The Order of the Stick: Utterly Dwarfed
The Order of the Stick: Utterly Dwarfed - Coming in December and available for pre-order now
Page 7 of 37 FirstFirst 123456789101112131415161732 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 210 of 1100
  1. - Top - End - #181
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2014

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pex View Post
    Interesting for me is that before 5E I very rarely multiclassed. I had done it, but there were particular circumstances involved.
    Before 5E I rarely multiclassed, but I dual-classed frequently. I just hate bumping into level limits, or even the thought of someday maybe bumping into level limits, so humans have always been my favorite race. It's the same mentality that in 5E prevents me from multiclassing Moon Druids with any other class although I will multiclass Shepherd Druids early and often.

  2. - Top - End - #182
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BarbarianGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pex View Post
    Another plus for 5E is the ease to multiclass spellcasters, because high level spells are great, yay, go them, but many low level spells retain their usefulness as the game progresses you don't feel weakened and aren't.
    So speaking of derailing the thread, this put a thought into my head.

    Has anyone tried an E6 variant where instead of a level cap across the board, you can only level a spellcaster level to the point where it reaches 3rd level spells? Once that class reaches that point, you must multiclass (even to another spellcaster, but the spell level cap always applies).

    So full casters are all capped at 6. Arcane trickster and EK can go to 18. Ranger and paladin can go to 12. And so on with any Xanathar subclasses.

  3. - Top - End - #183
    Halfling in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2018

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    The thing I've heard more than anything is that 5e is trying to make a video game out of dnd. I don't agree with that, but I've heard it.

  4. - Top - End - #184
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Max_Killjoy's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    The Lakes

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    Quote Originally Posted by NOMster View Post
    The thing I've heard more than anything is that 5e is trying to make a video game out of dnd. I don't agree with that, but I've heard it.
    That was a legitimate complaint about 4e.

    But for 5e? I'd really like to know where they're getting that impression other than "what's a thing I can say to attack a system I don't like".
    It is one thing to suspend your disbelief. It is another thing entirely to hang it by the neck until dead.

    Verisimilitude -- n, the appearance or semblance of truth, likelihood, or probability.

    The concern is not realism in speculative fiction, but rather the sense that a setting or story could be real, fostered by internal consistency and coherence.

    The Worldbuilding Forum -- where realities are born.

  5. - Top - End - #185
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BarbarianGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    Quote Originally Posted by Max_Killjoy View Post
    That was a legitimate complaint about 4e.

    But for 5e? I'd really like to know where they're getting that impression other than "what's a thing I can say to attack a system I don't like".
    Yeah, that's a tough sell for 5e.

  6. - Top - End - #186
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Bohandas's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2016

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    For me personally the issue is less that 5e is necessarily bad in and of itself, and more that one is a sucker for buying it. Same for anyone who buys Pathfinder 2e. The only thing "wrong" with the third edition was that everyone who wanted them already had the core rulebooks, so they had to make a forth edition and a fifth edition in order to sell more books, and regardless of their relative advantages or disadvantages that's the ONLY reason 4e and 5e exist.

  7. - Top - End - #187
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BarbarianGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bohandas View Post
    For me personally the issue is less that 5e is necessarily bad in and of itself, and more that one is a sucker for buying it. Same for anyone who buys Pathfinder 2e. The only thing "wrong" with the third edition was that everyone who wanted them already had the core rulebooks, so they had to make a forth edition and a fifth edition in order to sell more books, and regardless of their relative advantages or disadvantages that's the ONLY reason 4e and 5e exist.


  8. - Top - End - #188
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    RogueGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bohandas View Post
    For me personally the issue is less that 5e is necessarily bad in and of itself, and more that one is a sucker for buying it. Same for anyone who buys Pathfinder 2e. The only thing "wrong" with the third edition was that everyone who wanted them already had the core rulebooks, so they had to make a forth edition and a fifth edition in order to sell more books, and regardless of their relative advantages or disadvantages that's the ONLY reason 4e and 5e exist.
    Considering how many more people 5e brought to the hobby, both newbies and grognards like me, this is obviously not true.

