No no no ... 5e 2024 sucks.
this post was submitted on 08 Jul 2025
296 points (91.3% liked)
RPGMemes
12771 readers
894 users here now
Humor, jokes, memes about TTRPGs
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
All you've done is permanently write off any opinion you have on a replacement. It's insanely arrogant to push your own opinion as fact but even more so when the thing you're shitting on is something people actively enjoy and then expecting anyone will pay attention to a thing you say.
No, 5e sucks. And it's most obvious when you play on level 1. DnD is a superhero sim with paper cutouts for humans. When you leave out the super powers, then the characters can't really do anything. Like... at all.
Combat is DnD's only fleshed out system. Everything else is just "roll a D20" and sometimes add your proficiency modifier depending almost entirely on your class. Give me 20 different bards and I bet 18 of them will have a 90% overlap in the proficiencies they choose.
During combat, the wizard throws fireballs, the cleric casts spiritual weapon and the barbarian rages. During investigations the wizard rolls an investigation check, the cleric rolls an investigation check and the barbarian does nothing because they dumped wisdom.
That's why DnD sucks!
Everything you just said is opinion and subjective.
The only thing that sucks here is you for believing that your opinion is a universal truth and the arrogance of believing that everyone else is wrong.
The only thing subjective here is the very first sentence. Everything else is either fact and enforced by the way DnD is designed or an example to illustrate said fact.
What exactly is subjective about the fact that DnD doesn't have any depth or variety when it comes to anything besides combat?
Oh, and before you answer. Homebrew and cinematic encounters are not part of DnD as a system and using them in your argument will only strengthen my point.
Dungeon crawl classic, start with 3-5 level 0 chars each and hope the best rolled character survives the initial onslaught. Using magic is dangerous, a miscast spell could leave you disfigured or worse. Thick boy rule book.
It's also fun that critical success and critical fail has the player (or enemy) rolling for a random result from a table.
It was also pretty funny when one of my players cast color spray from the back line, but they cast it to well, so it actually did damage and almost killed a player
You can easily convert them to 5e
And lose the entire fun in the process...
Spike trap? I have spuder climb/fly speed! Enemies sneaking about in the dark? I have darkvision! Resources running low and no safe place to take a rest? I cast Tiny Hut!
DnD takes the entire fun out of dungeon crawling just so that a single person can win the d*ck measuring contest of "I'm the greatest"
I was introduced to flyweight RPGs a few years back and I absolutely love what they can do in the hands of a creative group.
Roll for Shoes is about as minimal as it gets. You will need one D6, and something to track player inventory. The game world is best started by the GM in the abstract, letting the players fill in the world's details through creative use of questions that prompt die rolls. This is fantastic for players that want to stretch their improv skills.
Lasers & Feelings has a tad more structure. Everyone has exactly one stat that sits on a spectrum of "lasers" to "feelings". The difficulty of challenges in the game sit on the same spectrum. Depending on the nature of the challenge and what the player's stat is, a single D6 roll decides the outcome. Everything else is role-playing in what is encouraged to be a Trek-like setting.
In my experience, Roll for Shoes usually turns into a cartoon-esque "let's see what else is in my backpack" affair, that usually ends with everything on fire (because of course it does). Lasers & Feelings typically devolves into Lower Decks. All of these are positives in my book - I'd play again in a heartbeat.
Oh I can do both. Though it's not necessarily that I think 5e sucks, (maybe 5.5e does though I don't know it well), but rather that Wizards of the Coast/Hasbro sucks and I refuse to continue to support them.
Although I do have to thank them since I very likely would not have explored other systems so vigorously had they not so visibly shown how greedy they've become.
I love Pathfinder 2E! I'm a pretty new player, but it's captured my heart. The three-action economy is great and offers so much freedom. The characters are INSANELY customizable, and I love how multiclassing works. And to top it all off, everything you need to play is free! Only the lore and campaigns have to be purchased. Plus, iirc, Paizo has vowed never to use generative AI in their works!
