And looking forward to it:)
Going in as a player or as a DM?
As a player. We have 4 players and the DM. We've been playing together for nearly 30 years now.
Nice! What you playing, and if I may ask, what PC are you running?
One of us! One of us!
:-D
Enjoy it. I'm so surprised and impressed by how well it works every time I run it. It really FEELS so much more like D&D. Is it perfect? Nope. But it works really well.
Don't be afraid to pilfer your OSR library. Stuff plugs in pretty easily.
Have fun!
Quote from: trechriron;817676Don't be afraid to pilfer your OSR library. Stuff plugs in pretty easily.
I would say not only don't be afraid to pilfer the OSR library, but to actually encourage it. It was sooo nice to be able to get mileage out of all my old favorite modules again, with players who were able to use some of the really good things about 5e that didn't exist really in 1e (background/class/subclass combinations, feats, etc). I.e., yeah we had two fighters in 1e play differently because that's how the players wanted, but it's nice to have a mechanical difference too between a battle master and a champion and see that in actual play
The group consists of an elven druid, a human warlock, a human paladin and a human fighter (my character).
One thing I can say is that everyone is jazzed to play. We've had some combats over the past couple of months just to get a feel for the system. Also, some of the players have been creating their own backgrounds which is cool. Looking forward to this evening:)
Let us know how it went!
First session was introductory. The DM is using a module for 5th, but I don't know which one- Daggerford? Regardless, I could see pages of notes that he added to it:), so my guess is that he's making it his own.
Any ways- we didn't get to engage with any of the mechanical bits of the game, but everyone had a blast nonetheless. It ended with everyone having a great time and looking forward to next Wednesday.
am i really the only one on this website who likes d&d in general but not 5e
We played again last night, this time with combat- three encounters! I asked the DM what module we were playing and was told it's a modded Ghosts of Dragonspear.
Anyway, during our trudge through the cursed swamp, we fought some skeletons, crazed diseased lizardfolk, and a giant constrictor snake. My fighter went down against the lizardfolk, but was brought back up (thankfully) by a bard npc.
Combat went smooth for the most part. One thing I'm noticing is that you really need to work together as a team- flanking is wonderful:).
All told we played for three hours. So, three combats, a bunch of swamp exploration, and some good old roleplaying were all done.
Great that it sounds like you're having fun. That's the goal right?
I personally like the pace of combat in 5e. I find it similar to AD&D in that it moves fairly quickly from player to player. It's also pretty lethal, especially at pre-level 5 range.
Awesome stuff! Flanking is great, and super handy for the Rogues in the party who can sneak attack a foe when an ally is within 5' of them.
Personally, I really like it when games encourage teamwork. I feel like the game is more fun when everyone is engaged.
Quote from: tuypo1;818270am i really the only one on this website who likes d&d in general but not 5e
1probably
2you should start a different thread because we are cheering on a fellow 5e-er :-P
Quote from: Sacrosanct;818919Great that it sounds like you're having fun. That's the goal right?
I personally like the pace of combat in 5e. I find it similar to AD&D in that it moves fairly quickly from player to player. It's also pretty lethal, especially at pre-level 5 range.
Yes, we're all having a blast. And yeah, combat keeps you on your toes:)
I actually like that tactics are not so much keyworded mechanics but party formations, such as flanking, shield wall, 2nd rank polearms, and so on.
There is no "flanking" mechanic that requires oppositional positioning around the enemy. It is just being surrounded, which is extra dangerous if there's rogues around. (And for this is considered mechanically not engaging for the white room arena DPS crowd.)
There is no "shield wall" mechanic that requires X shield users with Y feat for Z bonus. But there is Fighting Style — Protection which synergizes well with itself. (And for this is considered utter shit for the white room arena DPS crowd.)
There is "reach" but it doesn't create mechanical awesomeness by itself, as you can stay running around within and not trigger OAs. But with coordination reach restricts movement by overlaying OA ranges. (And for this is also considered an inexcusable penalty for the white room arena DPS crowd.)
It cuts back on mechanical cruft, embeds the remains as easily accessible but optional character flavor, and really shines with team coordination, (and apparently pisses in all the right cheerios). A refreshing 180 in previous design direction.
Quote from: Opaopajr;818925I actually like that tactics are not so much keyworded mechanics but party formations, such as flanking, shield wall, 2nd rank polearms, and so on.
There is no "flanking" mechanic that requires oppositional positioning around the enemy. It is just being surrounded, which is extra dangerous if there's rogues around. (And for this is considered mechanically not engaging for the white room arena DPS crowd.)
There is no "shield wall" mechanic that requires X shield users with Y feat for Z bonus. But there is Fighting Style — Protection which synergizes well with itself. (And for this is considered utter shit for the white room arena DPS crowd.)
There is "reach" but it doesn't create mechanical awesomeness by itself, as you can stay running around within and not trigger OAs. But with coordination reach restricts movement by overlaying OA ranges. (And for this is also considered an inexcusable penalty for the white room arena DPS crowd.)
It cuts back on mechanical cruft, embeds the remains as easily accessible but optional character flavor, and really shines with team coordination, (and apparently pisses in all the right cheerios). A refreshing 180 in previous design direction.