    (Started playing in the mid 80s, basic D&D and later AD&D 2nd edition. Never played 3rd edition. Considering the general attitude of its outspoken fans, happy to say I never will. Enjoyed 4th edition as a standalone game, but didn't feel like D&D. Love 5th edition, best edition I've played)
    Last edited by diplomancer; 2019-10-12 at 11:52 AM.

  9. - Top - End - #189
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Griffon

    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bohandas View Post
    For me personally the issue is less that 5e is necessarily bad in and of itself, and more that one is a sucker for buying it. Same for anyone who buys Pathfinder 2e. The only thing "wrong" with the third edition was that everyone who wanted them already had the core rulebooks, so they had to make a forth edition and a fifth edition in order to sell more books, and regardless of their relative advantages or disadvantages that's the ONLY reason 4e and 5e exist.
    Meh. Love 3.x, owe the majority of the published books, and think that they could have lasted a few years, bringing out more books building on the new sub-systems (soulbinding, tome of battle, incarnum, psionics), and maybe a large overhaul / fix / errata to eliminate the biggest faults in balance.

    But then again: the edition was totally bloated. Was very beginner unfriendly. Had balance issues in its very core. Took a lot of prep time. And they covered most angels that were there to cover: books on demons, devils, undead, dragons, abberations, celestials; numerous source books for all classes; 5 or 6 additional power systems in addition to what was in the core books; 5 or 6 monster manuals (depending on wether you count fiend folio); thousands and thousands of feats and spells, hundreds of races, thousands (I think) prestige classes... I think the edition was 'done' in a way. I didn't like 4e enough to buy/play it, but 5e is definitely an improvement in many (and all fundamental) ways.

  10. - Top - End - #190
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jun 2015

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    I think 5e could have decided to not make attacks utterly confusing: it would have been a great thing if people did not have to talk about melee melee physical weapon attacks and other complex nuances that seems to bloat the rules for no good reason.
    Then I think the skill system should have the difficulty ranks renamed.
    Otherwise from what I did read unless you start involving rage, concentration and other weird class abilities the game is not too complex which makes it nearly understandable for humans that does not lives only to lose time by reading rulebooks like me.
    Last edited by noob; 2019-10-12 at 03:11 PM.

  11. - Top - End - #191
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Bohandas's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2016

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    Quote Originally Posted by Waazraath View Post
    Meh. Love 3.x, owe the majority of the published books, and think that they could have lasted a few years, bringing out more books building on the new sub-systems (soulbinding, tome of battle, incarnum, psionics), and maybe a large overhaul / fix / errata to eliminate the biggest faults in balance.

    But then again: the edition was totally bloated. Was very beginner unfriendly. Had balance issues in its very core. Took a lot of prep time. And they covered most angels that were there to cover: books on demons, devils, undead, dragons, abberations, celestials;
    they never did Fey book or a Construct book though. And the environment books skipped forests, swamps, and mountains

  12. - Top - End - #192
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    JNAProductions's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Fighting Demons!

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    Quote Originally Posted by noob View Post
    I think 5e could have decided to not make attacks utterly confusing: it would have been a great thing if people did not have to talk about melee melee physical weapon attacks and other complex nuances that seems to bloat the rules for no good reason.
    Then I think the skill system should have the difficulty ranks renamed.
    Otherwise from what I did read unless you start involving rage, concentration and other weird class abilities the game is not too complex which makes it nearly understandable for humans that does not lives only to lose time by reading rulebooks like me.
    I think you vastly overestimate how complicated 5E is to a newcomer. While I do agree that there's issues lacking clarity, the details are nitpicky enough that for a casual player, it won't ever come up or be an issue.

    It's sort of like saying 3.5 is bad because Monks aren't proficient in Unarmed Strikes. While technically true by RAW (at least, I think so) it's such a minor and easily corrected error that it's never going to be an actual issue at any but the most pedantic of tables.
    I have a LOT of Homebrew!

