Newfag here

Newfag here.
What does Veeky Forums think of D&D 5e?

PS: Sorry for being a newfag.

It's fine. Out of the Abyss and Curse of Strahd are fun modules.

Positive qualities:
It's not 3.5/PF.
Negative qualities:
It's still D&D. Twincast Bardic Horse

It has all the basic flaws of DnD. It's a marginal improvement over 3.5e and 4e but it still sucks.

If you like the idea of a skirmish wargame-lite in a fantasy setting, play a wargame that does that. If you like the idea of an RPG, play a proper RPG and not this shit.

> Sorry for being a newfag.

Where the fuck do you think you are? /v/? Everybody was new once and if people give you shit about it it's because they are immature fuckheads who would do anything to get a semblance of power in their tiny-cock life.

5e is awesome lots of fun stuff to play with and definitely streamlined so it's easier on newer players.

>thinks D&D can only skirmish wargame
>it's a shit system

/v/ plz leave

Quick question:

Does 5e enforce one class per character, or somewhat strict multi- / dual-classing rules like 2e did, or does it continue the whole "any character can take levels in any combination of classes they want" mechanic of 3e?

>PS: Sorry for being a newfag.

This isn't /b/, don't apologize for that.

5e is a decent system. Most classes are useful or at least fun (the ranger being a notable exception). Bounded accuracy means that lesser enemies always pose some threat. If 5e has a major flaw, it's that it lacks its own distinct identity, a product of its conservative development. Of course, it still suffers from being d20, and from being a class based system, but your mileage may vary on those issues.

Any combo of classes

It's decent if you want a very...D&D...game.

It's nothing fancy and clings hard to basics of D&D that have been about forever. If you go in not expecting innovation, you'll be fine.

I personally like it less than 4e for that very reason but it's not a bad game. Just nothing really new.

>liking 4e
Why do you have such shit taste?

It's pretty good.

If you want cliche ridden dungeon fantasy, there are MUCH better systems to do it in.

Name 80.

Name 81

Name: 82

Name 83

So far I like it. It has some interesting aspects in encouraging roleplay, with the background system and inspiration.

Veeky Forums doesn't care about newfags

I like it, it's pretty solid for getting people into ttrpgs because of its near-simplicity. It's still much fun to keep going with. If you really want to get into in-depth character development try 3.5 or Pathfinder. Be wary of special snowflakes and Mary/Gary Stu's though.

Don't be afraid to try other systems out, even ones with different settings like Call of Cthulhu, Traveler, or Shadowrun.

OP here, thanks for being such cool guys.
And to everyone else, thank you too, I appreciate your input.

Name 84

Name 1 that people actually play.

Name 2 that people actually play.

>not liking 4e

Why do you have lower than whaleshit taste?

What the fuck just happened? Is this some Unknown Armies shit going on?

compared to other DnD systems so is it easier to get into and is probably the most played system out there, making it easy to find player for.

some of it's flaws is that is still DnD, it narrows customization/character generation down a lot.


it's a decent system to start with, even if there are a lot of "simpler" systems does is the fact that it is so popular mean it gets more support, tools and players, making it much easier to whip up a group on the fly.


lost mines, out of the abyss and strahd are are pretty fun adventures.


what i will say is that once you start getting comfy in it that you might want to look around for something else.

Half-assed, boring as fuck and already abandonware.

I can't speak for Veeky Forums in general but I personally like it.

>generic insulty comments
>stating opinion as fact
>abandonware
>ware
>not were

/v/ plz leave

Why even ask, OP?

You're going to play it no matter what because the brand is heavily advertised.

For the love of god, just lurk. Please. It's not hard. Honest.

>It's decent if you want a very...D&D...game.

I feel this is probably what people who pick up a game called D&D are looking for.

People who pick up D&D do so because they have no idea what makes a good system and because that's the only name brand they're heard of. Most people don't want D&D games, they want dungeon fantasy roleplaying. D&D is not a good dungeon fantasy roleplaying game. It is an awful one.

This is a D&D thread. If you post any competitors I will scream at you and call you a shill. Okay?

