Before D&D 5e came out, my group and I played 4e into the Epic levels and came to the conclusion that while 4e was a fun wargame for the first 10 levels or so, it got bogged down by rules for powers that brought the game to a snail's pace the higher up in levels you went.
I just bought the core 5e books, and played a few low-level games. It's pretty fun so far, but how does this edition handle at the higher levels? Are things still relatively fast or does it also suffer from grinding to a halt as characters get overloaded with powers?
Pic not related.
>>44526820
We only made it to level 12, so I don't know.
Offhand I'd say yes, cause there's a shit-tonne of powers just in the PHB.
>>44526820
im dm-ing some friends right now and theyre averaging out at level 16-17, and the game speed seems a tad bit faster, since there are wayyy more things in the PHB alone than pretty much the entirety of 4e. Personally, it all depends on the DM and if he/she doesnt cram a million traps or monsters in a single encounter to slow the game down. Even though I enjoyed 4e, 5e is alot more fluid in gameplay and gives the DM more to work with.
>>44527267
>>44527365
Both of you prompted a "wait, what?" OP talks about 4e getting bogged down in rules. Both of you seem to respond by saying that it won't happen to 5e because it has MORE rules. Is that a coincidence of typos and lack of clarity, or am I missing something?
>>44527558
OP here: Yes I'm just as confused.
>>44527558
> does it also suffer from grinding to a halt as characters get overloaded with powers?
>Offhand I'd say yes, cause there's a shit-tonne of powers just in the PHB.
>>44527615
>5e
>Powers in the PHB
Do you mean spells? Combat manuevers? Warlock invocations?
5e spells are the only thing that might compare to 4e powers in quantity, and only some classes even get access to those. The ones that do that aren't wizard get access to a comparable or smaller number than the number of powers available in 4e.
>>44527615
>4e
~3.5 powers per level that has powers * 20 levels that have powers * 8 classes = 560 powers, not counting racials/base class utilities/paragon paths/epic destinies.
>5e
By my count, which could be off by a few, has 359 spells. Is that a lot? Sure, but by no means comparable to 4e.
Leaving aside 5E, how the devil did you bog combat down in high level 4E?
4E always played pretty quick - in my experience the biggest slowdown spot was early-mid paragon.
>>44528356
Ran it straight without changing it? I honestly don't know, other than being very permissive about what character classes and options the players could use as long as it came out of an "official" book from WotC. The various powers, whether used by a PC or an NPC, weren't always straightforward to us and required constant recalculating as people shifted around the board and attacked different targets. I honestly don't know what to tell you other than we pretty much stuck to the rules as written with very little deviation.
>>44528639
>The various powers, whether used by a PC or an NPC, weren't always straightforward to us and required constant recalculating as people shifted around the board and attacked different targets.
Literally what
>>44528690
I don't know what to tell you other than we weren't using MapTools or any other kind of program that crunched the numbers for us, and always had to calculate the powers and their effects "by hand" as we read them off the power cards.
>>44528722
You mean your modifiers, like flanking and such?
Because the way you phrased it I thought you were somehow changing the powers themselves
>>44528777
Nope. Modifiers and the like is what I meant. Plus just the bookkeeping involved in keeping track of what each power with an extended effect did to certain targets, and keeping track of which target was affected by which power.
>>44528826
Sorry, I meant "Yep" to the question of
>You mean your modifiers, like flanking and such?
>>44528777
He probably means that a lot of the powers do a lot of tactical stuff like moving people around or attacking different targets or something like that, so that the tactical situation constantly changes and you have to take new things into account a lot and rethink strategies and recalculate stuff.
Which I is kind of the point of 4e (tactical combat and shit), so not liking that is kind of a dealbreaker.
>>44528846
>Which I is kind of the point of 4e (tactical combat and shit), so not liking that is kind of a dealbreaker.
Yeah. We all liked the tactical combat and shit of 4e in theory, but when a single combat took like 2 hours to resolve our interest waned.
>>44528868
This is just crazy to hear about, I'm currently running a group that's level 15, and we get through short fights in 15-20 minutes and long, boss-type fights in 40-60 minutes depending on just how involved the boss fight is. No rules mods.