Pathfinder - for people that think D&D doesn’t have enough rules!
I literally can't believe it took us 50 years of ttrgs existing in basically their modern form for us to find the 3 action system. Its so intuitive and liberating compared to every other game system I've experienced.
Out of curiosity, what is the 3 action system?
I know FATE has 4 actions (overcome, attack, defend, create an advantage) so did PF merge attack and defend? Or is it a different choice?
You have three actions that you can spend freely on attacking, moving around, etc. If you want to attack more than once, you get a penalty on the roll. Some things and spells cost two actions.
At least fading suns had something similar in the 90's with one action for free, 2actions with a - 4 and 3 actions a - 6(if my memory is right). The interesting part is that dodging would count as an action and you had to declare your intention at the start of the round.
I never got a campaign off the ground, but Palladium had, I thought, a great system.
I loved the approach to alignment (good, selfish, evil) and awarding xp for roleplaying, clever ideas, and problem solving, rather than simply killing an enemy.
I consider this a good vs bad DM issue, not necessarily a game system issue. A good DM will offer XP for non-combat situations too even if it's not in a handbook. I guess I might have a different view on D&D vs other gaming systems because my group started with AD&D and just changed all the shit we didn't like. It was only D&D by name after a while. We had a mana system (spell mats are the worst), custom classes / races / spells, and a lot of fun. The most important part isn't the game system, it's good people to play with.
Mutants and Masterminds is kind of interesting. I like how it's designed so character creation is entirely point buy. There's no classes. No spells. You pay for skills and abilities directly. There's basic powers, and modifiers you can use to make them more interesting. It's also geared towards balance as opposed to simulation, which means you can make whatever type of character you want instead of having to stick with what's optimal.
Unfortunately, it's not well-done. For example, they frequently forget the game uses a log scale and cut numbers in half. Someone with a Dodge rank of -2 who is Vulnerable has their active defenses halved, which brings their Dodge rank up to -1. Equipment is 3 to 4 times cheaper than Devices, with the only differences being flavor (Equipment is something a normal person can get) and a different method of calculating Toughness that very often makes Equipment stronger. I ended up making a list of house rules trying to fix all of them (and admittedly including a few alternate rules that aren't clearly better or worse) that's so long that it would probably be easier to make a new RPG.
I don't suppose I can get any advice on something I would like? My requirements are:
- A point buy system that lets you make any character you want.
- Costs are based on making characters balanced, and not how literally expensive a piece of equipment would be and that sort of thing.
- Must be balanced as far as reasonably possible without massive flaws like M&M.
- I'd really like having a wide variety of characters you can make and things you can do. Make it so you can just play a Swarm, or a character of any size class, or anything else you can think of.
I'm a fan of old-school Shadowrun (2nd ed.); it didn't matter how bad-ass your character was, you could get killed by a lucky shot from a punk with a zipgun. It kept the grime of Cyperpunk, and added fantastical elements to it. IMO, it required more role-playing than is strictly necessary in a lot of D&D games, because going in guns blazing all the time was almost certain to lead to death; properly played (IMO), the GM should be brutal in how they handle stupid players.
The downside was so many six sided dice.
The downside was so many six sided dice.
While indeed it can get pretty extreme, it's also so fun to roll handful of dices. This is one of the reason I find dice-pool fun (and not just better statistically speaking)
It's sister setting, Earthdawn, also had a lot going for it on top of the typical D&D formula. Weaving, instead of casting magic, was a much more involved process for the player/character which did a lot to ground such awesome power. At the same time, fighters of all stripes were also more or less magic users, which unified the whole rule system in a nice way. The setting itself was a fantasy post-apocalypse, troubled by evil horrors that dominated the landscape in the centuries before. In fact, much of the lore was intertwined with how people survived those times.
