D&D 5E What rule(s) is 5e missing?

[EzekielRaiden]

Serious question: what would that cover?

Forced movement. Marking rules that aren't absolute crap. Perhaps rules that make in-combat healing/support more effective. Much better traps. Rules for terrain that go to literally anything more than "regular terrain" vs "difficult terrain." If there were, in fact, engaging rules for facing, those too, though honestly I find most facing rules to be tactically quite dull.

I'm sure I could come up with more if I actually spent time thinking on it.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Here's the thing: 5E isn't missing much really, IMO.

The issues are just that the rules that are there seem incomplete or are too simplified.

For example of an incomplete rule (or system), you can certainly grapple someone, but how do you restrain someone? It is possible in real life to restrain someone, so how do you do it in 5E?

Apparently the only way is with the Grappler feat. But feats are optional, so if you don't use feats it isn't possible.

And what do the designers say? "Just rule it however you want."

Why? You have rules for how to grapple, why not how to restrain? Would it be so hard to include another rule for restraining?

For an example of over simplified look at the rules for jumping. Up to your Strength score, with just a 10-foot approach. Pretty silly, really, and too simplified. Under Athletics, they even specify making a Strength (Athletics) check is done when "You try to jump an unusually long distance..." But again, now we have incomplete rules. What is the DC? How much further can you jump if you make the check? It is always just left up to the individual DM.

I know you can't make a game where you have rules for everything, but frankly my biggest issue with 5E is it seem half-assed.

Of course, some systems are missing, such as others have mentioned, like dominion development or mass combat, but personally those aren't big things for me. I'd rather see concrete, complete rules for the systems we have, first.

 

[Reynard]

Here's the thing: 5E isn't missing much really, IMO.

The issues are just that the rules that are there seem incomplete or are too simplified.

For example of an incomplete rule (or system), you can certainly grapple someone, but how do you restrain someone? It is possible in real life to restrain someone, so how do you do it in 5E?

Apparently the only way is with the Grappler feat. But feats are optional, so if you don't use feats it isn't possible.

And what do the designers say? "Just rule it however you want."

Why? You have rules for how to grapple, why not how to restrain? Would it be so hard to include another rule for restraining?

For an example of over simplified look at the rules for jumping. Up to your Strength score, with just a 10-foot approach. Pretty silly, really, and too simplified. Under Athletics, they even specify making a Strength (Athletics) check is done when "You try to jump an unusually long distance..." But again, now we have incomplete rules. What is the DC? How much further can you jump if you make the check? It is always just left up to the individual DM.

I know you can't make a game where you have rules for everything, but frankly my biggest issue with 5E is it seem half-assed.

Of course, some systems are missing, such as others have mentioned, like dominion development or mass combat, but personally those aren't big things for me. I'd rather see concrete, complete rules for the systems we have, first.

I see where you're coming from but I think it is important to point out that design philosophy is a real thing. 5E isn't"half assed" -- it follows a particular design philosophy in which it tried to avoid endless lists with DM fiat. Obviously that's not to everyone's taste.

I started out wanting precise DC lists like you, but as I mastered the system I realized they were unnecessary and even antithetical to the 5E design philosophy. If you want a game that really embraces a precise design philosophy, give Pathfinder 2E a try.

 

[humble minion]

It's not a exactly a rule per se, but a skill that covers things like law/business management/politics/government/etc.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I see where you're coming from but I think it is important to point out that design philosophy is a real thing. 5E isn't"half assed" -- it follows a particular design philosophy in which it tried to avoid endless lists with DM fiat. Obviously that's not to everyone's taste.

I started out wanting precise DC lists like you, but as I mastered the system I realized they were unnecessary and even antithetical to the 5E design philosophy. If you want a game that really embraces a precise design philosophy, give Pathfinder 2E a try.

Yeah, I just think that design philosophy (of 5E) is simply being lazy really.

Personally, I don't need (or want) precise DC lists. What I want is more rules and guidance. As a player I would be frustrated if I went from one group to another just to find out both DMs have different "rules" for how they do the same thing. It creates an internal inconsistency that is bad for the game IMO.

As for PF2... oi... it is overkill. I get why they went to a simplified rule system after 4E as well, but they simplified things too much for my tastes. I finally got a hold of a copy of A5E, and don't really care for the direction it went, either.

But 5E isn't alone in this. I am searching for what will be the Holy Grail of gaming for me, and fear it is a fool's quest.

 

[payn]

It's not a exactly a rule per se, but a skill that covers things like law/business management/politics/government/etc.

Just a skill system itself that isnt an afterthought would be swell.

 

[jasper]

Just out of curiosity:

What rules do you think are missing from 5e? ..

For every nat 20 you roll, you have to pay Jasper 1 cent American. Western Union or Visa cards Only. $10 min. What. I want to go to dragon con in style.

 

[Minigiant]

Exceptional Ability Scores.

If D&D 5th Edition is Ability Score based then bring on Strength 18/75, Dexterity 20/50, and Intelligence 19/99.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Not that I personally care about them, but I imagine one of the more popular suggestions would be magic item crafting rules.

Xanathar's has some. Not super in depth, but they work for the most part. I'd rather crafting involve some rolls, and the hard requirement that it always requires a rare ingredient is kinda annoying, and there are no rules for designing a magic item, but basic crafting rules are in there.

Forced movement. Marking rules that aren't absolute crap. Perhaps rules that make in-combat healing/support more effective. Much better traps. Rules for terrain that go to literally anything more than "regular terrain" vs "difficult terrain." If there were, in fact, engaging rules for facing, those too, though honestly I find most facing rules to be tactically quite dull.

I'm sure I could come up with more if I actually spent time thinking on it.

Ability to trade something (AC, attack, damage, an attack, bonus action, movement, whatever) in order to threaten your space in a way that makes it difficult terrain

Subclasses that engage with the rules mentioned

Explicit addition of most of the basic battlemaster manuever into general actions you can take in combat. The most important ones are in the DMG already, but it would be expanded in such a module (and no, this wouldn't take anything away from BMs. Disarming as an action is nowhere near equal to disarming as part of an attack that has already hit, chosen when said attack hits, with extra damage)

Explicit rules for using every skill in combat

 

[jayoungr]

I do find myself wishing for morale checks. They don't really fit any of the ability saves neatly.