I kinda ripped D&DV a new one in the "Criticisms of 5e" thread. In the interest of fairness, and because I really do like the game, I'll sort of rebuttal my own post with a list of the stuff I like about the new edition:

1) Simpler than the past two editions.

2) The end (or serious diminishment of) the joyless "CharOp" culture.

3) Character creation is pretty fast, even moreso once you start to learn the system.

4) BACKGROUNDS. I fucking love backgrounds. Backgrounds are to 5 what ascending AC was to 3, that eureka "Why didn't I ever think of that" element.

5) The racial inclusiveness of the art. The gender/sexual orientation paragraph. That picture of the fighter.

6) Tieflings and dragonborn are (Very slowly) starting to grow on me.

7) Having marginal but cool shit like Ninja, assassins, and warrior-mages in the core book.

Side-lining multi-classing and prestige classes in favor of having stuff like ninja, assassins, and warrior-mages as options baked in to the standard classes.

9) Barbarians being greatly simplified. Not as much shit to track while raging.

10) At 3rd level, playing a fighter becomes as simple or as complex as you want.

A lot of just flat-out smart game design. The whole proficiency, advantage systems interlace in some very robust, simple, evocative ways in many areas.

I don't really see the much-vaunted 'modularity' as SUCH, but the way proficiency is laid out makes it a pretty open basis for socketing in ... anything. I mean, heck, you could slap on a Pokemon system in there, and have proficiency in Grassland Pokemon or whatnot.

More smart design:
Most caster classes have one unified spell slot system. Makes it VERY easy to multiclass. Half classes ... half progression on the same table, so just add Wizard + 1/2 Ranger.
Smart subclasses so you don't HAVE to specialize, you don't have to have feats.
So... hey, spell-capable fighter, spell-capable rogue? Go for it! 1/3 spell slot progression and hey, you can multiclass, add 1/3 fighter or rogue (if you have the subclass).


Not trying to nitpick shit. You want to do nonlethal damage? Ok, at 0 hp you declare your opponent is knocked out. Done.

Quote from: Will;783522I don't really see the much-vaunted 'modularity' as SUCH, but the way proficiency is laid out makes it a pretty open basis for socketing in ... anything.

I think making Feats optional is the most prominent part of 5e's modularity in the PHB, along with multi-classing. You can also see it in some of the class choices, like the Fighter and Ranger, where different versions of the class are presented.

For me, it doesn't get any more positive than this.

My group and I have been playing games for almost 17 years. I have run a lot of different games, including a some OGL driven fantasy games. Soon will be the first time I will run actual D&D, and it will be 5e.

(By the way, I agree with pretty much every OTHER comment, so far, but thought I'd try to not just 'me, too!')

Inspiration is beautiful. I was thinking of adding Fate Aspects to D&D before -- Inspiration does it simply, cleanly.

1: Vastly diminishes multi-classing. And the need for milti-classing.

2: Combat system flows damn fast at its basics and even with some of the extras.

3:  Background provide potential plot hooks and alignment/personality ideas for those who want that. The rest can make if it what they will.

4: Alot of effort into heading off various system cheats and tricks.

5: Spell slots as pseudo-spell points.

6: You are Number  6.

7: More diverse racial art. The fighter and two wizards for example.

8: Halflings look hideous. Good. Down with halflings!

Quote from: Omega;7835441: Vastly diminishes multi-classing. And the need for milti-classing.

That's a good point. Its also good that multi-classing doesn't nerf spell casters as in 3e.

Other things:

1. Concentration. The rules are simple and a league better than anything before in kerbing spell abuse.

2. Bounded Accuracy makes the GM's job a lot easier and adds a sense of reality.

3. Three saves for "Save or Suck" spells. Lets spells have their bite but allows greater opportunity to deal with them.

4. Ritual magic. I liked it in 4e and I like how its adapted in 5e.

It's almost a cliche at this point, but I think that advantage/disadvantage is great.

