I disagree strongly about the original posters premise of having care, camaraderie, and kinship the default state of the party. I like the companions, like that they are not pushovers/camp-followers, but have distinct personalities, their own agency and often conflicting interests. As long as there is a dynamic range, path to redemption/damnation, as there seem to be - I prefer having to work for what the OP apparently takes for granted.

Originally Posted by Stabbey
The OP of this topic seems to have already pre-judged the game and found it lacking, and is only looking for an excuse to condemn it. The writer of that article claims to be a D&D enthusiast for 40 years, yet is unfamiliar with the 5e rules about how actions, bonus actions, and movement works.

He also complains about fight with the mind-controlled fishermen being hard to avoid, but...
you can take a ranged character, sneak around the edge and use the ranged attack to finish off the Mind Flayer. Attack averted.


I did that the first time I encountered that, without bothering to try talking to them first.

Agreed. Also there are multiple conversation checks that lead to not fighting them too. Did your way get you any xp though? I don't think you were rewarded solving this through conversation.