>People who pick up D&D do so because they have no idea what makes a good system

5e is a great system for people who aren't deeply versed in the last 40 years of RPG systems and want to have a fun time playing a game. Which really, is the basic reason for playing any game, to have fun.

People who want to be "immersed in rules" the way you do are barely suitable for social gaming anyway.

The way class abilities and attribute stat increases (ASI) work, however, reinforces sticking in one class rather than spreading yourself out.

The effect of this on actually reducing multiclassing is limited, although it is tough to deduce just how much. That said, going twenty levels into any class is usually completely viable and enjoyable. There are just some interesting builds that dip into another class, or build into multitudes, in order to enable a certain strategy.

It's pretty flexible, really. And it hasn't been completely solved yet, for those who like to brew builds.

>There are just some interesting builds that dip into another class, or build into multitudes, in order to enable a certain strategy.

>Playing a social roleplaying game and building a character who's sole purpose is to execute some "strategic attack" you read about on a forum.

This is what Pathfinder is for.

>when you multiclass all you get are combat abilities
>when you multiclass you only do it for combat abilities
>jumping to conclusions

/v/ plz leave

>You can have fun with any system.
ANYTHING IS FUN WITH FRIENDS. This argument is banal and substance-less and gets repeated every damn D&D thread.

However you can have more fun with less effort using unobtrusive and common sense systems.

> more fun with less effort
>believing in some kind of fun efficiency equation to judge how fun something is

/v/ plz leave

It's easier to get a social game running if the system isn't some overburdened chart-beast like Pathfinder. This is simply factual.

There are a lot of people who don't find accounting/math homework incredibly fun.

Maybe it would be good if you guys could list games you think would be better for Dungeon Fantasy Roleplaying than D&D 5e. I personally like B/X D&D and its derivatives like Labyrinth Lord and Basic Fantasy Roleplaying. Both are free online OP and are VERY simple games that you can literally pick up, read and play within an hour, make characters in 10 mins. Much better for beginners.

>hyperbolic statements slipped into seemingly reasonable claims
>acknowledging the personal preferences of people only in the most insulting way

Truly a fine specimen of /v/ermin.

I realize now that responding to you will only fuel your irrational hatred that you have no doubt convinced yourself isn't trolling. Or maybe you are aware you are a troll? Either way I've already fed you enough.

I hope that this board starves you.

You really aren't cut out for the internets.

Not as good as 4e, but I've had fun playing it. I rank it about even with 3.5, though those two have different strengths.

It's a great game, OP. It's light enough to get into easily and it is getting more popular every day.

For a newcomer to role-playing, D&D does an outright bad job of introducing you to the role-playing part. It's systems don't inherently beget good play in that regard, so you as a player have to put the effort into forcing the role-playing in yourself instead of it coming naturally through a couple healthy mechanics.

D&D is also just downright janky in general, so if you want it to work better you have to houserule it to hell and back, which requires time and effort from the players. A sort of trial and error as you slowly learn more and more about the flaws of a system by playing it, until you get to the point that you drop it entirely and hopefully pick up a different system, if not discarding the entire hobby.

This is pretty depressing.

>You're going to play it no matter what because the brand is heavily advertised.

More like because everyone and dog is playing the damn thing. It has 90% chance of being played in any game store you go to and according to it holds majority online as well.

Between real life friends, Roll 20, and Gamefinder threads, you can fill a (voip) table for pretty much any decent system. In the internet age, you don't have to bow down to popularity to enjoy something. It's wonderful.

>D&D does an outright bad job of introducing you to the role-playing par

Homie, every new person I've introduced to roleplaying could pretend to be a character if their life depended on it. The stats were all that they had and as they started to play and interact with the system the character came out.

>coming naturally through a couple healthy mechanics

Like backgrounds? Or the lore of races? Or the lore of classes? Yeah it'd be great if you had stuff like that to help you figure out what kind of person your character is.

>so if you want it to work better you have to houserule it to hell and back

I started with 3.5 and we never houseruled shit. If there was stuff to break then I guess we were too stupid to find it and so did everyone else we played with so I don't see what the problem is.

Really all your argument breaks down to is "I don't like the system and neither should you." So once again I say

/v/ plz leave.

