D & D 5th edition: experiences.

Post Reply New Topic

With the beta of D and D 5th edition being out, the question is how does it compare to 3.5, 4th edition and Pathfinder? I'm finding the roleplaying experience to a lot better than 4th, 4th edition gives out a very mmorpg kind of feel. My major complaints of 5th edition, it is more d and d 3.75 than d and d 5th edition.

The source of effective (e.g., "Fun") role-playing lies within you, not the rules.

This is very true. The Beholder that surprised us while we were fighting a slime mold was one of the most terrifying things I had ever experienced... All with the pre-AD&D rules.

It seems to me the willingness to actually role-play and the skill of the DM in weaving a tell and dropping in atmospheric detail are the key things.

I stopped caring about DnD after reading the first few pages of the 4th Edition Player's Handbook.

Wizards Of The Coast: Proof that Chaotic Evil exists in the real world.

IMO, the best thing would be if White Wolf would buy the entire DnD franchise and change DnD's six-ability-score set to the 9-ability-score set of World of Darkness.

Having 3 physical, 2 mental and only 1 social ability score (as opposed to 3 of each in WoD) means that the rule system is not really designed to support role-playing.

^You're confusing Role-playing with "Roll"-playing. Creativity does not depend on dice rolls, but on a player's imagination.

I can take any character with average stats and have more fun with it than any munchkin can with his or her min-max character (psionic cyborg alien mutant ninjas, anyone? ). While the other players are delving through their rule books for the exact rule that will allow their characters to dominate the game, my characters would step up and do something 'stupid' that would set the action going in unexpected directions. The DMs loved me for it, and usually tossed a few extra XPs to my PC just for creativity alone.

I just DM'd a game with my son and a friend of his using the rules in the 091913 Playtest.

Lured by promises of gold into a dangerous expedition into the unknown, a young, inexperienced and unlikely pair of adventurers got more than they bargained for today. Ragnar was a level 1 mage and an outcast from among the Hill Dwarves and Aelric was a level 1 ranger Wood Elf. They were told that Ragnar was needed to do something magical when he got to a certain place in the wild and Aelric was to make sure he got there in one piece. The road ahead was blocked by Orcs and they had a battle that convinced them to try another route and also that magic can be quite effective for self-defense. A trek across open country to an isolate farmstead convinced them that something evil had taken root in the North. A few more Orcs and a band of skeletons later, and they were ready to level up. A very good time was had by all.

We've really just skimmed the surface. So far, the new rules seem just fine. I like the advantage/disadvantage idea.

My group did a playtest last year. I didn't care for it. The advantage/disadvantage system (or at least as it existed then, I have no idea if it has changed) was completely arbitrary when one understands how probability works. The wizard was able to cast magic missile at will, and the fighter I played had an OP ability that guaranteed a minimum damage as well. It feels like something designed for WoW players.

The playlist is actually a test so different versions are different. The goal is to try things out and tweak in response to feedback from the testers.

I don't think probability has much to do with it. A DM is there to make sure the game has certain core features: Bilbo doesn't die in Mirkwood, Aragorn decides to go through the mountain and face all that he is heir to...

The DM sets up opportunities for the right things to happen with a degree of chance, but this is not an open world simulation. Having the bad guys kill the party at the first encounter does not make a good game. Wizards should not be triffled with. Having just 6 hit points and no armor, I like giving the poor guy magic missile.

But the point is, does the scaffolding support the mutual creation of a story? The result our test was: yes, it does.

This comment has been in the back of mind for a while. I am now procrastinating from something else, so it's become impossible to ignore this!

I studied probability in school and I don't quite see your point.

As I understood it, Advantage means you get two rolls and take the higher while disadvantage means you take two rolls and take the lower. You are therefore at an advantage when you have "advantage" and a disadvantage when you are in that condition...
Can you explain why this is such a bad thing?

So, I played a D&D Encounters session at the local hobby shop tonight.

This was the last part of Murder in Baldur's Gate and I used a pre-gen Half Elf Paladin, a minstrel with massive strength and a low dex. We played with Next rules.

It was a blast. The DM was great, the players were great and the rules helped the story along without getting in the way.

I will be taking my kids along for a game this Sunday.

I was a brand new player in the waning days of 4rth edition. I played 1 campaign of that, then the shop I went to switched to playtesting 5e. I loved it so much that now that I'm away at college, I have made the decision that the role playing club is basically dead to me until they can run 5e games. (and I have the time for it).

5e is awesome

Well said! You'd fit in well in my group.

If you have a good (i.e. not railroady) DM, by far, the most important stat is Charisma but even that isn't necessary.

My group has a guy who loves to do that. He plays an insane atheist cleric with one arm. I'm not kidding!

Humor me, what is this advantage/disadvantage that everyone speaks of? I live in the middle of nowhere and know nothing of 5th edition as a result.

A DM can determine that certain moves put a player or npc at Advantage or Disadvantage--or certain class moves etc. may dictate advantage or disadvantage. The Rogue move "sneak attack" for example, gives the rogue a chance to do massive additional damage in certain circumstances--but the attack is always at disadvantage.

The basic idea is that you roll twice. If you have advantage, you take the higher of the two rolls.
If you have disadvantage, you take the lower of the the two rolls.

That's it: two chances to succeed with advantage, two chances to fail with disadvantage.
All other modifiers stay the same.

The rolls are independent. It has exactly the same outcome and probability distribution as just rolling once and using that result. A modifier would have at least made sense.

Methinks thou art unschooled in the arcana of the binomial distribution.

A wisdom or intelligence check, DC17, plus googling "Binomial Distribition" or "Bernouli Distribution" will reveal the mystic truths to the seeker. Without Google or a maths geek at your side, you make this check with DISADVANTAGE.