    Current Avatar by Elder Tsofu, who is awesome!

    Spoiler: Former Avatars
    Show
    Spoiler: Avatar (Not In Use) By Professor Gnoll!
    Show


    Spoiler: Avatar (Not In Use) By Cdr. Fallout!
    Show

  13. - Top - End - #193
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Griffon

    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bohandas View Post
    they never did Fey book or a Construct book though. And the environment books skipped forests, swamps, and mountains
    Very true (except that mountains were covered in frostburn, including relevant prestige class). But do you really think they also should have done those, before closing the edition? I don't think I missed them (though I would have gotten the fey one).

  14. - Top - End - #194
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    SD
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eldariel View Post
    Cheers. That's at least a rough indicator if nothing else; of course, it's probably not an unbiased sample but it'll do.
    It's something at least.
    I've always looked at it like this: everyone sees level 1 and then every level after has less and less play time. Some tables do start at later levels but almost always in a one shot or predetermined session count games.

    V Human isn't considered one of if not the best race choice because they get an extra feat but that they get a feat at lv one so will be guaranteed to see play. Same holds true for multiclassing for low level features vs holding out for usually pretty meh high level features.

    It's common ground for every DND edition but due to the lack of complexity of 3.X it's just more apparent in 5e.
    what is the point of living if you can't deadlift?

  15. - Top - End - #195
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Max_Killjoy's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    The Lakes

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    Quote Originally Posted by noob View Post
    I think 5e could have decided to not make attacks utterly confusing: it would have been a great thing if people did not have to talk about melee melee physical weapon attacks and other complex nuances that seems to bloat the rules for no good reason.
    That, and the random "this word means something specific here" vs "this word should be read as natural language here"... for the same exact word.
    It is one thing to suspend your disbelief. It is another thing entirely to hang it by the neck until dead.

    Verisimilitude -- n, the appearance or semblance of truth, likelihood, or probability.

    The concern is not realism in speculative fiction, but rather the sense that a setting or story could be real, fostered by internal consistency and coherence.

    The Worldbuilding Forum -- where realities are born.

  16. - Top - End - #196
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2014

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    Quote Originally Posted by Max_Killjoy View Post
    That, and the random "this word means something specific here" vs "this word should be read as natural language here"... for the same exact word.
    Without even bothering to put the technical jargon words on bold font or give a page reference to the definition.

    That's how we wind up with Create Thrall that seems awesome the first time you read the PHB because of no-save perma-charm, and incredibly lame once you've internalized the appendix at the back that defines "charmed" for 5E. The definitions aren't even at the front, they're at the back!

  17. - Top - End - #197
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    DrowGirl

    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    I'd imagine the hate for Fifth Edition is the same as why Super Smash Bros Melee players hate Smash 4 / Ultimate. Why Morrowind fans hate Skyrim. Why WoW Classic fans hate modern Wow.
    The majority of these people have simply found that they like what they have, don't want to learn what the new hotness is like, and are simultaneously jealous of the fun people are having with it. (Not to disrespect anyone here; Loss Aversion is a powerful stimulus and seeing people have fun with something you're not included in tends to trigger a fierce response.)

    5E does have a lot of problems though. The lack of clarity on rules has borderline turned me into a rules lawyer, and I've never really been that kind of person before. It can be frustrating when the game grinds to a halt because the DM wants to make sure their rulings are fair and allows everyone at the table to voice their opinions on strange / contradictory rules. (I almost would prefer them to make a quick ruling and move on to keep the game moving)

  18. - Top - End - #198
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    BarbarianGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2014

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    Speaking from personal experience...

    Ive played 3.5e for its entire lifespan, and fully through 4e until 5e came when we switched. As a player, I liked 3.5e more, because characters and builds overall felt more unique, you just had to be sure and not break the system and self-balance.