>you as a player have to put the effort into forcing the role-playing in yourself instead of it coming naturally through a couple healthy mechanics.
You mean like backgrounds?

I'd certainly say 5e is one of the best editions about that sort of thing, if not the best. The inspiration mechanic and how it keys into character traits is effective, plus the starter set characters have well integrated backstories that help illustrate good habits like that in a way you'd (probably) approve of.

>brand is heavily advertised.
I'm not sure I've seen an advertisement for D&D 5e outside of a few banner ads for Neverwinter, which in my eyes only half counts because of adventure season tie-in stuff. Well, also a placard or two saying an FLGS did organized play.

>/v/ plz leave.
If you can't stand to talk to people who disagree with you, maybe you're the one that should take a walk.
While I have your ear: What, you think nobody can look back on time spent and consider it not having been worth it unless they're from /v/?

They work for experienced players, but for newbies backgrounds are entirely fluff with no mechanics to enforce or encourage it. In that regard I think gurps does it very well and simply.

>I'd certainly say 5e is one of the best editions about that sort of thing
Baby steps. Still not what I'd call worth playing.

Most games are good out there if you know what you're shopping for and what each system is selling. 5E is generic to the point it's the swiss army knife of fantasy RPGs. It can be used to create and handle a wide variety of settings if at least the GM has a shred of creativity.

I'm in two games now, one is low magic one is high magic, and both are fun in their wildly different ways, but admittedly that's more the GMs' merit than the system's. At the end of the day, it's the quality of the people you gather that matters. The system is just a tool, and like every tool it's as good as the one who wields it, so we're back to how good your GM/group is.

>GURPS
Ah yeah, as a group of newbies trying out GURPS we all loved floundering around hoping that the points we spent on character background stuff didn't cause us to be god-awful at other stuff that might actually be important in the game.

What? Did you read the book right? Negative character aspects like greed reward you with points you can spend on positive character aspects. The only background stuff that costs points are stuff that give you rewards, like (presently) being a millionaire or being a special snowflake who has ~a rare power~. It's pretty hard to mess up in this regard. Either way I just think it does that right. I don't want to derail this thread. Not that it would matter, this thread is pretty bad.

>improvement over 4e

it's not really even and improvement over 3.5 because at least 3.5 had some options

>with no mechanics to enforce or encourage it
>doesn't give skills
>doesn't give superpower related to the background
>doesn't literally have the player roll a personality for their character
>completely ignores statement about newbies not being able to pretend to be someone else
>completely ignores statement about broken shit not being found, implying that breaking the game requires system mastery which newbies do not have
>"Still not what I'd call worth playing"

/v/ plz leave

Or if you are going to stay don't ignore a point just because it proves you wrong.

Oh right, flaws or "disadvantages" or whatever. Do you grab a bunch so you're a near-braindead quadruple amputee that can use computers AND shoot a gun? Or do you only grab a few and hope that no one asks you to do anything more complicated than tie your shoelaces if it's not directly related to that one skill you dumped your points into?

Y'know, signatures aren't considered kosher on this site.

>but for newbies backgrounds are entirely fluff with no mechanics to enforce or encourage it
The Traits/Ideal/Bond/Flaw system and unique Features are hardpoints that are immediately contingent on roleplaying and character development. That is to say, they're not intrinsically mechanical, but they directly translate into mechanical bonuses and benefits--but only if you're actually roleplaying.

Backgrounds do have other mechanical elements, though: namely, it's where most characters will get half their noncombat proficiencies.

can you reword this

Dang it user your ridiculous strawman has left me wanting to play a 0 point game with no disadvantage limit. In regular games with sensible point limits, what you're saying isn't ever a problem, but you know that.

>but you know that
Eh, he might not. They could easily have had their first GURPS experience curbstomped by someone who either pretended to know what they were doing or severely overestimated their own cleverness and thought they were doing something interesting by subverting the game's design.

You keep wanting, you know that there isn't a single campaign idea worth the time and effort required by players and GM to make GURPS worth anyone's time versus a system actually designed for it in the first place.

But you know that.

Look, if you want in on my games that much, just ask.

Look I think his GURPS argument is silly but this is just typical "I don't understand GURPS" drivel.