>>44528944
Then I honestly wish I could compare notes with you and see what the hell I was doing wrong to make it drag out so much. But I swear to you we ran straight-up 4e using all powers as-is, monsters straight out of the monster manuals, magic items, etc. etc. etc.
Would running it online probably have anything to do with it?
>>44528975
Maybe you were using MM1 math for the monster?
>>44529028
Yeah I was. How did the MM1 math differ from any other math?
>>44529043
MM1 makes the fight take much longer since monsters need to be higher level to offer a fight which means more HP.
Newer monsters are much better in this situation.
>>44528868
>but when a single combat took like 2 hours to resolve our interest waned.
Tell your group to hurry the fuck up.
For my group, even when we hit level 30, we NEVER had a fight that took more than 30-45 minutes maximum.
The best way to solve this is make sure people know what they're going to do when their turn comes up.
5e has even worse problems as far as combat time goes, since monsters in 5e have even more hit points than they do in 4e, and PCs deal less damage.
>>44529072
That's probably what the problem was. My game kicked off and concluded before MM3 or the ones from D&D Essentials.
>>44528975
Yes, I've run 4E games online and find it takes much longer. I eventually got my roll20 group to about 1.25 times as long as IRL though.
>>44529043
MM1 monsters had more HP but did less damage. This was referred to as "padded sumo" and such. It was fixed in MM3 with monsters having less HP, more damaging attacks, and more off-turn actions, heals, resistances, etc.
You're the only person I've ever heard of who ran MM1 fights - I ran with MM3 math, and people I know who got in at the start all used various unofficial fixes. MM3 math is such a basic assumption now that it didn't even occur to me as an issue until the other anon asked.
>>44526820
What really, really slowed down 4e combat was all the additional conditions of every high level attack.
>(The following is totally not an actual power, just something I made up off the top of my head which feels about right for a high level power)
"Okay, this is VS. REFLEX, I get me MOVE up to 8 SPACES, making an ATTACK against EACH ENEMY I PASS, if I HIT, then they TAKE DAMAGE as if they MADE A BASIC MELEE ATTACK against THEMSELVES. So, i'm very carefully moving HERE, to HERE, to HERE, to HERE, so i'll get THESE FIVE GUYS. my attack roll is... (clatter) Uh, an 8. well, Plus 37 that's, uh, forty-one? is it? yeah? okay, Is that enough to hit this guy's reflex? No? Oh, uh, then i'm going to use my IMMEDIATE ABILITY to add + 2 to ONE ROLL, which gives me a Forty-Three. Is THAT enough to hit? Yes? OH SCORE! Okay, next guy- now, this guy has a vulnerability to PSYCHIC damage, and this power is tagged with a PSYCHIC descriptor, so he takes whatever extra damage his VULNERABILITY does, and I have a THING that lets me SLOW enemies who take VULNERABILITY DAMAGE, So, if i hit, he's slowed too - rolling (clatter) a 14, puts me at, uh, plus, thirty-seven, hold on - fifty-one? that right?"
Which is what ground high level 4e to a screaming halt.
5e has MERCIFULLY simple attacks, by comparison.
>>44529931
OP here:
Thanks for illustrating that for me. This is the problem I remember running into.
>>44529931
Honestly, that sounds like 3.5 you're describing there.
Actually, scratch that, that's mot 3.5. it doesn't have pauses every 5 minutes to find out which rulebook the spell you're casting is in, followed by thumbing through it trying to find it, then spending another minute trying to find out which part of the spell you're casting actually tells you what the fuck the spell does.
>>44528975
>Would running it online probably have anything to do with it?
Are you running text only too? I see that slowing down combat a lot.
>>44529958
You're welcome OP.
Now, for comparison, let's look at a high-level 5e attack.
And, since combat maneuvers are pretty much all "Okay, does my X beat his Y? Then he's (Status'd)" let's look at a ridiculously powerful spell: Dominate Monster (8th level).
"Okay, i'm casting "Dominate Monster" on the Storm Giant. It needs to make a wisdom saving throw."
>The Giant is not some weak-willed foe, arrogant wizard. (Rolls a d20). "uh - "
"He gets advantage on this saving throw because we're in combat."
