What exactly is wrong with D&D 5e...

>If you cram it full of MMO terminology, of course nobody will view it as a RPG anymore

...which MMO terminology?

>I just expect better of the grandfather of RPGs. I want them to innovate, to drive the hobby forward, to be willing to take risks and try new things... Then again, after 4e, I can see why they shirked away from it.

I remember someone describing 5e as everyone's second favorite D&D edition. It is a good system but seems to stretch itself in who it tries to appeal to. It seems popular among those who just want a no-frills D&D game, which is perfectly fine.

On that note, I wish I got into 4e earlier.

>MMO terminology
Hello, child, maybe you don't know that mmo's took those terms from pnp rpgs, not the other way around.
The real issue, as denoted by , is that players these days, weaned on 3e, believe D&D to be something it wasn't UNTIL 3e.
Their skewed viewpoint leads to backlashes against anything that isn't 3e.
The only reason I don't play 5e is because I can pick up my 2e books, cut out the splat glut from the later years, and have the exact same thing without spending money.

>Shadowfell and Feywild were great replacements for Negative and Positive respectively.
They don't replace those planes you doublenigger. Plane of Shadow and Feywild were always there as mirrors of the prime material. Plane of Positive and Negative energy are still there and always will be so long as the planes remain the way they are. 5e doesn't have much info on the planes beyond the DMG because it doesn't expect people to actually go to them.
>casual racism
Yeah, you're on Veeky Forums. Get with it or get the fuck out newfag.

>Then why does nobody cite them as problems?
Because 3.PF's issues were so vast that having a cavilier with a taunt ability or introducing racial 1/day powers were peanuts compared to everything else wrong with the system.

Besides, most people who hated 4e only hated it because it was vastly different that 3.PF, not because it was a poorly designed system overall.

>Plane of Positive and Negative energy are still there
In 4e, no, they expressly were not.
You... don't really know anything about 4e, do you?
It's almost cute.
Alright, pack it in, everyone. This guy is trying to get the thread deleted like the WoD thread.

What's the point of a plane that you can't go adventuring in? Better get rid of all the trash and focus on places that actually provide useful plot hooks to GMs.

Virt is at it again! The madman!

>What exactly is wrong with D&D 5e?
There's a lot of good ideas strewn about its design but it's marred by how lacking a lot of player options are overall.

Like Battlemasters get a shitload of awesome maneuvers and martial dice were a great idea to give Fighters extra umph, but compared to the amount of spell slots a mage gets, they scale too slow to remain relevant and you end up resting more often than the mage does overall.

Then you have to deal with some of the same issues that plagued 3.PF, but on a marginally smaller scale so people don't actually notice the issues, like how mages still run roughshed over the martials but are stopped by concentration checks and how HP bloat is still an issue even though martials can blow their load to take out a chunk of HP.

>In 4e, no, they expressly were not.
What page? Cause in 5e they are left out but more or less in there since the planes are distinctly classified as higher or lower.
Because you still can go to any of them with some degree of preparation. Because some DM's like planescape style of real high fantasy where you go dimension hopping regularly. Because maybe they want to try to add some rhyme and reason why shit works the way it does in case a DM likes to build up on that.

He means having powers that only work a certain amount of times per day even though 3.PF introduced those concepts to D&D in the first place.

You sound like a person who's opinion I should take seriously.

I'd rather play 13th Age or Shadow of the Demon Lord. WotC is a shadow of what they used to be.

I'm not sure how any of that actually relates to my core point.

You're in a game about fantasy adventure. If the game bothers to detail a location, it should be somewhere you can go adventuring. All of the stuff you mention can also still be included, but a lot of the old planescape places were huge, featureless emptiness that only existed for symmetry and the actual interesting places were few and far between. Better scrap the distances and focus on the stuff that's actually fun to interact with instead of just wank pseudo-philosophy.

There's nothing wrong with 5e. It's just a bunch of 4rries being butthurt that people actually like it, unlike their tactical wargame which failed so badly, it literally created Pathfinder.

