*fixes 5e*

*fixes 5e*

Attached: Xanathar's_Guide_to_Everything_(LQ).jpg (381x499, 66K)

Other urls found in this thread:

dndwithpornstars.blogspot
dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1129528
youtu.be/boPLUivcDQw
web.archive.org/web/20160311225037/http://angrydm.com/2014/09/dear-wotc-why-do-you-suck-at-selling-games/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

sell me on it

$20 worth of content for double the price.

beat you to it

Attached: 4e.jpg (764x1000, 349K)

>2 * 20 = $28


It's okay. Has some cool stuff in it. Still prefer Shadow of the Demon Lord.

*momentarily kills D&D*
*lets paizo take over*

>Arcane Archer is garbage
>Samurai gets needlessly nerfed
>Inquisitive Rogue gets two literally useless abilities
>Hexblade assures that no proper fix for Bladelock will ever be printed while simultaneously making powergaming Warlock dips for EB spam even more lucrative
>Also the Aspect of the Moon invocation creates the Coffeelock (Sorcerer/Warlock multiclass capable of generating infinite spell slots at level 5, given enough time)
>AL's PHB+1 rules means pointless reprints like Mastermind and Sun Soul
>All the racial feats suck except Elven Accuracy which only leads to cheese and maybe Prodigy (the only good thing given to humans but of course Half-Elves get it too because why not make them better than humans yet again)
>Tenser's Transformation (a.k.a. Let Me Invalidate the Fighter: the spell) crawls out of the shithole that is 3.5
>Steel Wind Strike is a spell perfectly designed for EKs and ATs... but they can't get it. Wizard gets it though, because why the fuck wouldn't wizards get every single spell, especially ones that are martial powers but with another coat of paint?
>Healing Word singlehandedly breaks any and all healing economy and the devs say it's fine
>15 pages of random names nobody asked for
I love the shit out of XGtE and think it's a great book overall that adds a lot of fun stuff to the game, but this is Veeky Forums and we don't come here to talk about things in a positive light.

*becomes the best selling edition of D&D before 5e*

Heh...you really wanna keep going?

>>$28
plus tax

Man, I don't know where you live, but a 40% tax seems STEEP.

Not really fair to pin the tax amount on the vendor when they don't get any of it.

Is that why it has the shortest edition run prior to 5e?

40% VAT would be steep
40% overall taxation (income + VAT + customs) is normal in Eurolands

So 5e does Unearthed Arcana as free online they regularly add to. This is Unearthed Arcana, but a physical book you pay for. Some of it is new, but most of it is straight from Unearthed Arcana.
And as with the AD&D Unearthed Arcana and 3e Unearthed Arcana books, it's a low quality money-grab.

This place is filled with hate and suffering.

Attached: Painful.jpg (426x288, 31K)

pages of random names nobody asked for

Fuck you, I need them, otherwise I end up with stuff like Candy the Drow

5e's main issue is that the PHB classes and subclasses feel lackluster despite being presented in a great way
XGE brings to the table a bunch of polished options that were part of unearthed arcana in the past and puts them in a single place, and adds a lot of new player options outside of what they can do with classes by giving you ideas and clear uses for tool proficiencies and whatnot, also grabbing UA downtime and expanding a bit upon it

it also gives you a bunch of DM tools to make Traps easier to handle and more interesting to design, and tables for random NPC names and a bunch of other small shit

AND it's really pretty, it has a lot of really good illustrations that really nail the feeling that D&D should have

The Forge was a mistake.

dndwithpornstars.blogspot /2018/03/the-impossibility-of-fastball-special.html
dndwithpornstars.blogspot /2018/03/the-plottist-in-westworld-what.html

Good.

>*becomes the best selling edition of D&D before 5e*

That is likely true, BUT there is a giant issue with that: 4e & 5e need a lot of books to run.

There is good reason to believe that the single most sold D&D product ever is the Mentzer Box set. That is a whole core system as one product.

dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1129528

That is just for the old print, Wotc did a reprint of it a few years ago and it did very well then.

Not saying 4e or 5e are bad, just pointing out that the most played version of D&D is likely neither of those.

Fuck off, Zak.

Not him and I think he's asleep right now, but do you have counter arguments?

Attached: ad_hominem.png (664x600, 324K)

Only for bad things.

How does Tensers work?

You get proficiency with armour but you can't cast it while wearing armour?

>the most played version of D&D is likely neither of those.
That's a different ball again, do you count the people who bought Basic, played it a bit, then moved on to AD&D in that?

Attached: 1508822371351.jpg (374x481, 89K)

'Twas just a joke. I haven't finished reading the essays yet. So far they seem solid, if a bit wordy.

How much is there really to fix in 5th edition?