Quote from: Skywalker;7835454. Ritual magic. I liked it in 4e and I like how its adapted in 5e.

I'm oddly jazzed about the approach to ritual magic myself.

In addition to all the other stuff up thread, I particularly like that they have explicitly given advice that missing a check can mean failure or success with complications or setbacks. I'm sure DMs have been doing that for years but it's one of the elements of Dungeon World that I really enjoy and I'm glad to see it called out in 5e.

The title of this thread, here, makes me think of something like this - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXE1C--WezU

To state the most important:

Bounded Accuracy is huge. If it truly works, it changes the entire gameworld. And much for the better.

The range of possible characters that can be build just with the players handbook and without multicalssing is huge.

Bounded Accuracy and Ad/Disad are two great things, even though BA leads to the "big bag of hit points" syndrome when it comes to power level. I find the system a distinct step up from both 3E and 4E, though I won't be supporting it with any $$ whatsoever. Too many free systems that already do what I like. Still, more power to it. A good, strong version of D&D is good for the hobby.

Quote from: Just Another Snake Cult;783512stuff I like about the new edition:

I agree with nearly everything on your original post so I'll just highlight what I feel differently about.

Quote from: Just Another Snake Cult;7835122) The end (or serious diminishment of) the joyless "CharOp" culture.

My feelings on "twinking" and/or "powergaming" are complex but to sum it up: (1) it's not my playstyle and (2) I'm glad that official, WotC D&D no longer openly caters to the more annoying elements of the demographic with intrincate feat trees, while at the same time still allowing a modicum of leeway for character customization and optimization.

Quote from: Just Another Snake Cult;7835124) BACKGROUNDS. I fucking love backgrounds. Backgrounds are to 5 what ascending AC was to 3, that eureka "Why didn't I ever think of that" element.

They were a good idea in 4e. And in 1e too, back when they were called Secondary Skills.

Quote from: Just Another Snake Cult;7835126) Tieflings and dragonborn are (Very slowly) starting to grow on me.

Aw come on now, their 4e fluff wasn't half bad. They just lack the long-standing, transmedia pop culture cachet of dwarves, elves, orcs, et alii. I kind of wish they tookn the 4e fluff, especially the ancient empires (Arkhosia and Bael Turath) and did something with it.

Quote from: The Butcher;783563My feelings on "twinking" and/or "powergaming" are complex but to sum it up: (1) it's not my playstyle and (2) I'm glad that official, WotC D&D no longer openly caters to the more annoying elements of the demographic with intrincate feat trees, while at the same time still allowing a modicum of leeway for character customization and optimization.

The really, really great news about D&D 5E is that it doesn't try to indoctrinate what makes for "good", "right" or "true" role-playing.
Taking a more old-school approach with rolled up attributes, single-class only, feat-lessness and brutal "live to fight another day" encounters is just a matter of hitting a few switches.
If you look for a twinked game with equal attribute points for everyone, a lot of gears and cogs to tune characters and the necessary tools to gauge encounters - D&D 5E hands you the means to do so, and it is equally easy.
If you are just a regular joe who wants both his peanut butter and his jelly on his sammich, you can take the parts from both approaches that work for you and don't have any more work than saying which options are hot and which are not.

D&D 5E is not here to preach to us that everything since the introduction of the Thief class in Supplement II is a heretical diversion from the true vision of D&D, nor is it there to teach to us that D&D is all about Fun!Fun!Fun! in a video-gamey chain of tactical encounters. It is only there to hand us the tools to hammer the rules-set into the shape we need for our game, and those are some darn well-made tools.

Ritual magic was one of the few things in 4e that appealed to me, so I'm glad they kept it. Overall, it looks to me like the hit it out of the park. 3.5 was as unsuited to my preferred playstyle as 4e, so the current "official" D&D hasn't been my flavor of choice for fantasy rpging since 2003 (wow, I didn't realize it's been that long...). It's nice to be back.