>"Oh, well then -" (rolls a 2nd d20) "- it doesn't matter much, neither roll was above 8. Does a 12 save against you?"
"Nope! My Save DC is 16. He's mine to control now! hahahaha! Er, telepathically, for Concentration duration - up to an hour. Yeah, like I'm letting this guy slip."
>"Alright. I do know the rules about concentration spells, so any damage you take, any significant distraction -"
"And the giant becomes free. i know. Well, i'm going to make the most of this. "KNEEL GIANT! I wanna RIDE YOU!"
>>44530301
Nope. It was voice and text together.
>>44526820
Because of the thumbnail, I thought she was a giant and that was a waterfall between her boobs.
>>44530126
No, because what i just described was a melee attack. If this was 3.5, the attack would have gone "Oh, oh wow, the enemy didn't move? He's he's standing right next to me? Oh god what heaven is this? Okay, I'm doing a full attack. (Clatter of four d20 dice) Uh, well, er, this lowest one goes first, does a 13 hit his AC? no? Okay, then, what about a 26? Yeah? Okay! and a 20? No? huh. So, one hit, then. For, uh, (clatter) s- seventeen damage."
Fuck.
>>44530447
>No, because what i just described was a melee attack.
No.
>>44529931
>Okay, this is VS. REFLEX, I get me MOVE up to 8 SPACES, making an ATTACK against EACH ENEMY I PASS, yaddayaddayadda
That's not a melee attack. That's a power.
One listed right on your character sheet I might add, and is arguably THE most complicated power in 4e.
Meanwhile, that level of complexity for any spell is the norm for 3.PF, with half of the text just begin descriptions on how you have your fingers arranged and what face you're making while wiggling your left pinky toe, that nearly requires you to pull out the magnifying glass just to find what part of the spell description tells you what the fuck the spell even does.
>>44530126
>Not using the Spell Compendium
Be honest anon, you didn't really play 3.5. Maybe Pathfinder, but not 3.5.
>>44530447
>melee attack
Really, you should compare to Martial Adepts if you're going to go there.
>>44529931
I don't actually find this all that difficult.
Say one of my players uses it.
He rolls 5 d20 and I see if they hit - 30 seconds
Any enemy that gets hit rolls for their MBA damage and takes it - 30 seconds
He uses his immediate interrupt to add 2 to an ability, that takes 10 seconds.
Noting the psychic vuln and slow on enemies who take vuln damage - 15 seconds.
30 seconds for dropping dice, quick quip, erasing a misnoted number, etc.
All told, a big complex power takes 2 mins to get through, tops. And most things will be considerably less invovled.
>>44530855
>Be honest anon, you didn't really play 3.5. Maybe Pathfinder, but not 3.5.
Oh I did. From release in fact.
Still a goddamn chore to have to lug that thing out every couple of minutes, look for the spell, then figure out what the fuck the spell actually does.
>>44531081
>Still a goddamn chore to have to lug that thing out every couple of minutes
If you were really playing 3.5, the Spell Compendiums would never leave the table. And just like any other turn-based game, the player can look up their spells while it's someone else's turn.
>>44526820
High levels can grind to a complete halt, depending on players (true for any game) or classes.
As pudwhacking players are the same across all games, I'll leave those aside.
For some classes, especially ones who can routine switch out a large spell list, the play can slow down, especially while they either try to prepare optimum spells, or try to find the optimum use for those spells. Also, there may be some envy to deal with. Certain class archetypes are basically unitaskers. If it isn't HP attrition combat, the Champion really doesn't do anything. If the game doesn't focus on specific foes in specific terrains, the Ranger is just a very shitty fighter/rogue with a wilderness background.
If we are just talking combat, 5e, even at higher levels, tends to be faster. Provided no one has resistance to the type of damage being dishes out. Also, more nuanced casters can bog down any encounter. If your npcs are full casters, the same is doubly true.
>>44531139
>Spell Compendiums would never leave the table.
It didn't.
Unless you're insisting we somehow flip through it without opening it, it's still far more time consuming than anything in 4e.
Maybe this is me, but as the DM why not just print off little score cards for what your spells do, the description and relevant info. for the spell itself, along with the errata for it. Hell, didn't there use to be a program for that stuff in 4e for it's powers, and there's fan-made spell compendiums out for 5e that can do something like that.
