When we want to play the D&D game we need D&D sheet very urgent right then i found one good website for that you can check which sheet you want
Editable character sheet is a great opportunity to rectify your character details and to make your character as per rules
To edit your character you need to use pen/pencil, eraser and one character sheet.
In this editable character sheet, you have to erase all your character details after completing each level and make them balance with your current level.
The main infrastructure which will help you in editing your character details is Adobe Reader
Without Adobe Reader You can not do anything. So it's better to have it.
These aspects all about how to edit your character details by using editable character sheet. http://dnd5echaractersheets.com/

I'm not sure more detailed rules would have helped anything.  The encumbrance rules are pretty ridiculous so it is pretty trivially easy to gear up.  I think that a lot of the stuff that you bring up is stuff that the designers decided was best handled by individual tables -- you want more detail, make up something that seems cool.  This is DM's Guild type stuff not evergreen rulebook stuff.

If the problem with a rule seems to be insufficient detail, then it is simply a bad rule. More detail makes rules more cumbersome, not more useful, and therefore more likely to be ignored completely. Tracking weight down to the pound is just a bad rule, for example.

5e has rather simple combat mechanics, but they're the sort of simplicity that came from a lot of thought and testing. It would be nice if exploration had a similar level of investment put into it.

Quote from: KingCheops;1017861I'm not sure more detailed rules would have helped anything.  The encumbrance rules are pretty ridiculous so it is pretty trivially easy to gear up.  I think that a lot of the stuff that you bring up is stuff that the designers decided was best handled by individual tables -- you want more detail, make up something that seems cool.  This is DM's Guild type stuff not evergreen rulebook stuff.

Again, it is my point that an attempt at the detail is more important to test the underlying system, not so much that we get the resulting details.  Though it is nice to have something in the way of details, if only as a starting point, that is secondary.

Quote from: fearsomepirate;1017868If the problem with a rule seems to be insufficient detail, then it is simply a bad rule. More detail makes rules more cumbersome, not more useful, and therefore more likely to be ignored completely. Tracking weight down to the pound is just a bad rule, for example.

Yep, big equipment lists and weights are a good place to start, since that is the way people think about it.  It's a lousy place to end.

A good system for getting lost should be like the combat system: it should be simple and intuitive enough that I don't have to flip around charts to resolve things for the players do or engage in obnoxious levels of book-keeping. Navigating your way through the jungle to get to the lost pyramid should be, on an abstract level, no more complext than fighting a few monsters.

I think 5e is fun. I like it better than 3e and 4e, but probably not 2e, which I started with. Good things - plays quick at lower levels, easy to understand, love making custom feats, lots of cool abilities to choose from, classes feel distinct.

Problems with 5e for me are: way too much hp bloat, way too forgiving on death/dying (we havent had a single PC die in 3 years, on and off playing - and if you switch to slow healing with week long rests etc, you weaken long rest classes), too much magic (almost every subclass has magic), at will cantrips and rituals intended to balance out weaker overall magic (consequently magic feels less magical/spammable), concentration should have been limited to one spell at a time OR interruptible (not both), adv/disad is good but minor modifiers should have been retained (ie it is too blunt a tool - and they kept some minor modifiers anyway - eg partial cover +2 AC), and short rest vs long rest classes affects intraparty balance depending on the kind of adventure being run and opportunities for breaks (should have been a consistent recovery mechanic across all classes).

Also while I think of it - very much dislike the rise of the adventure path - which is from memory is all wotc has released barring the starter set (which I have and liked a lot).

Quote from: Psikerlord;1017904Also while I think of it - very much dislike the rise of the adventure path - which is from memory is all wotc has released barring the starter set (which I have and liked a lot).

They also did a bunch of conversions of old modules in Tales From the Yawning Portal - good adventures, but the redone maps are often too small to read.

Re death rate, I got to really hate killing dozens of PCs running 3e (then seeing powergamers trivialise all challenges in Pathfinder), I still kill PCs now and then in 5e (three PC perma deaths in the last few months), but I like it that the rate is lower and smart play gives a decent chance of success. Also like that I can ignore encounter-building metrics and still the PCs will likely survive.

I found the Long Rest classes overpowered vs Short Resters, because I was never seeing the assumed 6-8 encounters per LR. LR PCs would just rest overnight & recharge every couple encounters. Going to 1 week LR immediately solved that. Doesn't really work with Paizo style AP plotting ("Grind through these 30 encounters before the Ritual completes and the Gate to Oblivion Opens!") but great with episodic play.

The starter set was their best adventure. It gives you a skeleton of an adventure with a sandbox built in, and from there you can fill it out. I've been fleshing it out into a full on setting for the last 2 years.

