2E you may not like 5E because it adds all the things that made 3E bad, almost no negative effects for spells, feats(which are optional supposedly), a wider gap between casters and non-casters, etc...etc...I don't have enough experience to say but it looks to me that magic users are far more constrained in 5th than in 2nd.

Don't forget just how much less access there is to high level spells-- even at level 20 caster's only get 1 level 8 and 9 slot.

Also with concentration spell stacking is not possible like it was back in 2nd. Also spellcasters are very much vulnerable should they be hit while concentrating.

It actually feels like streamlined 2nd ed with 3/4th ed wisdom and modern game design lessons thrown in.

Feats are also, as mentioned, optional and come at the cost of an ability increase and is only gained every 4 levels for most classes.

Honestly suspect 2nd ed players, even if they don't adopt 5th, would more likely enjoy 5th than 3rd or 4th.

[Lokiare]

HP bloat is not really an issue if the game flows more quickly thanks to the streamlining. It might mean it takes more turns to resolve the encounter, but if those turns all go by more quickly then the game is still flowing. And with more turns each player will be acting more often which helps keep them engaged.

Also is there actual HP bloat compared to previous editions? Or is it just an effective HP Bloat since characters all deal relatively less damage?
I don't have enough experience to say but it looks to me that magic users are far more constrained in 5th than in 2nd.

Don't forget just how much less access there is to high level spells-- even at level 20 caster's only get 1 level 8 and 9 slot.

Also with concentration spell stacking is not possible like it was back in 2nd. Also spellcasters are very much vulnerable should they be hit while concentrating.

It actually feels like streamlined 2nd ed with 3/4th ed wisdom and modern game design lessons thrown in.

Feats are also, as mentioned, optional and come at the cost of an ability increase and is only gained every 4 levels for most classes.

Honestly suspect 2nd ed players, even if they don't adopt 5th, would more likely enjoy 5th than 3rd or 4th.

Yeah, you should go read up on 2E. Polymorph causes a system shock roll (save) or death on the target. Haste aged you a year every time you used it (thus you have about 40 uses of it before you become too unhealthy to adventure). Teleport could cause instant death. 2E casters got less slots overall than 3E. They did get more slots at higher levels but we are still taking around 2 slots of their highest level spells.

2E had concentration too, only it was more brutal. If you got hit in a round you couldn't cast spells until the following round. No rolls, no checks. Spells took entire rounds to cast and if you got hit anytime within that time frame you lost the spell and the spell slot.

Basically the answer is no. 2E was way more restrictive. The only additional restriction 5E puts on it is the fewer high level slots, but you didn't often use high level slots in 2E either because of the deadly side effects of the spells themselves.

5E is not a streamlined 2E. It is a streamlined 3E with a few arbitrary restrictions added, thus 2.75E, not 2.1E.

Its also not relevant if they like 3E or 4E slightly less than 5E. If they don't want to play 5E they aren't going to play it.

[Cambrian]

Yeah, you should go read up on 2E. Polymorph causes a system shock roll (save) or death on the target. Haste aged you a year every time you used it (thus you have about 40 uses of it before you become too unhealthy to adventure). Teleport could cause instant death. 2E casters got less slots overall than 3E. They did get more slots at higher levels but we are still taking around 2 slots of their highest level spells.

2E had concentration too, only it was more brutal. If you got hit in a round you couldn't cast spells until the following round. No rolls, no checks. Spells took entire rounds to cast and if you got hit anytime within that time frame you lost the spell and the spell slot.

Basically the answer is no. 2E was way more restrictive. The only additional restriction 5E puts on it is the fewer high level slots, but you didn't often use high level slots in 2E either because of the deadly side effects of the spells themselves.Some high level spells had large drawbacks.

And you've forgotten 5th's more strict limitations on stacking spells and that spells don't necessarily scale by level but by spell slot.

It is just false to say that 5th brings the same spell supremacy of 3rd.

[Beowulf DW]

What specific issues do your fellow players have against 5E, other than that it's new? Would showing them the Basic Rules change their minds?

Pretty much exactly what I mentioned earlier. They've only read the Basic rules so far, but none of us has actually tried a game other than a playtest a while back.