This does require you wasting a fair bit of paper and making multiple copies of certain spells for players at the table, along with knowing what spells players pick when they level, but that seems easier (ie., making combat go faster).
>>44531259
In >>44531081, you say it was
>a chore to have to lug that thing out every couple of minutes
>lug that thing out
Now it never left the table.
Which is more accurate, because you never played 3.5.
>>44531307
>lug out=pull from a bag off the table
While you're here Mr Fantastic, mind dusting my shelf?
>>44531307
Not that guy you're talking to, but even I can see he means it had to be shuffled out of a stack of books, opened, and perused through.
>>44531299
Or better yet, make the player make those cards for every ability/spell they intend to use.
>>44531366
Don't interrupt the apologist, they are relying on literal interpretation to protect their most favouritist game that can do no wrong.
>>44531366
Yeah, except now - >>44531361 - it's sitting in the bag.
Once the Spell Compendium came out, it was basically the most important book for a mid- to high-level game. It wasn't something that got lost in the stack of books. It got referenced multiple times each combat round and routinely out of combat.
The guy's stories have changed every post:
>>44530126
> pauses every 5 minutes to find out which rulebook the spell you're casting is in
>>44531081
>a goddamn chore to have to lug [the Spell Compendium] out every couple of minutes
>>44531259
>It didn't [ever leave the table]
>>44531361
>It was in a bag on the table
That doesn't mean that 3.5 had no problems (it had plenty) but referencing spells wasn't even on the top ten.
>>44531509
>Yeah, except now - >>44531361(You) - it's sitting in the bag
Reading and critical thinking aren't your strong suits I take it.
Maybe Plastic Man is a better comparison than Mr Fantastic.
>>44530701
>half of the text just begin descriptions on how you have your fingers arranged and what face you're making while wiggling your left pinky toe, that nearly requires you to pull out the magnifying glass just to find what part of the spell description tells you what the fuck the spell even does.
...
Lemmie just stroll over to my book case here.
Pick up a random 3.5 boo- oh right, i sold most of mine, uh, lemmie get the core book.
Flip to a random spell...
"Sequester"
Abjuration...
level, components, blah blah blah.
First paragraph: "When cast... spell prevents divination spells from working to locate the creature or object affected. ... also renders (target) invisible to any form of sight or seeing -
huh, i'm surprised this isn't constantly cited as the anti "I'll divine everything" wizard guy spell.
Anywho, it goes on into specifics and exact function.
3.5 spells can start off with purple prose, but the 4e "powers" function as either melee or ranged or - whatever.
And then it goes on into the specifics of
>>44531806
hitting reply without proper editing: the post.
>>44531787
>let's go ad hominem
Let's not.
You can't keep your story straight, which shows that in this instance you are engaged in a fabrication. It's not a big deal, as hyperbole on the internet is hardly anything new. But this is 4chan - you can walk away with your dignity intact, rather than start name-calling.
>>44531509
Alright, I'll take nice and slow so you can comprehend what exactly is happening here, since you seem to be strugglign with it m8.
>now it's sitting in a bag
Said by no one except you. That post you quoted is saying that by "lug out" I didn't mean I was pulling it out of a bag every time.
Lug out in itself was an exaggeration, and not literally what I'm doing.
>pauses every 5 minutes
True when you play with people who have any familiarity with how 3.5 works(ie, every one plays spellcasters because they're the only classes that can get anything done).Again, not literally, just by a wide margin. Felt I should explain the humor this time since you seem to be struggling with it..
>goddamn chore to lug...couple of minutes
Don't see any change here. Again, exaggeration, but doesn't contradict anything I said earlier.
>it didn't ever leave the table
true
>it was in a bag on the table
As I said above, something said by no one but you assuming things.
>>44531937
>You can't keep your story straight
Your lack of reading comprehension and inability to remember things mentioned 2 seconds ago aren't my problem.Not literally 2 seconds. Exaggeration!
>>44526820
How about you play it instead of posting your cancerous weeaboo wankbait on /tg/?
>>44530126
>they never used dndtools.eu