>What page?
DMG?
Manual of the Planes?
Also, you do know that every edition of D&D changed the cosmology, and the one you are talking about is Forgotten Realms cosmology, which in 5e is the standard setting, whereas the Points of Light setting was standard.

Nothing, it's just boring mechanically, which you won't notice with an enthusiastic group.

Any horror stories about mechanics you hear are 99.99999999999999999999999999995% of the time some butthurt Pathfinder faggot or 3.5 loser trying to 'fight back' against the system that is gradually choking theirs out.

>4rries

But it's 3.5 fanboys who seem to hate it the most. Or 2e grogs.

>Better scrap the distances and focus on the stuff that's actually fun to interact with instead of just wank pseudo-philosophy.
You do realize that travel is part of the adventure. That running into random encounters of cool shit to interact with rather than big, fuckheug set pieces is part of the gameplay style. Some people would rather weave sense and style together rather than string every fucking landmark together by 15 mile intervals.

>Stupid shit literally no one cares about
>A bunch of things that have literally nothing to do with the game or the rules set
>T-T-THE SJWS

3.5 fags everybody

Nuking the OSR created pathfinder.

4e could have been the second coming of Christ and PF would still be a thing.

>*OGL

never drink and post, kids

>You do realize that travel is part of the adventure. That running into random encounters of cool shit to interact with rather than big, fuckheug set pieces is part of the gameplay style.

You don't really run into anything on an infini

The OGL, you mean?

jesus

*You don't really run into anything on an infinite featureless plain.

5e is not bad it's just very vanilla. They have a good base but they aren't really doing anything with it and just leave it to the GMs to homebrew to add flavor to it.
I prefer to play TSR era D&D because it's simple but also has flavor to it, and more than enough things that are actually interesting.

Veeky Forums was pro-nigger in 2006. Get off my lawn.

user, you do know that many of the planes had nothing in them, right, or had any real details about them at all, and existed because they needed to bookend planes?
What you are talking about could easily be found in the elemental chaos.
My players were once meandering thru a portion of the air plane, when, out of pique, I told them that a firestorm of planar energy was bearing down on them. In this firestorm was an efreeti's castle broken away from the City of Brass.
They manage to survive the firestorm by finding an attached "well" of the castle, climbed it, and were in it's basement.
Cue mad adventures.

5E is just an overly elaborate way to codify "roll 1d20, 1-5 fails, 12-20 succeeds, for the rest, plead your case"

I mean yeah, that's how a lot of people play D&D, but I don't know why you need a big book full of rules if you're going to do that anyway.

>Then why does nobody cite them as problems?
Practically every fucking person who criticizes 3e considers them problems, explicitly or not.

>D&D is just an overly elaborate way to codify "roll 1d20, 1-5 fails, 12-20 succeeds, for the rest, plead your case"
Fixed that for you, because that was the case in AD&D (usually), 3e, and 4e (by explicit design).

That's only true at low levels in 3.5. Later everything becomes auto-success or auto-fail.

And it's not true at all in 4E, where all the skill DCs are so wonky that nobody can accomplish anything.

>Later everything becomes auto-success or auto-fail.
That is more the fault of the charop community's mindset of "if it isn't guaranteed to succeed, it's useless".
>where all the skill DCs are so wonky that nobody can accomplish anything.
Stop using the skill charts from the dmg, and use the one in the Rules Compendium.
Further, you need to cotton on to the fact that skill dcs are not keyed to the pc level, but to the level of the opposition. The real problem came from people who cheesed out their skill bonus to absurd heights, then keyed other skills to their cheesed out skill.

wtf i love 5e now!

But seriously, anything that makes someone as dumb and incoherent as you this mad must be a quality product.

Lot of 4e autists

A quick flickering of lights should remove them

>where all the skill DCs are so wonky that nobody can accomplish anything.

That's a first.