And like Shadowrun, there were lots of dice thanks to the "step table" system. It could be a huge PITA to sum all the rolls on high steps, but then when else do you get to roll entire fists full of dice all at once?
I never had a chance to try Earthdawn, but it looked like a lot of fun.
GURPS is my go-to system. It's incredibly flexible, both in what it allows you to do as a player, and what kind of game you can run as a GM.
It's an older system, and by default is rather simulationist - it grew out of the same tabletop wargaming that D&D did, and tends to take a more realistic approach to what players can do than more narrative systems. I like some of the more narrative systems as well - Starforged is my other go-to system - but the characters always feel a little more loosely defined to me. GURPS is perfectly happy saying "okay, you can fly, you can turn invisible, and you can't be killed" - but if you want to make your character more nuanced, it's not only possible, but encouraged!
On the other hand, if you just want to throw something together and go, you can do that too! One of my players has a character sheet that consists of their racial abilities, 5 or 6 regular skills, and a high level "Security!" wildcard skill. And 3 guns. They're a nightmare in combat, because "Security!" is their all-in-one skill with pistols and melee combat, along with anything else a person with a security background would be expected to know - it's been rolled against to evaluate patrol schedules, reading a foe's body language, and shadowing a mark, among other things. That character plays alongside someone with three different templates (classes), a mount, a bevy of different equipment options, and something like 55 different skills - because that player -wanted- that kind of detail. And they're both very effective in their domains, and play off of each other well.
That's the thing that really sticks out to me about GURPS - it's very playable with a very minimal ruleset (GURPS Ultra-Lite is free, and 2 pages - http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/books/ultra-lite/), and can seamlessly expand when you want more detail. And not only are there a lot of options for that detail, they also show their work - so if you're still missing something, you can generally still come up with reasonable rules. It just gets a reputation for being super complicated because the people who discover it tend to get excited and throw everything in...
Thank you for sparing me the rant I was inhaling to deliver.
The system is so good. You wanna run a political intrigue campaign? Great! Not only are there dozens of skills to navigate the nuances of that style, but there are multiple supplemental guides if you want to get real nitty gritty. You wanna run a hyper-tactical combat heavy campaign? Great! The combat can be extremely rich, with an entire book dedicated to Martial Arts.
You can run any setting you can think of: sci-fi, fantasy, modern, historical, cinematic, realistic. The mechanics are there. But the base system is so simple and modular, you can run it off an index card. I almost think of it less as an RPG than an RPG engine. You really can adapt it to any kind of game concept.
When it come to more traditional RPGs, I really like Pathfinder 2E for the following reasons:
- It scales very well from level 1-20. The math just works
- Encounter design and balancing is easy for the busy GM
- All of the classes are good, there aren't any trap classes
- Teamwork is highly encouraged through class and ability design
- Degrees of success/failure
- Easy, free access to the rules
- The ORC license
- https://pathbuilder2e.com/
- Pathfinder Society Organized play is very well done and well supported by Paizo
- Women wear reasonable armor
- The rune system for magic weapons/armor
- And so many more
For me it's the 3 actions per turn. So much nicer to still have a turn even after I rolled an attack and missed.
How did I forget to put that on my list? I love not worrying about action types and if I can do this action as this other kind of action. I just have to count to three.
- Encounter design and balancing is easy for the busy GM
- Teamwork is highly encouraged through class and ability design
ngl, you're selling it.
Anything that improves combat is a win in my book. I've switched to Cyberpunk RED, and I'm discovering that good combat is hard to make in either system, but encouraging teamwork is a nice way to take a little load off the GM.
The bestiary is also really good (and free!). There are thousands of enemies, most of which have solid gimmicks that tell you straight from the stat block how you can best run the creature. And the they're balanced to the same levels as players, so encounter power budgets are very intuitive.
The game gets a bit of a bad rap for having "nitpicky" rules, but people often seem to fail to recognize that the rules are spelling out how people already usually resolve things, rather than introducing something novel. It's written in a very systematized way, and people aren't used to reading about their intuitive experiences in systematized language.