Enforce no, suggest yes. Pretty much all classes and archetypes are 1-20 viable if "best at what they do," although some of them are *very* niche. (In some parties, a Beastmaster Ranger is worth their weight in gold. In almost all parties they trail every other build when it comes to damage and every other Ranger build when it comes to utility. Plan accordingly.)

They did not, however, completely nerf multi-classing. There are some strictures involving minimum attributes and pick order, but for the most part the multi-classing is still powerful and rewarding in its own right and produces some distinctly fun and interesting builds.

The main thing now is to figure out where you are trying to go and then figure out how to get there, not the other way around. Canned Cleric, Eldritch Knight, and Fighter 1/Wizard 19 are all viable but very, *very* different from each other. It's up to you to figure out what you're actually trying to build before you build it.

(Also weird stuff like STR rogue and DEX barb are oddly viable, too, so we're seeing multiple new build ideas within existing classes, as well.)

Peraonally i dislike it a lot. Recently we have been mixing the skill syatem of 3.5 and the core rules of 5 and its way way better. You regain controle over your skills which is fantastic, because you get defaulted skills in 5e so thats the main downside for me.

Play Dungeon World instead

You say it doesn't give mechanics

Backgrounds give a bunch of skills and proficiencies, they give the character a unique (usually) roleplaying specific power, and even a handy list to roll on to form a personality.

I just want people on Veeky Forums to stop being such fuckheads for no reason.

Well, Dex barb is pretty shit compared to Str barb due to most of it's features only working on strength attacks.

It's actually a bit of an issue I have with 5e. After 4e where every class had variable secondary stats based on build the 5e classes feel a bit locked in. Like how every single melee class runs on dex or strength. 4e had melee options for literally every single stat but for some reason even Bladelocks don't get Cha to hit with the magic blade.

In regards to that, some systems have you do "self-control" checks if a personality flaw would overtake or more overtly influence your decision making. That's a mechanical role-playing thing, to remind those that find it hard to act it out themselves (Typically new players) that they should keep their character's personality in mind.

People have a right to disagree. D&D hate isn't exactly a foreign concept if you haven't noticed.

People have the right to disagree.

People also have the right to call you out if you are a fuckhead twat.

I think I'm nice to tell them to go to a place full of fuckhead twats so at least they can be in friendly company.

Chill.

You see, for me that's training wheels.

And that's all good and fine, but I personally find them insulting and useless because of the infinite interpretive possibilities of any given personality trait. If anything I'd just say "choose from this list of hyper specific things, there are some general things, and boom there you go" if that.

And in my opinion, putting restrictions on things that are infinitely interpretive is the definition of insanity and causes way more problems than it will solve.

From what I know, there are no statistics to prove things either way so it's all opinions anyway.

Which is why it's stupid to say shit like "X is terrible for roleplaying" because there is absolutely no way to prove that beyond interpretations and opinions.

I am chill, homie. That's why I come to Veeky Forums and have never gone back to /v/. And that's why I'm going to tell people who treat Veeky Forums like /v/ to go back to /v/

Just... lol.

DEX barb is about defense, not offense. It's about being able to play deeper into the enemy line to pick off or disrupt key targets and setup teamwork plays while still dealing enough damage to not be completely ignored. Not every party is going to want to send someone with Mage Slayer in deep or need someone to play Frank who Flanks, but some parties do strongly benefit from it and DEX barb is very good at those roles.

But while not exactly terrible at damage compared to some gimmick builds, it's way behind the damage curve with easily the lowest damage-per-round of any of the melee builds (for that you want a DPR battlemaster or a champion)

Everything is about carving a niche. The lion may be king of the jungle, but drop him off in the arctic and he's just some penguin's girlfriend.

> "self-control" checks if a personality flaw would overtake or more overtly influence your decision making. That's a mechanical role-playing thing...
If you ask me, that's not 'roleplaying', that's a mechanical hook that usurps an opportunity for roleplaying. While it addresses their characterization, I don't see a PC failing a check meaning the player is getting more involved.

Being shitty isn't going to stop them. It's just going to make you worse, and bring out the worst in other people.

Yeah but you are still getting a LOT of your features simply not functioning. It can sorta work but you give up a lot for not really a heap compared to a heavy armour character or a monk.

