Opinions on 5th edition mechanics compared to other editions/retro clones

[KorvinStarmast]

Trouble is now someone has to play a cleric.

Given that cleric is one of the original classes, wrong. But if you have a dozen classes, and level drain, then adding to the number of ways undead could be turned/handled would be appropriate.

That said, I won't say that as a player I miss level drain. there are still ways for some undead like wights, shadows, etc to, if they hit you often enough, get you to 0 HP and then under their control that the danger is still there.

What 5e has going on in that regard is fine, as it's something you can at least work against/try to deal with. Not quite as "save or suck" as the first time I was hit by a wight in OD&D

(OK, you are now a 4th level magic user, and can't use fireball. That sorta sucked.) We killed it, adventured more, and eventually I got back to 5th level.

[mephnick]

there are still ways for some undead like wights, shadows, etc to, if they hit you often enough, get you to 0 HP and then under their control that the danger is still there
.

The attacks are so weak I bet it hasn't come up in the history of 5e at any table in the world, so I'm not really sure they count..

Whether save or suck is something you want, the ones that do have the abilities should at least be effective.

[Stan]

I kinda want a middle ground with special monster powers. I don't miss save or die or AD&D level drain. But I want more than most just amount of hp damage. On the other hand, 3e had ability score damage and things and it could be a pain in the ass - it could affect a dozen types of rolls that you had to keep track of. I guess I just like the fear aspect, where characters were afraid to get near a monster.

[Finieous]

To be clear, I wouldn't reintroduce level drain and save-or-die in a game I'm running for my wonderful group of players. It's not what they enjoy. I'd love to play in such a game again. This is because it adds a sense of real risk, suspense and danger to the game that daily hit point attrition followed by full recovery can't touch, and I like those things.

So enough with the "Tyrant DM just wants his jollies" crap.

[Eric Diaz]

I kinda want a middle ground with special monster powers. I don't miss save or die or AD&D level drain. But I want more than most just amount of hp damage. On the other hand, 3e had ability score damage and things and it could be a pain in the ass - it could affect a dozen types of rolls that you had to keep track of. I guess I just like the fear aspect, where characters were afraid to get near a monster.

Exhaustion seems to be a good compromise. Other than that, I use Constitution damage.

[Sigreid]

What if some rare monsters caused festering wounds that couldn't be healed by magic and didn't heal over night. The basic idea rattling around in my head is they could only be healed by spending hit dice over a long rest, leaving at best fewer HD for the next day.

[Stan]

Exhaustion seems to be a good compromise. Other than that, I use Constitution damage.

That's a good idea. I've used it for non-lethal damage for a particular case. But it could be a monster power for something akin to a vampire. It can be healed at higher level but still takes resources. One hit isn't nearly as painful as level drain but it adds up and can be debilitating for a couple of days.

A lesser draining creature might give a level of exhaustion only on a critical or only when it rolls max damage.

[Willie the Duck]

A barbarian can't use a thrown or ranged weapon attack to satisfy their abilities. It must be a melee weapon attack. If it was just a weapon attack then you would be correct, but because 5e breaks down the attack types and things must be specific, we don't really have just two simple options.

Hell, the barbarian even further dictates that a Strength melee weapon attack a Dexterity weapon attack are two different thing as RAGE won't work with the later. In a simple system, rage would work with weapon attacks and wouldn't dictate what subclass of weapon attacks count and don't count.

This is the devs trying to have a simple game yet not being able to make a simple game. I'm not saying it's a terrible thing, just they tried to have their cake and eat it too. 5e isn't actually rules light, though it was sold as that way for a while... 5e is more "Rules Medium" than anything else because of all this.

Weapon v. non-weapon, melee v. ranged, and Str-based v. Dex-based means there are three binary, toggle-switch flags you have on attacks. That's less than the number of flags that exist on damage type, and I've never heard anyone suggest that you can have different vulnerabilities or resistances to piercing damage instead of fire damage etc. indicates that the game is rules medium instead of rules light.

So, also not saying wrong. I'm just not finding the argument convincing.