The game's broader community's obsession with rules orthodoxy doesn't help...
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Plus, I don't know any other system that lets me pull my intestines out of my abdomen and use them like a lasso to climb a cliff when I forgot my rope at home.
The biggest "con" to PF2 is that it is decidedly not 5e, and people expecting it to work like 5e will have a bad time. AC generally hangs within 1 or 2 points for the entire party at a specific level, same for enemies. It is rarely a good idea to just walk up to the enemy and face tank them. Moving around is big for survivability. Synergy with other party members can be huge too. Sometimes that thing you can do doesn't sound like a big buff or debuff, but if several party members are doing complementary buffs/debuffs it can turn the tide.
The synergy part is so huge. PF2 is very strongly based around making your party as awesome as possible instead of just making your character individually powerful, which I think trips up a lot of people coming from other systems or video games.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(15 replies)
let me tell you about daggerheart!
having combed through a good portion of ttrpgs that have come out over the last 20 years, and having played a version of d&d since the 90s, i've found a system that does a lot of what i've been after in a system and i'm hoping that it's popularity continues to grow.
things i like:
- new player friendly (either new to ttrpgs or new to this system particularly)
- heroic curve for player actions (2d12 > 1d20)
- narrative driven, but still tied to mechanics (in combat action doesn't grind to a halt, which allows for a flow that i more appreciate.)
- degrees of success and failure (allowing for more gradient resolution to checks, which then allows for more opportunity for tension)
- hope & fear as mechanics (hope being used by players to boost what they do and fear being used by the gm to facilitate opposition. i like that there's a tangible correlation between failure and the walls closing in.)
- the structure of monster and environment stat blocks (these work really well for me and it makes it easy to frame something with the mechanics with little effort).
- the emphasis on collaborative storytelling. (this is something i think either a lot of ttrpgs just don't do, do a bad job at getting across, or gms/dms don't take into account. i like being a fan of my players. i do not like the 'me vs them' mentality of running a game. this is the player's story, i'm just furnishing it with extra layers and adding complications when things don't go their way.)
if you like a heroic, narrative-driven fantasy system that makes combat less of a wargame, but doesn't pull it's punches, then i think this one is a good shout. i feel like it has enough rules to give players direction and enforce narrative choices, but removes some of the things i feel make other systems feel tedious or unrealistic.
other systems that i've eyed but haven't had a chance to play yet:
- delta green (high on my list. horror/conspiracy setting that put regular folks up against lovecraftian horrors. not to solve or understand it, but to end it. it's like call of cthulhu but you hate your job and you want to go home.)
- lancer (epic mecha building fantasy. make a big beautiful bot from a ridiculously large number of options over time and fight. super duper crunchy)
- the wildsea (post apocalyptic fantasy of sailing on the treetops of an overgrown world and dealing with what's left behind after nature takes back the planet)
- mothership (aliens the ttrpg. shit goes down on spaceships. you will probably die in a spectacular way. it will be fun.)
most of these recommendations have come from quinns quest on youtube (https://www.youtube.com/@Quinns_Quest) and having followed quinns from board gaming to video gaming to ttrpgs, I feel like he does a great job of highlighting a lot of overlooked gems in this space. if not just to check out the possibilities that are afforded to you when you step outside the box of what has become popular, but to experience games that people put a lot of love into and it definitely shows in their work.
as a last point, i think it's okay to be critical of things, even things that we enjoy. often times the things we like the most are the things we're most critical of. i personally have watched d&d grow from ad&d to where it is now, and still play it. mostly because it's popular and the people i play games with know it well. they're the same people i've been making great strides with in terms of introducing new systems and showcasing all the neat stuff people have made. i'm not a fan of d&d anymore. mostly because i've grown tired of it, but also because of all the baggage that it has (wotc and hasbro being the biggest two). but i am a fan of tabletop gaming and getting together with friends to have fun. i think that's the primary goal, so whatever you use to facilitate that is fine. just don't close the door on criticism because you don't want to hear anything negative about what makes you happy. open the door to new things.
lancer (epic mecha building fantasy. make a big beautiful bot from a ridiculously large number of options over time and fight. super duper crunchy)
Lancet is so much fun. It’s really about building super op mechs and the GM doing the excavation same thing to you.
