89
I recommend this video to look more into OSR philosophy regarding the rules: https://www.youtube.com/live/bCxZ3TivVUM?si=aZ-y2U_AVjn9a6Ua
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2023
89 points (70.0% liked)
RPGMemes
10272 readers
169 users here now
Humor, jokes, memes about TTRPGs
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I don't find 5e bloated exactly. But I do think it has a few too many systems in place, sometimes with overlapping use-cases.
Like attacks, skill checks, saves... They're all basically the same thing, an opposed check, but they have slightly different rules. Sometimes the player is rolling against a target, but sometimes the target is rolling to save against? It's a little strange, and adds a bit of extra complexity where I don't really think it's necessary.
A lot of it is just legacy systems that are kept because it wouldn't be D&D without them.
That's why I enjoy Weird Wizard and Demon Lord. They streamline this overlap pretty well and removed the bloat
Also because if they made a simple system, they wouldn';t be able to sell more books.
This introduces confusion in new players like "sorry cat's grace only applies to dex skill checks, not saves". Which then makes them think all RPGs are a convoluted stack of exceptions, so they don't try other games.
It's nice so you can strategize and not just roll against a high ac all the time.
You could force a Dex check against a slow tank or an intelligence save against an authoritarian.
I'm not complaining about having different kinds of opposed checks. I like that there are lots of different things to target, in fact I wish different kinds of checks were more accessible so that combat was more varied.
I just find it weird that they have different game mechanics. Like, attacking has the player rolling against a defender's static DC. Except actually sometimes the defender rolls to save against an attacker's static DC? And Dex saves are actually represented twice, once as an actual save to dodge things, and once as AC. Precisely because there are those two overlapping systems at play.
AC is more than a dex save... And in fact may not involve dex at all if the target is wearing heavy armor.
It's a very consistent system. Direct, targeted attacks with a physical manifestation (that is, some kind of targeted projectile or weapon swing) roll against the target's general-purpose defense stat (AC). Indirect attacks (e.g, fireball) or things that are otherwise simply "happening" to the target has the target rolling a save of some sort to resist the effects somehow (dodge out of the way, resist mental influence, hold themselves upright, etc.). There's nothing arbitrary about it, and a unified defense system would no doubt involve a lot of special-casing/ad-hoc calculations to be at all worthwhile, to the point at which it would be far more cumbersome and confusing.
Let's say we only use AC as a defense and have no saves. How does a spell like Hold Person work? Does the target use their wisdom modifer instead of their dex modifer for calculating AC? Does the armor they're wearing affect their defense against it? What about proficiencies or other bonuses? Since the target is no longer making a roll, how do buffs to protect against the effect (e.g, bardic inspiration) work? I don't think there's a way to do it that is not more convoluted.
Skill checks don't really overlap at all, other than the fact that they use the player's attributes, I guess.
Are you going to reinvent 4e? Because a lot of attempts to fix 5e turn into 4e.
I think it worked like Everyone has a few defenses. Probably Armor, reflex, will, fortitude. Write them down on your sheet. They can receive bonuses from different things. All attacks target one (or more, maybe, if you want to get fancy) defense. Attacker always rolls. Easy peasy.
I wasn't trying to fix 5e, merely demonstrate the futility of it.
I'm well aware. I just said that Dex is represented twice, once in each "system".
I mean the division itself is entirely arbitrary.
What? No? Why would that be the case?
The two systems could be mostly merged by just having saves be passive, and having the attacker roll to overcome them. Exactly like AC currently works now.
The caster rolls their spell attack against the target's Wisdom defence/save. Exactly like how AC works now for physical attacks.
Buffs like could add a flat value to the defence stat, like AC buffs currently do.
The more I think about it, this would actually streamline combat a bit too. Because the "acting" party is doing all the rolling, rather than waiting for the defending party to roll a save to see if attacker gets to continue.
How is it at all strange?