It's for bad RPers. As they fail checks, they learn to actually role play their disadvantages so the GM doesn't have to make them do obtrusive self control rolls. It's like training wheels. You don't make good players constantly do self control rolls because good players know to act out their disadvantages even if it leads to some trouble.

Nah, I'm confident in the system of

>point out their pointless acts of shittiness
>point out logical fallacies
>tell them to go back to /v/

And I'm feelin like I could do for a little "worsening". Keeps me on my toes.

Also, a bear barb in heavy armor has the same AC but will be dealing more damage.

Rules are rules, and a group that cares about them enough will be able to twist them and change them with homebrewed rules anyway. Finding a good group that you enjoy playing with and roleplaying with is worth far, far more than what mechanics you're working under.

I think this is a good thread to ask.
I have never played a table-top game (apart from simple board-games, I mean) like Dungeons and Dragons before and I'm interested in trying it. What troubles me is that I don't know how to find a group to play with, and what the general rules are.

That's the worst example of a "roleplaying mechanic" you could have given. That's not about guiding new roleplayers, that's about taking control of a character's actions away from the player and giving it to random chance. It's telling a new player "you don't have to roleplay, just let the dice decide what you do" and it's stupid.

>What troubles me is that I don't know how to find a group to play with
Local LGS, facebook groups, gamefinder threads, sites like Roll20. You'll probably run into a lot of shitters, just don't give up.
>and what the general rules are.
Read the book, or read the SRD, or just have the DM explain it to you if you can't even be fucking bothered to do that.

thanks user

You are welcome. Player's handbook should be in the 5e general thread opening post mega links.

A STR bear is 2 AC behind a DEX bear at the cost of a half feat. Barb's don't get heavy armor proficiency and plate is a flat 18 ac versus a 20 for a fully-leveled unarmored defense.

Yeah, it's not going to suit every group. Unless you're sitting around going "man, I wish we could trade a bunch of damage for a nearly-unhittable frontline pseudo-rogue" you probably have no use for them. There's a surprising amount of builds that are viable in the sense that they are very, very good at something that is sometimes very, very useful, but trade away a lot of more generally useful things to get there. Nice to know, but rarely worth putting into play absent a group composition already tilting towards "unwise."

Barbarians can't even rage in heavy armor.

Yeah, by the time you hit 20 CON and 20 DEX, the armored guy will have a +1 or +2 plate.

And, ya know, he had 18 AC since about level 4.

You can. You just usually don't get any benefits. Bear totem, however, doesn't have the stipulation about heavy armor,

The armour guy also does a load more damage and also has the ability to wear magic armour.

Right now there isn't any magic armour equivalent for naked people.

Imo it's ok, didn't take any rist, so isn't really bad neither awesomely good. It has some minor problems, and like always Wotc refuses to fix, but is a good system for beginners.

DEX can come into play with 16 UD and a +2 shield, and bump up to a 17 UD at 4, pocketing the money instead of burning a half feat. At level 8 they're dead even and at lvl 12 the DEX pulls ahead. They both have access to magic shields, so it really comes down to the STR barb needs access to an extra magical item just to catch up. Or, to put it another way, the DEX barb can get the same benefit as +2 armor just by pumping their two primary stats.

However stats are a very, very rare resource. You don't really get a whole heap of them.

Bro tip: If your GM wants to translate any game from any system ever (that isn't already 5e) say NO, if he insists, punch him and flee to never return

Barbarian-type naked people don't need it. As they max their primary stats they get the equivalent of a very rare +2 armor for free. The only way to out-AC them is to get your hands on a legendary +3 armor. If we're talking free legendaries, they could just grab a Defender rapier and shift it all to AC to be 2 AC ahead again.

>At level 8 they're dead even and at lvl 12 the DEX pulls ahead

By 1 point of AC.

Meanwhile, the bear totem had been dealing more damage for the better part of the last 11 levels, and still continues to do so.

>so it really comes down to the STR barb needs access to an extra magical item just to catch up

Considering WBL doesn't exist in 5e, it's more like "the bear totem can actually use all these really good armors you may find, while the dex-barb can't without downgrading his AC".