Quote from: fearsomepirate;1017881A good system for getting lost should be like the combat system: it should be simple and intuitive enough that I don't have to flip around charts to resolve things for the players do or engage in obnoxious levels of book-keeping. Navigating your way through the jungle to get to the lost pyramid should be, on an abstract level, no more complext than fighting a few monsters.

Sorry I'm not understanding the problems you guys have with the exploration system.  Navigating is a single check and if you get lost you spend 1d6 hours trying to get your bearings before you re-check.  Pretty simple.

We have rules for party order, ranks determine what the DM lets you spot, and there are a variety of actions you can take during a march.  I'm not sure what else you guys are looking for.  It is actually far more robust than anything we got in the 2e, 3e, or 4e Player's/DM's guides.

Quote from: Psikerlord;1017904Also while I think of it - very much dislike the rise of the adventure path - which is from memory is all wotc has released barring the starter set (which I have and liked a lot).

CoS, Out of the Abyss and Tomb of Annilation are no more adventure paths than the starter set. People love repeating cliches from the 3e era without even reading or playing the actual adventures. I think it is the problem of received wisdom in OSR circles. Everyone just parrots the same lines.

As to death being too rare, just institute death at 0 hit points, the way people talk you'd think they're helpless and have to follow BTB play only, even though you're overtly invited to tweak the system as you like.

My main issue with 5E is that it repeats all the old WOTC problems of still having too much implied setting.

Quote from: Voros;1017935CoS, Out of the Abyss and Tomb of Annilation are no more adventure paths than the starter set. People love repeating cliches from the 3e era without even reading or playing the actual adventures. I think it is the problem of received wisdom in OSR circles. Everyone just parrots the same lines.

As to death being too rare, just institute death at 0 hit points, the way people talk you'd think they're helpless and have to follow BTB play only, even though you're overtly invited to tweak the system as you like.

I picked up tomb recently actually because I liked the look of the jungle exploration part. I mean you can always steal parts of any adventure for your own sandbox, but I would like to see some 20 page, episodic drop in adventures, for example.

edit - well, got it for an xmas present (I requested it)

Quote from: Voros;1017935CoS, Out of the Abyss and Tomb of Annilation are no more adventure paths than the starter set. People love repeating cliches from the 3e era without even reading or playing the actual adventures. I think it is the problem of received wisdom in OSR circles. Everyone just parrots the same lines.

I hat talking about what 'people' love. Who are these people? Are they representative? Are we just making sweeping generalizations. And how do we know they are just parroting and don't have the same opinions about 3e and 5e adventures? That's not just putting words in peoples' mouths, but thoughts and motivations.

...That said, Tomb of Annihilation is the anti-adventure path. It is a mapped out mini-continent with lots to do on it, one super dungeon the players probably will want to explore, but don't have to, and a 'go at it, find your own adventure' mentality.

QuoteAs to death being too rare, just institute death at 0 hit points, the way people talk you'd think they're helpless and have to follow BTB play only, even though you're overtly invited to tweak the system as you like.

 I will definitely agree that many of the same people who will defend OSR games with a 'you use the parts you like' attitude often do not extend the same perspective to newer ground. But again, 'people' is such a useless term.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1017983I hat talking about what 'people' love. Who are these people? Are they representative? Are we just making sweeping generalizations. And how do we know they are just parroting and don't have the same opinions about 3e and 5e adventures? That's not just putting words in peoples' mouths, but thoughts and motivations.
...

 I will definitely agree that many of the same people who will defend OSR games with a 'you use the parts you like' attitude often do not extend the same perspective to newer ground. But again, 'people' is such a useless term.

I was harsher towards Psikerlord, who is a good poster, than I intended, mostly it is from how tiresome it is reading the same half-baked claims again and again.

And surely it is a generalization but what do you expect me to do, go through this forum and copy and paste every time someone lazily criticized the modern WoTC adventures for the supposed sins of 3e? Or claimed they were overwritten (with the average location being described in total within 200-500 words) or underwritten? How often do you have to hear the same weakly argued claims repeated over and over before you call bullshit?

Because when I ask what adventures they've read (forget having played) what do I hear back? That maybe they read the first one or two but most often they clam up because they've been caught talking out of their hat. It is the same received wisdom you hear on DL by those who haven't ever even played past the first module, if that. These claims are so common and so commonly revealed to be petty prejudice.

There are certainly things to criticize about the more recent adventures (like S'mon's issues with the maps in Yawning Portal) but that they are somehow 'adventure paths' or 'linear' is not one of them.

And I have trouble buying that it is an honest difference of opinion when so many of those criticizing haven't even read the books they speak of.