Odds and ends, things that for me skew the 5E, and maybe you will or won't agree

[djreynolds]

Please lets keep this civil.

I like 5E, its fun and these are only examples of things that I find odd.

But there are some aspects of the game that do need tweaking, ZMan, Mr Lee, Malifice and Kryx have all come up with interesting solutions.

1. Cantrips, they scale on terms with martial and there extra attacks and they are limitless in casting.

Having an elf wizard was standard for me because he had a longbow to supplement his magic with, now a single classes caster doesn't really need the longbow.

It's nice for a dwarf to get war hammer and battle axe, but useless if he is a single class rogue and its too easy to get martial weapon proficiencies.

2. Barbarian's damage resistance, resistance is half damage and that is huge, even for monster's who have this. It is a very powerful feature, perhaps too powerful as it doesn't scale with level. And then the bear totem is even magical and elemental resistance to boot. Where is their exhaustion? I would figure all barbarians would be exhausted after raging. At least throw in a con save to avoid it.

Yes they wear medium armor, or none... but their AC for unarmored is as good a plate armor.

3. Do not get me wrong I like the long rest/short rest but you have too many classes on either side of this equation and aside from common sense, no way to establish a happy medium if players just want to use one or the other.

I have tried as the DMG suggest 6-8 encounters with 2 short rests and 1 long rest and with that idea, just multiplying out what a monk who is only going to be long resting would get x3 on all his Ki points, same for fighters and channel divinity and warlocks but this becomes tedious. So a first level monk would have 3 ki point, a 2nd level monk would have 6 per long rest, etc. A paladin would have 3 uses of channel divinity, and a cleric would have 3, then 6 etc..

There is just such big divide in the classes who do or do not need a short rest.

And yes I use the 5 minute short rest to encourage players to use it.

4. We use the standard array and point buy system in the AL, I actually hate this. Every build looks the same.

I have rolled out 4d6 six times for my own standard array and said here you go, this seems better.

5. Aside from an easy dip of bard or rogue, I would like expertise at least as a feat. You can get the skilled feat for 3 skills, or expertise in 1 skill and 1 normal skill proficiency.

6. Something must change for the better in terms of versatile weapons, especially for martial classes... any ideas would be greatly appreciated.

7. I do not like BB or GFB, obviously anyone can take magic initiate to get them, easy enough but now entire builds are focused on these cantrips.

[Jaycon356]

I'll start out by saying I may be a but bias, as I've only played 5e, and that may skew my view on things, but here's my take on your points.

1. If compared to the fighter, cantrips never quite hold up (aside from E.Blast warlocks) as they never add any modifier to damage. That may not seem like much, but when you look at a d8 weapon, your +5 is on average half your damage, which can get even higher with fighting styles.

The main thing that makes them stand out is there scaling past other martials that only get 2 attacks, which is why you see builds that you mention in point 7. I think the main saving grace is that 2(1d10+5) is roughly 4d10 (Admittedly worse), with the added bonus of being able to do other things with your attack action attacks (Grapples Etc.)

2. While barbarians rage is powerful, even with bear totem, I don't think it's horribly over powered. The way I see it, it's a way of giving them more health to burn through when they need it.

I think rage is mostly kept in check by the rules needed to maintain it that many DMs just hand wave.

As for adding exhaustion, I think that would kill the barbarian, I mean the first level of it gives you blanket disadvantage on all ability checks, even if you add a save it would would be an awkward binary of "save for the rest of the day being terrible". I really do think it's the reason I've never seen a frenzy barbarian.

3. I see the rest system balanced by what you get from them, a short rest for SW/AS is acceptable, the fighter can burn it when they need it, but it's not as valuable as all the wizards spell slots (but don't forget about arcane recovery) and it seems appropriate for how often one should be using their abilities.

As for the 5 minute rest? I hate it, I feel like there should be a risk in having to sit and lick your wounds, and that it opens windows for things like spamming short rest abilities and then taking another. If you really feel like it improves gameplay, that's your call, but I wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole.

4. As someone with horrendous luck, I prefer making point buy characters, but I agree it kind of sucks, but for different reasons, primarily being 4d6D1 characters are reliably better.

Personally, I feel that it does it's job in assuring consistency around the party, so that the guy who rolled two 18's isn't the behemoth who's shadow the party hide stays in.

My personal changes would be to simply give characters a few more points, so by rolling you trade the opportunity to put things where you want, for a moderately better outcome.

5. I would love to see a good way to implement this, I was always kinda confused why rogues and bards where the only ones who could master things.

6. Admittedly, I don't get what you mean here, there comes the issue of there being strait upgrades to weapons (RIP mace) that fall in the same proficiency rings. But personally, I think it's balanced in how you trade the damage of a 2d6 (Or a d12) for the option of using one hand when you need to.

7. GFB Pallys are quite a sight to behold, but the damage only goes thru the roof at around level 17, when it would overtake your str bonus. Admittedly, the second target effect Is a little game breaking in terms of damage per round, but it would be hard to balance it away without really specific wording to forbid it. You could comfortably make a house rule of "No X with Y" to stamp out the insane builds.

[Giant2005]

1. Cantrips, they scale on terms with martial and there extra attacks and they are limitless in casting.

Having an elf wizard was standard for me because he had a longbow to supplement his magic with, now a single classes caster doesn't really need the longbow.

It's nice for a dwarf to get war hammer and battle axe, but useless if he is a single class rogue and its too easy to get martial weapon proficiencies.
I don't think those proficiencies are actually supposed to be useful for the most part. If you find a build that would actually benefit from them, then great - you just managed to get some actual use out of your ribbons. Just don't expect them to be useful and you will be fine - those races have plenty of other reasons to be taken, even with some useless ones thrown in for flavor.