They had to increase skill DCs later because things became a bit too easy IIRC.

>The real problem came from people who cheesed out their skill bonus to absurd heights, then keyed other skills to their cheesed out skill.

This, arcana twink wizards were ridiculous.

For the most part, hit it on the nail. 5E isn't the best PnP RPG system, not by a long shot, but it's not terrible either. Its rules are at least semi-balanced (there's no gaping class / spell / creature imbalances in the original material) with a focus on KISS for DM and Player's sake, it is not inflexible in what it can do / how it must be played, etcetera. Most of the complaints I've seen aimed towards it being "WORST GAME EVER!!!1one!" come from 3.5 / PFers who are attached to that system at the hip and dislike, among other things…
1) That casting =/= God Mode and make non-Caster classes irrelevant outside Multi-Class purposes at higher levels.
2) That most people can't stack Skills out the ass anymore leading to the horrific 3.5 / PF Skill Bloat of "Right the party's Level 8 so I'm setting the DC check at 35 so you need someone at least halfway competent in the skill to reliably pass".
3) Seriously, "REEE I'M LEVEL 11 WHY IS THE FIGHTER DOING COMPARABLE DAMAGE TO MEEEEE?"
4) That much of the excel sheet formulas from the 3.5 / PF era mean jack and the difference between tiers (barring a handful of exceptions like Yuan-Ti Pureblood PCs or Berserker Barbarians) is much less noticeable

Again, are there problems? Yes. It's KISS rule set means several options are sorely lacking (Have fun never crafting) and the DM will probably need to house rule things to fix overly simple rules instead of overly complex, and there's a bit of setting dissonance for some of the class / race options (just to name a few issues). But for the most part all the horror stories I've heard about 5E stem from people upset that their Dragonwrought Warforged Psion with six classes by the time they hit Epic has no direct comparison and how their "streamlined" replacement can't even render an optimized Level 20 Fighter irrelevant by the time they get their third ASI.

>several options are sorely lacking (Have fun never crafting)

from what I gather, I think you can be proficient with a set of tools, which includes smithing tools
instead of a Craft (Smithing) skill you just have the tool proficiency instead

at least that's how i got it, but the first time i played i REEEEd at the lack of craft/smithing skill

The rules are inconsistent and flimsy, the designers already admitted they made things purposefully vague.

The mantra of 5e is "DM fiat" which entirely defeats the point of having a rulebook in the first place. They wanted to make DnD more accessible so they made an edition for people who don't care much about rules and mechanics.

The issue is less that you can't craft, more that it's fixed at 5GP / day productivity regardless of level or proficiency bonus or so-on. Meaning that be you a Level 1 or Level 20 Wizard (as an example), you're still going to take ten days to craft a single Alchemical Fire flask.

In addition to balancing the power level, concentration in 5e does negate a large chunk of being creative as a caster though.

Question for the 5e people in the thread. I'm primarily a 3.P player that dabbles in Shadowrun and World of Darkness, and all three have solid and easily understood summoning options that allow for many various flavours of minions.
What if any sort of support is there for that sort of thing in 5e?

>balancing the game means not arbitrarily giving one group overly grand means to swing the game in any one direction, from stacking of spells to item creation
Surprising, that.
None, if the devs have an iota of sense.
PC armies are among the most abusable tactics in all of the games you have mentioned, on top of slowing the game to a crawl.
And I say this as the guy who popped for a force 8 spirit of man with an avenger for a particularly ugly wet run I sorta had to do.

Summoning spells exist. There's also summoning familiars/mounts and some other utility stuff.

You are not going to be going around with armies though. Unless you are a necromancer.

>The only reason I don't play 5e is because I can pick up my 2e books, cut out the splat glut from the later years, and have the exact same thing without spending money.

This, pretty much. It's a solidly designed system that uses some of the core design elements of 3e to sort of reverse-engineer the best of what 2e was, but then just doesn't have much content for it. At all.

