Reading through this and holy shit, is it just me, or is this

>>54331001
Maybe ask your question on the general.

Just you.

>>54331001
It has its highs and lows.

>>54331001
Another poster committing a cardinal sin of Baiting: No Vague, Sweeping Statements. If you're going to be making the attempt, then go the whole way and find specific reasons, find sources you can actually use to help support your argument. Additionally, your subject matter is ignorantly chosen. The quality of the PHB's rules are a matter that is constantly up to debate, but the rules themselves are quite comprehensively written out and organized meticulously. As far as I'm concerned, 5e has done everything exactly right with the presentation and formatting of their information, as well as integrating it with the artwork and giving it a unique feel, while still keeping it easy on the eyes and clarified to a T. In that, at least, 5e has done something with absolute precision and quality.

1.5/10 Poorly chosen argument, no substance, and no effort.

>>54331001
Yes, by design.

>>54331001
It's not you, 5e takes many of its inspiration from 3.PF, which also includes how most of the rules are written as vaguely as possible (save for magic, of-fucking-course).

Perhaps it's intentionally written so vaguely, so that there would be lots of room for improvisation and that so Joe Neckbeard doesn't come crying about the rules every time the DM does something he doesn't like.

>>54331001
Yep. It reads like they wrote it all in one draft and then just published it.