2. Barbarian's damage resistance, resistance is half damage and that is huge, even for monster's who have this. It is a very powerful feature, perhaps too powerful as it doesn't scale with level. And then the bear totem is even magical and elemental resistance to boot. Where is their exhaustion? I would figure all barbarians would be exhausted after raging. At least throw in a con save to avoid it.

Yes they wear medium armor, or none... but their AC for unarmored is as good a plate armor.
I really wouldn't advise that. Rage is basically all that a Barbarian has going for it - if you nerf it that hard, the class will no longer exist. If you want to nerf the resistance, replace it with a version of Uncanny Dodge that only works while Raging. The level 3 Bear Totem ability can just upgrade that Uncanny Dodge so that it can be used against all forms of damage rather than just damage resulting from attacks.


3. Do not get me wrong I like the long rest/short rest but you have too many classes on either side of this equation and aside from common sense, no way to establish a happy medium if players just want to use one or the other.

I have tried as the DMG suggest 6-8 encounters with 2 short rests and 1 long rest and with that idea, just multiplying out what a monk who is only going to be long resting would get x3 on all his Ki points, same for fighters and channel divinity and warlocks but this becomes tedious. So a first level monk would have 3 ki point, a 2nd level monk would have 6 per long rest, etc. A paladin would have 3 uses of channel divinity, and a cleric would have 3, then 6 etc..

There is just such big divide in the classes who do or do not need a short rest.

And yes I use the 5 minute short rest to encourage players to use it.
I agree - the short rest mechanic is terrible, but it is easily fixed if you shorten the requirements to 5 minutes like you have, and then take a cue from the long rest mechanic. That cue being a limited number of uses per 24 hours (1 per 24 hours in the case of the long rest). With a short rest, limit them to 2 per 24 hours and have them take only 5 minutes. Any player that needs one could then easily spend one during the 5 minute post-battle cleanup, without it forcing the other players to wait around needlessly (or use a short rest themselves).


4. We use the standard array and point buy system in the AL, I actually hate this. Every build looks the same.

I have rolled out 4d6 six times for my own standard array and said here you go, this seems better.
I don't like the non-random options either. I am too much of a coward to gamble when there is real stakes, but I love the thrill of gambling with stakes as minimal as having a gimped character (and even being gimped can prove to be a lot of fun - a type of fun that is unattainable by those that reject random rolls).


5. Aside from an easy dip of bard or rogue, I would like expertise at least as a feat. You can get the skilled feat for 3 skills, or expertise in 1 skill and 1 normal skill proficiency.
I don't think your proposal is perfect. I think it is fairly unanimously agreed that a reliable skill (expertise) is far more valuable than two unreliable skills (proficiency). Therefore, 1 expertise + 1 proficiency would be more powerful than skilled. Instead, I'd go for what sounds like an even more powerful option, but isn't in practice: I would give two expertises for a single feat. Expertise in a skill of choice and expertise in a tool of choice (with the exception of Thieves' Tools - that would infringe on the Rogue a little too much).


6. Something must change for the better in terms of versatile weapons, especially for martial classes... any ideas would be greatly appreciated.
Have the versatile property increase the damage die by two steps instead of one. Only the Greatclub is screwed over by the change and the Greatclub is already inferior to the staff anyway.


7. I do not like BB or GFB, obviously anyone can take magic initiate to get them, easy enough but now entire builds are focused on these cantrips.
You are probably right to hate them due to the whole power creep thing. I just can't bring myself to agree - I am primarily a player and power creep is a whole lot of fun from this side of the table.

[Gastronomie]

1. As aforementioned by others, cantrips are still weaker than normal attacks of the martial classes, with the sole exception of the warlock's Eldritch Blast. I personally don't like the idea of wizards using normal weapons, but that's probably personal preference. Certain classes like Valor Bard exist if you like the idea of an arcane archer.

2. Barbarians are overrated IMO. They're strong, but not absolute. Sure they're tanky, and they're also good at grappling, but it's actually pretty easy to strike their weak points, like weak WIS saves, and the lack of methods to make ranged attacks. Let them do the only thing they really excel at.

3. The DMG's encounter suggestions are sorta... meh. I have never actually took them seriously. It's a shame that despite the original system being pretty good, the creators didn't set the encounter measures correct.

4. This depends on the table, but the only thing I can say is that Adventurer's League itself is honestly not very fun. At least, in my opinion.

5. Sure, make a homebrew. There's absolutely no reason to stick with just printed material... unless you're going AL (which is, again, why I don't like AL. Too strict).

6. Uh, sorry, don't get what you mean here. Versatile weapons are already strong enough IMO.

7. I see only Swashbuckler builds using BB or GFB with Magic Initiate. Otherwise I think it's good for the game in how it allows many unique and creative builds, opening up new options. And TBH they aren't that much overpowered, with the exception of aforementioned Swashbuckler. To add, even that BB Swashbuckler isn't really gamebreaking.

See, my personal philosophy is that the characters not need to be equal in terms of power level as long as they can fulfill their respective roles in the party. A wizard with 12-score point buy can be still more versatile than a heavily optimized Battle Master with a score of 20-20-20-20-20-20. Even if the Bear Barbarian is immortal, and the BB Swashbuckler stops anyone in his path from moving a step, the party wizard can still remain as the versatile caster, the warlock is still good at blasting, and the bard can still be a skill monkey. The classes do different things, and each is crucial, beneficial, and most important, they don't step much on each others' feet.

I don't like arguing about whether a particular class is overpowered or not, unless the argument is "this class A overshadows class B in terms of what it can do to help the party".