2e shows its age a little but has tons and tons of content, some of it very very good. Since my favorite setting is Planescape, I'm pretty much bound to 2e.

>innovation
Let the new stuff be called other name than D&D, because trying to sell cheese labeled "bread" will result in skub like discussing 4e was

Sort-of? I won't deny it prevents certain combinations that use to be staples as far back as the original D&D, but at the same time the main thing it limits is stacking multiple buffs / effects from the same source without the aid of magical items. A number of the spells you'd want to stack together also have a short enough duration (another one of the changes made to balance spells) to last only a single encounter anyways, let alone to get stacked ahead of time.

The bigger issue casters face is that they tend to have some of the worst action economy (comparable to that of Barbarians) due to a lack of Bonus Action actions (that don't rely on spell slots), ways to increase their number of actions / turn (compared to Action Surge or certain class abilities), and their Reaction generally being saved for a Class feature or a specific spell (often Shield). Despite being Level 1, Expeditious Retreat remains an actually not-terrible spell even into higher levels because "Can dash as a bonus action" gives them something to do with their bonus action.

As said, valid things to complain about 5E about, but generally minor gripes and nothing game breaking. Unless "Aren't a god as a caster" is game-breaking for someone, but see earlier 3.5 / PF comment.

>Have fun never crafting
What is yesterday's Unearthed Arcana: Downtime for 50, Alex?

>implying a character wanting to be rewarded for investing in a skillset or artisan tools is arbitrary and unfair

it's less about the car and more about who's your company and where you ride

Necromancy, but nobody likes necromancers coz they take long to move their shit.
"Conjure" spells also let you summon a legion of small critters or a small squad of stronger ones.

>"DM fiat" which entirely defeats the point of having a rulebook in the first place.
You can only believe this if you think book rules are more important than the GM being able to both run the game AND make decisions wisely.
This mindset is ultimately the gift of 3e on tabletop gaming, and it honestly runs counter to the vast majority of games on the market.

UA crafting is still pretty shitty, something simple like melting down a chandelier into 10 silver bullets for a sling will take you 2 weeks.

Nice, I thought WotC wouldn't spend money on shills and focus on development, but I guess that isn't the case.

He's not saying that the GM shouldn't be free to mess with the rules, he's arguing that building an entire system around the idea of the GM being able to ignore the rules is dumb, which I agree with.

You should always try to build a coherent, logical functional ruleset. That a GM can and will ignore and modify things at will is always true, but it's not something you should rely on in your design or use as a crutch.

Aye. Mention it in a survey when next UA comes out so that they fix it when it becomes an actual thing and not "playtest material".

Lay off with the false dichotomy, there's a difference between a DM able to make his own decisions out of his own volition and a DM forced to make his own decisions because the core rules have holes in them.

Has anything from any of the UAs moved from the playtest stage?

5e has it's own drawbacks but is a much more balanced system than 3e or 4e. Martials and casters are better balanced, though still not perfectly. Everyone is better out of combat since the DCs are less stratified so it makes the dice roll mean more than it used to. Honestly every game will still come down to the DM but 5e is more approachable mechanically so it allows people with less time/experience to both play and DM thus bringing more focus to creativity and roleplaying

Not yet.
Well, storm sorcerer, maybe. Whatever was in SCAG.

>More balanced than 4e

Nope.

For the 3 pillars

I agree with those two but wanted to add that this is the reason why Neverwinter Nights was a shitty game. The main story was crap but they gave people tools to make their own game instead of making a good game on their own.

>You should always try to build a coherent, logical functional ruleset
It is functional.
It's just that the vast majority of games do not try to put to rules the things that 3e D&D did, and 3e D&D is the metric most people use (Even ignoring other highlights like SR and WoD already mentioned for being exceedingly crunch heavy).
The GM is obliged to ignore the rules whenever they want, but must also understand when not to. It's rule 0, which I've noticed in many of the game threads that a LOT of people on this board have problems with, along with a general malign towards GMs as a whole.
>the core rules have holes in them.
>implies that since something does not already have a rule written for it, it must be "missing", rather than purposefully not there
2e would drive you fucking nuts then, when it was assumed the DM would in fact use their own best judgment for the many situations not even attempted to be covered by rules, and it was understood that the DM's word was to be accepted at face value rather than be challenged and undermined.