I can think of lots of things I'd have preferred to see (I for one think the fighter should have been a mini-Tome of Battle, with paladin as an archetype), but little that's outright broken; the whole thing seems pretty functional.

The only major things I can think of is that the modifiers are too small for my liking, making things swingy, especially in regard to skills that a character is allegedly good at. Also, as a player, you don't really get that much agency over how your character develops. CR is pretty much worthless, but that's nothing new, and there's probably some other small things I could nitpick.

Overall, though, the system is fine. A little bland, I think, but perfectly serviceable.

Not much aside from the slightly boring martials. But people on the internet really like to get mad about stuff. Especially if they don't really play the game.

Its perfectly serviceble, but like most systems it benefits on being tweaked to the groups specifications

For me I'd lower HP across the board and make combat a little more dangerous, but I prefer that playstyle in general. Changing the proficency modifiers at low levels too would be good, as it stands now a ranger thats a trained tracker is barely (if at all) better than a cleric who's lived in an cloister all their life at survival skills assuming your average build for each.

Allow this for fighters and you're good to go tbqh famalamadingdong

Attached: Beyond Damage Dice.pdf (PDF, 3.65M)

>Candy the Drow
youtu.be/boPLUivcDQw

Murder Suicide for one

The fuck is this. Save or stun everyturn, ignore armor at low levels, save or 0 movement every round? This shit is hilarious. 10/10 would play.

Reminds me of BECMI Weapon Mastery where Fighters get Save or Suck attacks all day every day. This shit is good.

>the only edition to be unprofitable
>is redeemed because of one tweet about quantity of sales that contradicts distributor data

There are several conditions you can use to count 4e as "outselling"

First you have to discount all 3rd party including Pathfinder, which is basically 3.501 so it does feel a little disingenuous.

Then, total money earned, not profit, but total earned due to inflation and online subscribers and a larger market population should be higher.

Lastly, the distributor data is vague and WotC doesn't release sales information, but I think realistically you might even see 4e core books outselling 3.5 core books, even if the total book sales were much less.

That is awesome, but it reminds me of how much I want everyone to be a battle master.

This shit looks good. Thanks I'll probably use some of that.

>That is awesome, but it reminds me of how much I want everyone to be a battle master.
I already give every martial at level one access to a modified martial adept feat. They get 2 or 3 maneuvers and 3d6 as martial superiority dice. They also learn 1 more maneuver at levels 3,7,10,15 and get 1 extra superiority die at level 10 if I remember correctly. This way, everyone gets to do cool maneuvers but a battle master will get much more maneuvers and better superiority dice.

Attached: 1519444721764.jpg (500x667, 38K)

>5e Beholders and Illithids
>Good
They're absolute trash, and a fucking disgrace before Dragon 330, Lords of madness, and the Illithiad.
Above all else, this "abstract beholder" Tyrant spawn crap is the worst of all, but the biggest offender?

THE FACT THAT THIS FUCKING FORGOTTEN REALMS BEHOLDER IS STILL ALIVE.

NO- I DO NOT CARE IF HE'S THE SECOND, HE IS A VIDEOGAME CHARACTER FROM A DUNGEON CRAWLER NOT A SINGLE CASUAL HAS PLAYED, HE DIED IN THE COMICS, HE DIED IN THE VIDEOGAME, HE NEVER MANAGED TO BITE OF HIS TONGUE AND REPRODUCE, HE IS OLD AS BALLS.

See this? THIS is Xananathar, and almost everyone in this image, even the Drow women are fucking DEAD.

Attached: tumblr_nmwgbnYuCy1tpri36o1_1280.jpg (640x905, 78K)

Uhh, you do know that, due in part to Beholder Backstabbery and behaviour, they bullshitted "Xanathar" into being a title, rather than an individual name, right?

I mean, he could be dead, this is just a guide he had written.

Attached: 1493943936285.png (886x660, 451K)

In addition to what everyone else said the rest system needs to seriously be reworked if you want to put pressure on your players resources and meaningful character customization is pretty lacking at least in the phb

Modifiers are low because advantage/disadvantage is a thing and you should be using stuff to give yourself advantage.

There shouldn't be only a 10% difference between someone trained and untrained in a skill

The problem is that there are just flat out better d20 games you could play instead

I vaugly remember this happening but don't remember the specifics, could you tell me how and why this wrecked 4e?

Still DnD. Still shit.

Hi VH

>they brought back Tenser's Transformation

Attached: 1515651472790.jpg (704x710, 30K)

>meaningful
I don’t think you are aware what this word means.

Yeah, but advantage and disadvantage is a sloppy mechanic that scales with the target number. Yes, the alternative system had its flaws as well, but we have to stop pretending that advantage/disadvantage is objectively superior in every way.