The lore is amazing. NPHs, blink space, Ra, Horous, and more.
mothership (aliens the ttrpg. shit goes down on spaceships. you will probably die in a spectacular way. it will be fun.)
We had a total party kill within hour and half. So much fun. The GM was telling us the party before fucked up so bad, the planet had to get nuked.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I just started DMing an Ironsworn campaign for my wife. I like that it's fiction-forward rather than mechanics-forward, and being able to run a campaign built around having only 1 player makes scheduling so simple, reliable, and just an all around good experience.
Ironsworn was my first exposure to a fiction-first game! I didn't really gel with the setting, but still really like the mechanics. Ended up backing Starforged (and later Sundered Isles), that seems like a much better fit for me!
I'm partial to Fate.
It's very open. You don't have to worry about looking up the right class or feats. You just describe what you want to play, and if the group thinks it's cool and a good fit for the story, you're basically done.
Now, the downside is this requires a lot more creativity up front. A blank page can be intimidating.
I like that players have more control over the outcome. You can usually get what you want, even if you roll poorly, but it's more of a question of what you're willing to pay for it.
Every roll will be one of
- succeed with style
- succeed
- a lesser version of what you want
- succeed at a minor cost
- succeed at a major cost
- (if you roll badly and don't want to pay any costs) fail, don't get what you want
It's a lot more narrative power than some games give you. I don't like being completely submissive to the DM, so I enjoy even as a player being able to pitch "ok I'm trying to hack open this terminal... how about as a minor cost I set off an alarm?" or "I'm trying to steal his keys and flubbed the roll... How about as a major cost I create a distraction, get the keys, but drop my backpack by accident. Now I'm disarmed, have no tools, and they can probably trace me with that stuff later. But I got the keys!".
It's more collaborative, like a writer's room, so if someone proposes a dud solution the group can work on it.
The math probability also feels nice. You tend to roll your average, so there's less swinginess like you'll get in systems rolling one die.
d&d 5e is a fine system, it's just more than i want to gm and more than my friends want to learn. so simpler systems like shadowdark or black hack are really great for us, but if your group knows d&d 5e and has fun playing it, than why the hell not just play 5e?
load more comments
(1 replies)
Classic Deadlands! Do you want a system that grinds to a halt in combat if you have more than like 3 players? This system is for you! Wait, that's the bad part.
Do you want a really flavorful world of spaghetti western meets supernatural meets call of cthulhu? Great!
Maybe, like me, you really love playing with a deck of playing cards for everything! You get to do that! Initative? Deck of cards. Stats at creation? Deck of cards. Slinging spells? Deck of cards. Building a fucked up mad science gizmo (my favorite)? Deck of cards!
Did you know Pinnacle, the creators, made an official deck? With all cards plus the two jokers you need. Did you know those cards feel amazing to my little stupid hands??? I love them.
Do you want to do mad science, explode things, and invent completely new shit? Be a mad scientist! Want to gunsling? Throw probably evil magics? Maybe have the power of God on your side (but not anime, that doesn't exist yet) all set during a sort of longer term civil war? Wheeeee!
It's my favorite setting and system. I don't like Reloaded, I hate the Savage Worlds system. It feels so fucking generic. But! I'm glad people enjoy it and have made so many things for it!
My current DM despises 5e
I think it's because 3.5 offers such a ludicrous bag of dickfuckery for the GM to employ at their leisure it's literally like hanging out with someone who insists on cleaning their guns with company over.
I just want to play cyberpunk red again.
view more: next ›