Video games != pnp games, no matter how much people try to make that comparison.
The human interaction element is what makes pnp games, along with an arbitrator that makes decisions based not on preset directives, but whatever serves the game at the time.

>mfw I still play 3.5 because I own all the books
They'll never get another cent from me!

>I loved 4e

Oh boy here we go.

It's also a mirror of 2e in the mindset. 5e is wizards going "holy shit people hated 4e, just make something as unassuming and unhateable as possible" and 2e was tsr going "holy shit people think dnd is Satan, just make something as unassuming and unhateable as possible"

Personally, I find it extremely DM dependent and after playing for two years with very little new content a little repetitive as well. If you got a good group that gets along well it can still be fun to play.

I personally wish there were more items that players can buy or use without needing a DM to give them to you. I understand that they wanted to stay away from the magic item amrket in 3.5 but I wish they'd at least give you the option to buy better healing potions instead of just the basic ones. spending your action to regain 2d4 + 2 hp can help out early game but it's absolutely a wasted turn to use one late game where it's barely a bandage.

But the biggest gripe comes from how slow wotc gives new content for players and DMs to use aside from adventures. And after playing for two years, and playing each class at least once, the player options don't feel that different overall so if you play one class variant, you've pretty much played them all.

5e has potential to be good but it needs more stuff for the players to sink their teeth into or else they will grow bored of it. I finally decided to start wanting to DM a game and when I told my group I'd be using 5e half of them said they'll pass unless I change the game to pathfinder, 4e, or find something different. Our last DM who ran a 5e game was too busy playing overwatch to prepare a session so he wouldn't work on his campaign until the day before or day of the session and it was obvious he didn't have anything really planned. So that put a final nail in the coffin for our group giving 5e a chance.

I still have no idea what to try and run for them. Pathfinder has too much shit and I'm not experienced enough to run it, I know nothing about 4e and so far every other system i had skimmed has had some major fault to it that i know my friends won't want to play the game.

It's a god damn shame if you ask me. 5e could have been great.

3.5 had always been the didn't realize there were other versions version

Repost the post you fags. I wanna laugh too!

What's the difference between an MMO and roll20?

At the end of the day, you and a few other people are still making characters to interact with the world. I mean sure, ttRPG's CAN offer freedom but how much freedom you get is highly dependent on the DM, while in an MMO, the amount of freedom you have as far as mixing different abilities together is much more consistent.

It's the nature of 5e.

Hasbro pushed 4e hard, trying to make it as profitable as a brand as MtG. Regardless of what they did, it was an impossible and unrealistic assessment, and despite making money the game didn't reach their expectations.

5e is very much a budget project. It has a very small amount of money and staff involved and mostly exists as a passion project for WotC and to occupy the brand so they can license it out for more profitable ventures like videogames. It sucks, but it's the economic reality of the situation.

>What's the difference between an MMO and roll20?
Roll20 is an electronic medium that facilitates pnp gaming, which I've already said is incomparable to video games in scope.
This is the first time I've ever seen someone actually try to argue that video games and pnp games are comparable on any real level.

Ultranigger concentaration Pozio Poz, newfaggots, casualisation, Gay Strahd, shitty explansions, lack of lore, cash-in to Neverwinter Online, Beamdog cross-workers, Drizzt Beating Demonignog, THE FUCKING HALFLINGS OH GOD Racemixing half-orcs born consensually, Mongrel men not being Mongrels and Proof of natures mistakes, lower level of lore and writing because pozio, beamdouche and vcirtue signalling leftists.