    As a DM, 5e is much easier, characters are less powerful, enemies more resilient, and you can focus on the story more-so than 3.5e. However, its also a bit frustrating because of the intentionally designed vagueness in the system. There are no tables for suggested DCs for skills, there are very vague grey areas that some people will try and abuse, and there are no guidelines for how to decide, other than "youre the DM, make a ruling!".

    Sometimes, I just want to loo up a skill in the book, and tell a player his climb attempt up a cliff is DC 25, instead of having to guess based on weather, terrain, chance of a tectonic event mid climb, and how old his rope is and realize all he gets is Advantage/Disadvantage. I love the simplicity, but I wish it was just slightly less simple.
    I Am A: Neutral Good Half-Orc Fighter/Barbarian (2nd/1st Level)

    Ability Scores:
    Strength-16
    Dexterity-16
    Constitution-17
    Intelligence-17
    Wisdom-16
    Charisma-13

  19. - Top - End - #199
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Kane0's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Waterdeep
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    On the other hand, when I cast Scorching Ray I donít want to have to factor in AC (no not that one, the other one) with all my various plusses and minuses, damage resistance, spell resistance or spell absorbtion, miss chance, caster level, casting defensively check and whichever of my class features and feats change any of those.
    And then the damage roll of course.

  20. - Top - End - #200
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Ignimortis's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kane0 View Post
    On the other hand, when I cast Scorching Ray I donít want to have to factor in AC (no not that one, the other one) with all my various plusses and minuses, damage resistance, spell resistance or spell absorbtion, miss chance, caster level, casting defensively check and whichever of my class features and feats change any of those.
    And then the damage roll of course.
    The lack of Touch AC and Flat-Footed/Immobilized AC is actually pretty annoying, because it doesn't really make sense not to have those things and it's not that complex.

    Damage resistance is still there, as are miss chances. Spell resistance got turned into "magic damage resistance" or "advantage on saves".

    So basically there are less plusses and minuses (which should already be calculated into your attack values anyway, that's what charsheets are for), no caster level (but slot level is still there) and no casting defensively check (which only exists if you cast in melee (why?) and which is a flat 15, IIRC, so it stops being a thing you roll at levels past 7 or so, less if you have to take Combat Casting for some reason).
    Last edited by Ignimortis; 2019-10-13 at 01:47 AM.
    Elezen Dark Knight avatar by Linklele
    Favourite classes: Beguiler, Scout, Warblade, 3.5 Warlock, Harbinger (PF:PoW).
    78% of DM's started their first campaign in a tavern. If you're one of the 22% that didn't, copy and paste this into your signature.

  21. - Top - End - #201
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Bohandas's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2016

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    Quote Originally Posted by Waazraath View Post
    Very true (except that mountains were covered in frostburn, including relevant prestige class). But do you really think they also should have done those, before closing the edition? I don't think I missed them (though I would have gotten the fey one).
    I would have gotten the swamp book and fey book if they had them.

  22. - Top - End - #202
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BarbarianGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mongobear View Post
    Sometimes, I just want to loo up a skill in the book, and tell a player his climb attempt up a cliff is DC 25, instead of having to guess based on weather, terrain, chance of a tectonic event mid climb, and how old his rope is and realize all he gets is Advantage/Disadvantage. I love the simplicity, but I wish it was just slightly less simple.
    I don't mean to come across as condescending but I've found that trying to explain what I'm about to say often sounds that way.

    Setting DCs off the cuff isn't that hard. The way one-off instances of probability work, it really, honestly, doesn't matter if you set the DC of a task to 10 or 15. It might matter somewhat if you're "off" by a large amount -- say the DC should be something like 15 and you set it to 5. The only context in which it matters that you have a precise and consistent DC for a given task is in when you look at attempting that exact task under identical conditions over time.

