• Delta_V@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Dungeons and Dragons 5e is less fun than 3.5e IMO.

    There was more of a sense of character progression, and ability differentiation in 3.5e.

    5e achieves balance by flattening the power curve.

    For example, the attack bonus for a level 20 Fighter in 5e is just 4 points higher than it was at level 1 - same as a 5e Wizard. Both get +2 at lvl 1 and +6 at lvl 20

    In 3.5e, a level 20 fighter’s attack bonus is 19 points higher than it was at level 1 (+1 to +20), but a wizard only gains half that much fighting prowess as they level up (+0 to +10).

    All 5e characters are pretty much the same statistically & mechanically. Differentiation comes from role play, which is the least interesting part of the game for me.

    • Suck_on_my_Presence@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      I think this is one of the reasons why Pathfinder 2e has been doing so well.

      It’s a middle ish ground and it feels good to progress.

      My current issues with it are how underpowered the items are. So boring.

      • orenj@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Heartbreaking that they decided static item attack rolls and DCs was a good idea. It’s my biggest gripe with the system. Some items, like the Holy Avenger, subvert this and are pretty good, but most items suuuuuck the instant you outlevel them. Like, Sparkblade is cool, who doesn’t like chain swordbeams? Anyone over level 4, aparrently, because every creature you come across has learned to dodge lightning from that sword in particular