Also, fucking Giant princesses, it was done already in 3.5 with the Fire Giant Princess and her RIPPED AS FUCK RANGER fuccboi space marine scout, the fuck we need it again for? Why is the Temple of Elemental Evil the Temple of Elemental negros, why the fuck is Strahd bi, unchallenging for Paladins uncaring, undriven for Ireena, why is barovia nigger land and why is there such little Ravenloft content that Van Richten himself has no reason to even be present because what's the fucking point of him if Ravenloft is only barovia and he's got no guides to write because there are no proper dark powers, choice monsters and the like, why are the Vistani Presented as Dindu nothin Blatantly kikes even more so than their 2e guide would give away, and why did they bring Minsc back for a shitty comicbook no one fucking reads to showcase the shitty release of more effortless splatbooks that I've seen better content and detail and lore-knowledge in the likes of the Book of Forbidden Carnal Lusts?

It's shit, it's all shit, fuckign 4e had more effort, and 4e suffered from putting too much fucking effort in without decent quality control. Who the fuck thought Spellplague, Shadowfell and those Far realm changes were a good fucking idea?
>this will be deleted in 4 minutes

I think the total list is Swashbuckler, Storm-origin Sorcerers, Undying Light Warlocks, part of the Tiefling variant, and the "Ranger, Revised" version generally being seen as the superior of the two (but not put out in a book just yet due to being a bit big for most Adventure Books but not enough to justify a PHB recall / reprint).

>Roll20 is an electronic medium that facilitates pnp gaming, which I've already said is incomparable to video games in scope.
By that logic, MMO is just another electronic medium that facilitates roleplay opportunities.
>This is the first time I've ever seen someone actually try to argue that video games and pnp games are comparable on any real level.
That's probably because most people don't care or knows that there's really no difference and the people who argue the most about it are generally elitist who think that their nerd hobby is inherently more legit than another nerd hobby.

>By that logic, MMO is just another electronic medium that facilitates roleplay opportunities.

Well, I guess if you sit down and use the chat function to roleplay with one of you as the DM and its chat has built in roll function, sure.

But that's a bit meta.

This is exactly the kind of attitude that shows a near-total misunderstanding of what makes a good game and game system.

I'm mostly a GURPS player these days, so I don't have a dog in the fighting of the edition wars. But I think this guy has it spot on. 5th is a good game overall. It's great for what it is supposed to be. I preferred 3rd to 4th, but partisans of both editions are watching their favorites dry up and so now are butt hurt. So the whining is mostly sour grapes.

This isnt conpletely bad.

1+1=2 no matter if youre a mathematician or a preschooler

tbqh the lower budget thing is almost kind of working in that we get less releases of higher quality, and if you don't count UAs nothing official has been broken or unusuable like some of the splatbooks of earlier editions. You can maybe look at the yuan-ti pureblood or something but that's fucking nothing compared to earlier edition's problem supplements

Well, I mean, these complaints basically boil down to "Shit that started before 5E", "Fucking SJWs", and "Fucking SJW shit that started before SJWs was even coined as SJW". I don't think you can even pin this post on 3.5 / PFers at this point and more "My shit don't smell" + "Non-whites? In my official material? REEEE!" Next thing you know the original poster is going to complain that Zakharans in the Al-Qadim setting didn't resemble the Francs.

>By that logic, MMO is just another electronic medium that facilitates roleplay opportunities.
Incorrect, as video games are inherently limited by orders of magnitude.
What you are saying is that preselected choices with no variation is equal to full variation limited only by the human imagination.
Your sole argument is that preselected creativity by committee can occasionally surpass what a singular individual/s can create, but the limitations of one do not exist for the other while both have the same strengths.
You are playing devil's advocate for the loser side of a long finished battle, user.

>This is exactly the kind of attitude that shows a near-total misunderstanding of what makes a good game and game system.
This.
I've played a lot of different games, many good for their own reasons even if I don't particularly like them (gurps, owod, besm), and this idea that a game must have X or it's shit is incredibly foreign to me.