Tenser's Transformation:
>10 minutes, concentration
>can't cast spells
>50 temporary hit points
>advantage on simple/martial weapon attack rolls
>deal 2d12 extra force damage on a weapon attack
>proficiency in all armor, shields, simple/martial weapons
>proficiency in Strength and Constitution saving throws
>Extra Attack feature
>DC 15 Constitution saving throw or gain exhaustion when the spell ends

Donning Armor:
>shield: 1 action
>light armor: 1 minute
>medium armor: 5 minutes
>heavy armor: 10 minutes
>can't cast spells while wearing armor you're not proficient in

You probably won't be wearing much armor unless you have a something that can bypass the donning time, but I can't think of anything like that that yet exists in any official material.

3.pf has ruined skills for so mamany people.

Proficiency has a much greater weight when you don’t just roll for everything endlessly and let everyone in the group constantly try and roll for checks. It’s not even how you should do skill checks, but so many people just run it like 3.pf recommends where you just roll until you get the result you need. That’s the most boring way to do things.

You should roll a single check once, and if that roll fails you shouldn’t get to just keep trying over and over. That’s how a game works; you didn’t find tracks so you need to figure out what else to do, no one can manage to pick that lock or disarm that track, the opinion of the court sours, etc. This doesn’t mean you can’t make multiple checks in a scene, but it does mean that you need to plan them out as a team and put your best foot forward.

All that does is obscure the problem, not fix it.

That's not why proficiency is bad, at low levels the bonus is too small to for what someone trained in a skill ought to have

You don't seem to understand what he said

>Steel Wind Strike is a spell perfectly designed for BLADESINGERS
FTFY

that has nothing to do with the post youre replying too

If anything, it makes it worse since with fewer rolls the randomness of the dice come out more.

5E doesn't excactly have in depth character customization though, mechanically your character is their weapon choice, archetype, and spells if you're a spell caster, everything else is just fluff since skills are so weak

The difference between someone with and without a bonus gets smaller when you roll more dice assuming you have better than 50/50 odds, that being said a 10% higher chance of success is piss poor for someone that supposedly trained in a skill

i think proficiency should be used for auto succeeding on basic things associated with the skill

your proficient in athletics and want to climb that rope securely attached at the top of the cliff? dont need to roll you automatically do it, but the rest of yall have to

your proficient in history and ask if you know about the noble lineage of a neighboring kingdom? you got it no problem

That's not the RAW so it's not really relevant to the quality of 5E, it does fix a lot of problems though, when you have players roll it's still a problem though

I think it should give you extra dice to roll so you get more mileage out of the pitiful modifiers.

More dice means the difference between those with and without modifiers shrink though, unless you mean only those with the skill get extra dice

Proficiency should equal character level so a level 2 gets +2 while a level 6 gets +6 etc.

have it transform 1d20 into 2d12.

It's still only a 20% difference between someone untrained and someone trained with a +3 bonus

>unless you mean only those with the skill get extra dice
What else did you think I could mean? 5e was all about not having big numbers, so instead you can add extra dice to create a curve where difficulty targets are still difficult and there is still a chance of failure, but a skilled character can reliably perform routine tasks.

>Not saying 4e or 5e are bad, just pointing out that the most played version of D&D is likely neither of those.
I think 5e almost certainly holds the vast population, with 3.5/pathfinder holding kind of a niche, insular community.

Although, that depends on if you coun't "most played right now" or "most played total", in which either 3.5/pathfinder or advanced dnd would take it, primarily from just being around for longer.

I'd rather proficiency started larger but grew at the same pace, level one characters should be competent

The math still doesn't add up, RAW anyone can get advantage and with advantage the difference caused by static bonuses gets smaller, plus advantage isn't big enough of a bump

Generally speaking the DM sets the DCs to always have the same kind of chance to succeed or not, it's just that it breaks down when other people with different modifiers attempt the same roll.

Personally I don't really mind other people also being good at tasks. Definitely prefer it to playing a paladin in pathfinder at medium levels and being entirely incapable of anything other than swinging my sword and maybe perception

Ideally I'd prefer kind of a medium between the two with reasonable amounts of numbers, which pathfinder 2e looks to be going for.

So what's your take on the situation, princess (male)?

Characters should have a decent number of things their good at but the difference between someone with and without a skill should be significant. I think you're problem with pathfinder is that paladins have way fewer things they're good at than would be fun or realistic

Play a better d20 system or homebrew higher skill bonuses at level 1

If you pay anything more than $0 then you're a chump though

I'd pay for books if they were actually worth it even if I could pirate them

You are have to post proof for this claim

iirc there was a post by wizards claiming this or something but it's unclear if they're were just lying to make 4E look more popular than it was. It's not really relevant to the quality of 4E as a game though, popularity isn't a good metric for them quality of a game

Market share is a better indicator than sales imo, and 4e totally failed at that

>5e has already outsold 4e
>5e has the most active players of all time
I don't really think we need to keep going, do we? Feel free to step off the contrarian bandwagon anytime, you can go back to disliking 4e and thinking 3.PF is the best thing ever like you did before 2014.

