Right up front: I’ve not been a fan of the d20 system for decades. I played Dungeons & Dragons up through the AD&D days, but from version 3 on, I mostly ignored it and played other things. About eight years ago, our new gaming group coalesced around 5e. I inherited books from a Pathfinder fan who didn’t want them and started running the game for the group, as well as another campaign for my wife and daughter. A few of the group were excited for the drop of the new Player’s Handbook at GenCon and after having a look through it, I’m glad I didn’t waste money on it.
So what’s wrong with it? There’s a few things but let’s start with the obvious: D&D is an utter disaster, rules-wise. The basic die mechanic is fine. Very simple. Roll a die and get above the DC (difficulty class). The flat probability (each face on the d20 is essentially 5%) is simple, although there are so many systems that allow for the probability curve to shift by using different dice or multiple dice, rather than a flat modifier based off of the ability. In fact, the ability score itself — strength, dexterity, what have you — is generally not used.
And then you get to combat. There’s 13 different types of damage, some that carry on over the course of a few turns or until a save throw is made. It’s overly fiddly, and an artifact from the wargaming origins of the game. Yes, there’s some reason for it. Maybe you’re resistant to a type of damage — fire, cold, necrotic, etc. — and the rule is there to allow specificity so that a player or gamemaster can ensure fairness.
There’s been some complaining over time about the use of ye olde 10’ (or 5’) grids for combat, but again…this started as a wargame and for a lot of the older players, that’s what they’re looking for. Yes, I prefer the idea of zones (see everything Free League, and other publishers…) better, but it’s certainly not a deal breaker. The issue with the grid can come quickly when the GM or the player starts busting out their trigonometry skill to figure out if their target’s elevation puts it outside the range of a weapon or spell.
Spellcasting is probably the most egregious point of failure in the game. The spell section is enormous — and no, that’s not a good thing. The original 5e Player’s Handbook has 82 pages of word count-filling blather. There are spells no one is going to use…ever. There are the ones that will be commonly used. Is it a cone? Is it a sphere? Area effect? Range? There’s a lot of moving parts to just using a spell, and this is an artifact of the game’s original wargaming heritage. Only certain spells can be used by certain spellcasters. Good to try and have players focus on their character and their type of magic, instead of everyone just grabbing fireball.
Character creation is overly involved and fiddly — especially once you start adding the burgeoning feats (74, now…about double what they had in the original 5e), ideals, bonds, flaws, or even alignment. I’ve always hated alignment, although I understand why it’s there. More on this in a moment. There’s more weapons mastery properties (proficiencies, essentially). More is not better; more is just more. The race/class/level mechanic is central to a lot of the roleplaying element of D&D and becomes a primary driver of the game: gaining levels to gain more spells, special maneuvers, and other perks. The list of these is huge — 54 pages of material on character class for 12 classes. Add in the special abilities of different races, and it’s overwhelming for newbies.
Just to simplify it to the point of making running an adventure manageable, I used the excellent Game Master 5 and Fight Club 5 apps, which take a lot of the work out of running the game.
None of this has been fundamentally changed by the 2024 edition. Yes, there’s the move from “race” to “species” because some folks have to be offended by…everything. Does it change the idea of race? Nope. Classes have more perks per level. Why? More, stupid! There’s more subclasses in each class. Why? More.
There is also, of course, the whinging about “woke”, and yes, the social justice types have infiltrated WotC in force. The move from race to species, the addition of the BDSM derived “safety tools” that are showing up in almost every new TTRPG are there. (The worst offended I’ve seen is Evil Hat, to the point I haven’t even considered their products since Atomic Robo.) I’m not surprised by this development. We’ve gotten allow the spoiled, wealthy, and whiny to politicize everything at the expense of fun, and games are not immune. I’m also not doing that stuff at my table. Should you be alert to things that might be making folks uncomfortable? Yes. Should one overly sensitive tit shut down everything so you can all pay attention to and change everything for them? No.
Yes, there’s the professed attempt to “decolonize” D&D and push white guys out of the hobby so the rainbow warriors can have it all to themselves. The anti-white woke was particularly highlighted by the online rants of brand leader Kyle Brink — since let go from Wizards. Ain’t going to happen. We’ll see what we’ve always seen: like-minded folks will play together. Cool. So, yes, D&D got woke and that might hurt the brand, but it’s the least of the problems.
The big error is their move toward trying to milk the players for every dime they can. The “One D&D” push reminds me of BMW and Mercedes trying to charge drivers a subscription to use their heated seats. The push to move to digital books and tools and away from pen & paper is 1) cheaper for WotC, especially with the cost of paper, printing, and shipping; 2) allows them to bilk their customers with a subscription model for access to Beyond D&D and other “exclusive products”. If anything, this is the reason that Dungeons & Dragons is most likely going to bleed customers to Pathfinderand better games like Forbidden Realms, The One Ring, and the retroclones of old D&D.
So, is it worth it? At $50-60 to get new art and feel like you’re saving Orcs from racism? Nope. Find the 5e stuff on sale and buy that.
The Black Campbell 