>Well, I guess if you sit down and use the chat function to roleplay with one of you as the DM and its chat has built in roll function, sure.
Are you so inept that don't use voice? Also, you don't need dice because action resolution is already handled by the mechanics of the game.

Honestly, one could argue that it's purer roleplay because the time that would be spent planning out the setting, NPC's, quest, etc. is already handled by the game, meaning that you can spend more time roleplaying and the mechanics are consistent enough to where you don't have to double-check every other minute with the DM to ask "so hey, can I use X in this way to do Y?"
>Incorrect, as video games are inherently limited by orders of magnitude.
Honestly, a shit DM is way more limited in comparison to most MMO since an MMO is consistent in what you can or cannot do while the effectiveness of anything will always be dependent on the whims of the DM.

>This is exactly the kind of attitude that shows a near-total misunderstanding of what makes a good game and game system.

I agree with him in the sense that I prefer rules-like language massively to natural language when describing rules.

Otherwise, I agree that it strikes a good balance with what it has described in its rules and what the DM needs to rule on.

Yeah that's a shame. I'm super dissapointed our last DM killed any interest in our group wanting to play 5e. I read the rules, learned most by heart and now my friends don't want to play it.

I knew we had been growing bored of 5e, but our last DM's lack of preparation made the game so god damn boring. It started off great, we had awesome characters and had a blast roleplaying them but after overwatch started getting popular in our group, the sessions started lacking anything for our characters to do and aside from our dialog between our characters there was nothing for us to attach ourselves too.

If our last DM hadn't have completely ran a campaign with no work put into it at all, maybe my friends would have been open to me running my first game in 5e. But damn. That last session was such a slog and was so boring players began dropping out and eventually the campaign was killed.

I sweat if they give it another chance i can find a way to make it more fun. I know one player still probably won't join because he likes the crunch of 3.5 and pathfinder but I might be able to convince the others with a little help. I just don't want all this time I spent reading and rereading the rules to run my first 5e game be for absolutely nothing.

The majority of what our group loves to do that keeps us playing campaigns is our character interactions not the game mechanics. So since the 5e game was boring, they feel like any more games will be just as boring so i really really want to convince them to give it another chance. I'm even allowing them to come to me with homebrew classes they can find but so far nobody seems interested.

Are you really so stupid that you didn't catch that I was saying that you use the MMO as ghetto Roll20?

>Also, you don't need dice because action resolution is already handled by the mechanics of the game.

I want to climb over a wall in WoW.

>Oh no! I can't even attempt it because invisible walls! I can just jump in place!

I want to try digging a trap.

>Does your class have "dig trap" ability? Nope? I guess not then.

I want to parlay with the pirates. Take one live, maybe

>They attack the moment you enter aggro range and die the moment the HP runs out.

>implies that since something does not already have a rule written for it, it must be "missing", rather than purposefully not there

Not sure if youre either trolling, never played 5e, or are just stuck with a negative int mod, I stated that the core rules have holes in them, whether that was intentional or not doesn't matter nor does it imply one way or another.
Noone is arguing against DM judgement here, but the rules should not rely on the DM to have them make sense, and players should expect a certain degree of consistency, which is quite hard to achieve if the DM cant even rely on the rulebook.

That was not what I was trying to say, I meant it in a way that you should have a good base game and not a half ass one and expect people to modify it. If I wanted to modify a game to my needs, I would honestly just play GURPS

Again, if you're playing with a shit DM, you wouldn't really be able to do any of those things anyways.
>I want to climb over a wall
"Uh...you can't, the wall has no handholds and it's guarded 24/7."
>I want to try digging a trap.
"Okay, you spend an hour digging a hole that's only two feet deep, now let's move on to something more exciting."
>I want to parlay with the pirates. Take one live, maybe
"They ignore your attempts at diplomacy, roll initiative!"

Hell, with how wonky the skill system is in certain editions, you can actually find more versatility in WoW than playing as most martial characters.