Yea, because Bladesingers could use this but Eldritch Knights and Arcane Tricksters couldn't.

It's still a better game than 3.5 and 5E. It did perform really poorly though

>We were talking about the growth of D&D over the various editions. And Mearls explained to (without giving any solid numbers) that each edition of D&D had been successful. D&D had enjoyed a steady growth over all the various editions. More people were playing D&D every year and with each new edition. And that seemed like good news, so I asked the question that came naturally to me. “If that’s true, why are you scrapping 4E so soon and moving on to 5E?” I didn’t want to keep 4E, mind you. I’m not a fan of 4E. But if 4E had been successful and maintained the steady growth of D&D, it seemed like mothballing D&D for a two-year development cycle so quickly was weird decision. And here’s what he explained to me.

>Mearls said that, even though the growth of D&D had been steady, something else had changed. In the prior five or ten years (remember, this was two years ago), there had been an explosion of people in geeky hobbies. More people than ever before were playing video games and MMOs, reading comics, watching comic and sci-fi and fantasy movies, watching anime, playing card games, playing board games, doing cosplay, attending conventions, and all that other crap that we gamers do aside from playing games. It was suddenly cool to be a geek. There were huge numbers of new geeks in the world. And every one of those new geeks was a potential D&D player. But D&D wasn’t nabbing them. Somehow, D&D’s growth remained as steady as ever.

web.archive.org/web/20160311225037/http://angrydm.com/2014/09/dear-wotc-why-do-you-suck-at-selling-games/

Interpret that however you like. It sounds to me like 4e wasn't particularly successful but nor was it a devastating flop.

But it IS objectively superior in every way. Just because it isn't perfect doesn't mean that proficiency+mod+advantage/disadvantage into gated accuracy isn't the most functional system yet, even if it is a bit boring.

Theoretically it works but proficiency and mods offer to low a bonus imo. The math in 5E is just bad

Name literally one that "flat out better" doesn't ultimately boil down to "my personal preference". I'm quite interested, Mr. Quads.

Reminder RPG market tripled in size in 3 years after 5e's release

I mean aesthetics are subjective but a lot of other d20 games do a better job at being traditionally good

>Not really fair to pin the tax amount on the vendor when they don't get any of it.

They know what their taxes are. At the end of the day they're the ones choosing the price-point.

Practically, it functions just fine. I've been running games in 5e pretty consistently since it dropped, and the only problem - of the multitude of issues that Veeky Forums insists are game-breaking, unavoidable, and common - that I have encountered is that CR is probably undertuned, which is easily fixed by using the tables provided in the DMG to increase difficulty on curve with what has been designed into the game.

Okay. Name literally one, Mr. Trips. I am actually interested. I am very tired of hearing [PLETHORA OF THINGS]. Please give me the specific name of a particular game in question you are thinking of that is "better" at being "traditionally good". While you're at it, you should probably define "traditionally good", since I'm not sure which tradition of the many that exist in d20 table top you're referring to.

Could you tell me what you use 5E to run. I could name plenty of games that are better than 5E in their niche but I that for this argument I should give you a game that does what you use 5E for but better

Yeah, 5e kind of got rid of the whole 'builds' thing.

Although, like, I *really* wouldn't want to see pathfinder tier minmaxing with ten billion obscure rogue talents and traits and racetraits and subrace traits and metamagic feats and so on and so forth.

It feels like for the majority of pathfinder/3.5 players, character building is the actual game being played, with roleplaying, adventuring and combat with other people in sessions just sort of being an excuse to test out your moontouched half-waterorc fey-kind arcane rager 2 bloodsnarler 7 crimson blade 3 that they spent so many hours and splatbooks designing.

>I'm quite interested
Tactical goodness? D&D 4e.

Zero-to-hero campaign full of logistics and planning and warfare? BECMI/Rules Cyclopedia or AD&D.

Light, breezy game with a lot of characters? Shadow of the Demon Lord.

Narrative/Story driven? 13 Age.

Gritty meat grinder with a good payoff and psychedelic mixes of sci-fi and fantasy? Dungeon Crawl Classics.

I think character customization is important if you want your character to be defined as more than just his class and equipment mechanically. I agree with you that pathfinder style optimization is bad though since it ironically restricts how you build your character by making some options flat out better than others, I think that's more of a balance problem though

>Shadow of the Demon Lord.

I just use this as the 5e stand-in. Even if I'd run 5e, I'd think about nabbing its bane/boon system.

I think there's a certain amount of wiggle room between how much you define your character mechanically and how much you define them just by roleplaying it out.