I agree. It feels like in actual play, tactics feel more natural as to what you would normally think of in the mind's eye, rather than make all your decisions based upon mechanical rules. Which is a plus for me. The rules we do have support what makes sense without being convoluted.
Quote from: trechriron;818922Awesome stuff! Flanking is great, and super handy for the Rogues in the party who can sneak attack a foe when an ally is within 5' of them.
Personally, I really like it when games encourage teamwork. I feel like the game is more fun when everyone is engaged.
1probably
2you should start a different thread because we are cheering on a fellow 5e-er :-P
dont worry i dont intend on messing up this thread with my anti 5e you guys look like your having fun so clearly it works for some people
Quote from: RunningLaser;818916Combat went smooth for the most part. One thing I'm noticing is that you really need to work together as a team- flanking is wonderful:).
I'm curious as to what you mean by "flanking" here. What does that mean in game terms?
I play 5e with a group of 3.x-ers and separately with a group of 1e-ers, and it's interesting (and kinda cool) to see how differently 5e plays between the two groups.
Quote from: Natty Bodak;819082I'm curious as to what you mean by "flanking" here. What does that mean in game terms?
I play 5e with a group of 3.x-ers and separately with a group of 1e-ers, and it's interesting (and kinda cool) to see how differently 5e plays between the two groups.
Not to speak for him of course, but for me, it seems more intuitive. That is, I can be a player and not know any specific rule for flanking or AoO or any of that, but instead utilize flanking as common sense would dictate. For example, I don't need to know a specific rule to know that if I have a polearm fighter behind the front line, I can have both PCs attack, or that if I have a target flanked, that makes it very hard for them to move out of there without being penalized and it's easier for me to attack them. (in game terms, AoO and advantage)
The 5e rules handle this very well because they're simple. AoO is very clear and basic as to when it happens, and you never have to worry about stacking modifiers or more complexity. If you use the optional rule of flanking, you just grant advantage. No extra math.
Sacrosant did a great of of explaining it:) My dmg is sitting right next to me at my office desk, boxed and taped up- waiting for fedex to get here and bring it back to WOTC- so I wasn't able to read it. It's easy.
wait what im confused
About flanking? If you flank a creature you get advantage. At least that's how it was played for us this week:)
Quote from: RunningLaser;819098About flanking? If you flank a creature you get advantage. At least that's how it was played for us this week:)
That really sort of hits on one of the big reasons why I like 5e. I am not a fan of looking up in books for charts or modifiers or whatever whenever I don't have to.
5e is pretty much: advantage, disadvantage, or normal. And that's it for about 90% of the various scenarios you may run across, and neither are really anything to do with math. As far as modifiers and whatnot are any way. Roll two dice and take highest or lowest. Anyone who has played risk is more than familiar with that concept.
In fact, the last two gaming sessions we played in the past month, we only looked at the DMG to find out the descriptions of magic items that were found. That was it. So any game you can play without
needing the DMG? Win in my book.
Quote from: RunningLaser;819092Sacrosant did a great of of explaining it:) My dmg is sitting right next to me at my office desk, boxed and taped up- waiting for fedex to get here and bring it back to WOTC- so I wasn't able to read it. It's easy.
My bad. I was fishing for whether or not you meant the DMG option for Flanking when said "flanking" earlier or something non-grid/map based, but I wasn't clear at all. But now the answer
is clear. Thanks!
Quote from: Sacrosanct;819100That really sort of hits on one of the big reasons why I like 5e. I am not a fan of looking up in books for charts or modifiers or whatever whenever I don't have to.
5e is pretty much: advantage, disadvantage, or normal. And that's it for about 90% of the various scenarios you may run across, and neither are really anything to do with math. As far as modifiers and whatnot are any way. Roll two dice and take highest or lowest. Anyone who has played risk is more than familiar with that concept.
In fact, the last two gaming sessions we played in the past month, we only looked at the DMG to find out the descriptions of magic items that were found. That was it. So any game you can play without needing the DMG? Win in my book.
The bolded part is a huge bonus for me as well.
The only place where 5e fails in that department, by my estimation, is when you have players used to more structured rules for things such as stealth. Honestly, this is actually hard to call a failing of the edition, though. More of a funky unintended consequence.
My 3.x-er group instinctively implemented what turned out to be the DMG flanking option out of the box when the PHB came out, while for the 1e group combat advantage arises out of more descriptive play (they use combat maps very loosely).
If asked, I'd say that I find the new nature of AoO and Flanking to offer advantage a bit too frequently, but it's not impinging on my fun negatively at all. Supporting both play styles is worth way more than picking any of those nits to me.
Quote from: RunningLaser;819098About flanking? If you flank a creature you get advantage. At least that's how it was played for us this week:)
no about the dmg
Quote from: tuypo1;819140no about the dmg
Ah- I abbreviated DMG for Dungeon Master's Guide:) The glue binding was starting to fail on the last couple of pages. I called WOTC and they sent out fedex to pick it up from me and bring it back to them. I guess they'll send out a new copy in a couple of weeks.
ah i see
and yeah i know what the dmg is