    If you flip a coin, the DC for getting heads is 11 (well, 10.5 but dice can't do fractions). It is, obviously, a 50-50 chance. But if you actually flip a coin three times, you could easily get three heads in a row because of the chunky way probability works. The only way to get a functional 50-50 outcome is to flip the coin many, many times. Despite it being a DC of 11, you got three successes. How important is it, then, that if you were modeling this at the table, that you got that DC exactly right? You could just say, well, sure, the DC is 15 to get heads. And then the player gets heads three times in a row. Reality doesn't shatter.

    Unless a feature gives me a DC (like spell saves and such), I set the DC to 12 for everything. If I want to convey to the player that the task is a little harder than normal, i set it to 15. If I want to scare the player, I set it to 20. But these numbers are there purely to stimulate an emotional response in the players. "Ooh, DC 20, this is gonna be tough!" The player succeeds when the DC is 20 and feels like they made an accomplishment. They fail when it's 12 and they feel like they flubbed something. But it's laughable to think the DCs (in any edition) correlate to any kind of realistic assessment of how hard a task is. Any more than AC relates in any kind of realistic way to how getting hit in combat would really work. It's just a tool to enhance storytelling and immersion.

  23. - Top - End - #203
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Max_Killjoy's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    The Lakes

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    Quote Originally Posted by EggKookoo View Post
    I don't mean to come across as condescending but I've found that trying to explain what I'm about to say often sounds that way.

    Setting DCs off the cuff isn't that hard. The way one-off instances of probability work, it really, honestly, doesn't matter if you set the DC of a task to 10 or 15. It might matter somewhat if you're "off" by a large amount -- say the DC should be something like 15 and you set it to 5. The only context in which it matters that you have a precise and consistent DC for a given task is in when you look at attempting that exact task under identical conditions over time.

    If you flip a coin, the DC for getting heads is 11 (well, 10.5 but dice can't do fractions). It is, obviously, a 50-50 chance. But if you actually flip a coin three times, you could easily get three heads in a row because of the chunky way probability works. The only way to get a functional 50-50 outcome is to flip the coin many, many times. Despite it being a DC of 11, you got three successes. How important is it, then, that if you were modeling this at the table, that you got that DC exactly right? You could just say, well, sure, the DC is 15 to get heads. And then the player gets heads three times in a row. Reality doesn't shatter.

    Unless a feature gives me a DC (like spell saves and such), I set the DC to 12 for everything. If I want to convey to the player that the task is a little harder than normal, i set it to 15. If I want to scare the player, I set it to 20. But these numbers are there purely to stimulate an emotional response in the players. "Ooh, DC 20, this is gonna be tough!" The player succeeds when the DC is 20 and feels like they made an accomplishment. They fail when it's 12 and they feel like they flubbed something. But it's laughable to think the DCs (in any edition) correlate to any kind of realistic assessment of how hard a task is. Any more than AC relates in any kind of realistic way to how getting hit in combat would really work. It's just a tool to enhance storytelling and immersion.
    If I found out a GM was trying to manipulate my "experience" in that manner, I'd be deeply disappointed.

    Regardless of what system we're using, I want the difficulty of the roll to be based on about how hard the task is on a consistent scale, NOT on how the GM thinks it will make me "feel", NOT on narrative or cinematic appropriateness, NOT on fulfilling an archetype, etc. My character is interacting with the world around them, those rolls are part of the interaction, they need to reflect what's going on -- the situation, the character's abilities, etc.
    It is one thing to suspend your disbelief. It is another thing entirely to hang it by the neck until dead.

    Verisimilitude -- n, the appearance or semblance of truth, likelihood, or probability.

    The concern is not realism in speculative fiction, but rather the sense that a setting or story could be real, fostered by internal consistency and coherence.

    The Worldbuilding Forum -- where realities are born.

  24. - Top - End - #204
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Ignimortis's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    Quote Originally Posted by Max_Killjoy View Post
    If I found out a GM was trying to manipulate my "experience" in that manner, I'd be deeply disappointed.

