-snip-
I feel like you probably shouldn't make a judgment on 5e without having actually looked at the Player's Handbook yourself. I mean, yes, compared to the full run of 3.5, it's limited, but we only have the Player's Handbook so far, and it has a lot more options available for characters than the 3.5 PH did. It may not have as many Feats as 3.5, but that's because they got rid the idea from 3.5 that you need a feat for basic competency, so they made feats be things that are actually worth taking instead.
And the classes are designed in such a way that they are varied, like in 3.5, but somewhat balanced, like in 4e. But they're not as balanced as 4e. It's somewhere between 3.5 and 4, so that the wizard isn't just a glorified mook-smasher like in 4e, but he also isn't so overpowered he makes all other classes redundant, like in 3.5.
I did. I read it through a couple times a while back to be sure. It's pretty much exactly what I described: a blend of 3.5e and 4e with some (but not near all) of the 4e stupidity cut, and some of the extreme edges of 3.5e blunted. The discussion on caster spells/day above is a good example of that, and it's one of the better balance changes they made from a perspective of trying to find a lower-power neutral ground.
That said, it's still less versatile both in and out of combat -- Tawa made a good point on that -- not least because it
is partially derived from 4e. Honestly, I'd argue that it's better for RAW to have the potential for absurdity and non-combat adventures that you got with 3.5e, I just think that it should have been expanded beyond primary casters and certain skills. When I say that it's a step between 3.5e and 4e, that's not a good thing, because what 4e did was not a good way to fix balance issues.
Obviously 3.5e has balance issues, but the way to solve them is not to remove potential and make the game less interesting, it's to balance things by bringing
everything up to the same level. 4e is a fairly good example of how perfect balance doesn't necessarily mean a game is good, because all of the classes basically do the same thing with different fluff. Good balance is asymmetrical; look at Starcraft or TF2 as example of how classes/factions can be radically different without one being overpowered compared to the others. Moreover, 4e's focus on the most boring parts of DnD is telling -- the main thing that made dungeoncrawling and random encounters fun for players is giggling about what their build can do, but 4e removed most of the variety, risk, and wow factor from combat.
Exalted in some respects is a good example of how to do a high-power game full of bullshit-hax powers and make it interesting -- moreover, while dealing with problems other than combat.
Heck, look at some of the stories we get out of 3.5e and Pathfinder. Would the Tale of an Industrious Rogue happened in 4e? Would it have been anywhere near as interesting? That's why I honestly think that, while 5e is not necessarily bad as a standalone, and good in comparison to 4e, it's still only a step in the right direction by virtue of moving away from 4e.
Don't nerf casters, give martial and skillful classes better bullshit. Here, take an example class with random ideas off the top of my head: fix the basic problems with monks, give them real bullshit (Haste and a Nerveskitter-like as #/days at # level? Featherfall at 1st or 2nd level at-will instead of that bullshit-long useless slowfall progression? Automatically give them things like arrow-catching, Spiderwalk and Spring Attack as they level? Make Flurry of Blows not suck a barrel of dicks? Better unarmed damage? Better class AC progression? Shift some of the class bonuses to reduce MAD? Let them enchant their bodies? Give them a selection of extra special abilities to pick from: let them choose things like getting massive boosts to dipl/intimidate/bluff checks made in combat, element-typed unarmed damage, at-will Blink, &c.) Stuff like that. Make as many classes bullshit enough to at least make it to Tier 2 classification of "Does a small selection of things really, really well."
Author
Topic: Tabletop Games Thread (Read 196567 times)