    Regardless of what system we're using, I want the difficulty of the roll to be based on about how hard the task is on a consistent scale, NOT on how the GM thinks it will make me "feel", NOT on narrative or cinematic appropriateness, NOT on fulfilling an archetype, etc. My character is interacting with the world around them, those rolls are part of the interaction, they need to reflect what's going on -- the situation, the character's abilities, etc.
    Otherwise progression isn't really meaningful and it doesn't feel like your character actually achieved something, it just feels like you got lucky or you got thrown a bone.
    Elezen Dark Knight avatar by Linklele
    Favourite classes: Beguiler, Scout, Warblade, 3.5 Warlock, Harbinger (PF:PoW).
    78% of DM's started their first campaign in a tavern. If you're one of the 22% that didn't, copy and paste this into your signature.

  25. - Top - End - #205
    Orc in the Playground
     
    SwashbucklerGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2011

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ignimortis View Post
    Otherwise progression isn't really meaningful and it doesn't feel like your character actually achieved something, it just feels like you got lucky or you got thrown a bone.
    I think their point is that any kind of rigorous DC system is going to be swamped by randomness anyway, so ballparking it gets you almost all the benefit of a rigourous system minus the hassle of managing fiddly details.

    They're not saying to invent values for narrative or ~feelings~, but that the purpose of DCs is to give players experience of granular difficulty: some tasks are harder than others, and you can still fail the easier tasks from time to time. You just don't gain a whole lot going from coarse grained to fine grained.

    Now I like fine grained details in and of themselves, so I'm usually going to prefer a finer grained system just out of personal preference. But as a matter of course, going "this task feels like a DC15" is often going to be better for the game than stopping to look up the tables and counting up all the relevant factors to find out it's actually a DC17.
    Quote Originally Posted by crayzz
    That a given person is known for his sex appeal does not mean that he is only known for his sex appeal.
    Quote Originally Posted by jere7my
    For instance, I am also known for my humility.

  26. - Top - End - #206
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jun 2015

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    Quote Originally Posted by crayzz View Post
    I think their point is that any kind of rigorous DC system is going to be swamped by randomness anyway, so ballparking it gets you almost all the benefit of a rigourous system minus the hassle of managing fiddly details.

    They're not saying to invent values for narrative or ~feelings~, but that the purpose of DCs is to give players experience of granular difficulty: some tasks are harder than others, and you can still fail the easier tasks from time to time. You just don't gain a whole lot going from coarse grained to fine grained.

    Now I like fine grained details in and of themselves, so I'm usually going to prefer a finer grained system just out of personal preference. But as a matter of course, going "this task feels like a DC15" is often going to be better for the game than stopping to look up the tables and counting up all the relevant factors to find out it's actually a DC17.
    The complaint is more about "ok so today it is the gm that always imagine walls as being near impossible to climb so right now it is a dc 25 to climb one that looks like stairs while tomorrow I play another game with another gm that is used to climbing walls and so there will not be even a check for a straight brick wall"
    Lacking consistence in how dcs works can make investment in skills have a very random efficiency and therefore make problems with the balance between skills and other options(since skill efficiency is going to be very variable).

    Essentially it is completely impossible to balance the skill system with the rest of the system if there is only vague guidelines on when skills should be used and the difficulty of doing so that makes skills vary from one extreme to the other depending on the gm.

    That or avoid making class abilities and feats based on using skills.(to reduce the interaction of skills with the other parts of character building)
    Last edited by noob; 2019-10-13 at 11:39 AM.

  27. - Top - End - #207
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    SD
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    Quote Originally Posted by noob View Post
    the complaint is more about "ok so today it is the gm that always imagine walls as being near impossible to climb so right now it is a dc 25 to climb one tomorrow I play another game with another gm that is used to climbing walls and so there will not be even a check"
    I think the logical on how each DM sets ablity check DC is fine but the books should have suggested (strongly) that it an important part of the pre game conversation. I have an example of each DC printed on the out side of my screen so the players know where I stand as far as setting them.
    Giving the DM the authority to set DCs was great but they needed to make sure they are aware they also have the responsibilities that come with it.
    what is the point of living if you can't deadlift?

  28. - Top - End - #208
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BarbarianGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    Quote Originally Posted by Max_Killjoy View Post
    Regardless of what system we're using, I want the difficulty of the roll to be based on about how hard the task is on a consistent scale, NOT on how the GM thinks it will make me "feel", NOT on narrative or cinematic appropriateness, NOT on fulfilling an archetype, etc. My character is interacting with the world around them, those rolls are part of the interaction, they need to reflect what's going on -- the situation, the character's abilities, etc.
    Every single game system in existence is providing you an experience based on narrative, cinematic, or some other similar emotional metric. Every single one. You can't possibly model (especially in a TTRPG) all of the variables that would be involved "in real life" task-resolution. Having a list of DCs does literally nothing for that. It just sets a bunch of arbitrary numbers that are no more reality-based than the DM setting something to 12 for most cases, and then adjusting perhaps based on circumstance. Not to mention that "climbing a rope" is not the same task each time you attempt to climb a rope. Each rope is different, each situation is different. You're different. Having a carved-in-stone DC for climbing a rope is just creating an illusion of consistency (which you need, of course, for emotional and narrative-based reasons).

    What's even weirder is that I've seen some folks say the DC for a given task (and I mean literally a given instance of a task) should vary depending on how hard it is for a given creature. Like, the DC should be 12 for PC #1 but 15 for PC #2. I don't get that at all. If the task is easier for PC #1 that's reflected in PC #1 having a higher bonus.

    I get the impulse to say "climbing a rope should always be DC X" but again, which rope?

    Quote Originally Posted by crayzz View Post
    I think their point is that any kind of rigorous DC system is going to be swamped by randomness anyway, so ballparking it gets you almost all the benefit of a rigourous system minus the hassle of managing fiddly details.

    They're not saying to invent values for narrative or ~feelings~, but that the purpose of DCs is to give players experience of granular difficulty: some tasks are harder than others, and you can still fail the easier tasks from time to time. You just don't gain a whole lot going from coarse grained to fine grained.
    Mostly, yes.

    The PC can't know the difficulty of a task ahead of time with any mathematical precision. Certainly not to within 5% chances of success or failure (unless, I guess, your PC is Spock or something). All the PC can do is feel confident they can complete the task, or lack that confidence. There's some granularity there (very confident, not so confident, no freaking way, etc.), but in the end the PC is more or less making an educated guess if they can complete the task. The dice are going to reveal if they did it. If the d20 comes up a 1, doesn't matter how good the PC is or mostly what the DC was, chances are they failed. Where's your precious stone-carved DC now?
    Last edited by EggKookoo; 2019-10-13 at 12:25 PM.

  29. - Top - End - #209
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Max_Killjoy's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    The Lakes

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    Quote Originally Posted by EggKookoo View Post
    Every single game system in existence is providing you an experience based on narrative, cinematic, or some other similar emotional metric. Every single one.
    If you insist on telling other people how and why they play, and what the experience of playing an RPG actually is for them even if they say otherwise... then there's nothing left for us to discuss.
    Last edited by Max_Killjoy; 2019-10-13 at 12:30 PM.
    It is one thing to suspend your disbelief. It is another thing entirely to hang it by the neck until dead.

    Verisimilitude -- n, the appearance or semblance of truth, likelihood, or probability.

    The concern is not realism in speculative fiction, but rather the sense that a setting or story could be real, fostered by internal consistency and coherence.

    The Worldbuilding Forum -- where realities are born.

  30. - Top - End - #210
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2017

    Default Re: Why the hate on 5e?

    Quote Originally Posted by EggKookoo View Post
    I get the impulse to say "climbing a rope should always be DC X" but again, which rope?
    A 1" diameter cotton 4 braid rope knotted every 14-15" inches with a simple overhand knot hanging vertically from 50 to 53.2 feet from a 4' diameter steel ring mounted vertically to a fixed surface and unattached at the bottom.
    Last edited by LordEntrails; 2019-10-13 at 12:33 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •