Seminar Transcript - Charting the Course: An Edition for all Editions

ferratus · Jan 27, 2012

Lanefan said:
Not just the d20. The d8, the d6, the d12 - all the damage dice get squashed by the bonus as well.

Lan-"hoping the other dice get to play more in 5e, in the last two editions the d20 stole the spotlight"-efan

Definately. What's the point of having all those lovely platonic solids if they never get any use?

Plane Sailing · Jan 27, 2012

I'm sensing real platonic love here, IYKWIMAITYD.

Leatherhead · Jan 27, 2012

Monte: For example, the basic game fighter might have specific level-bases abilities. Things that every fighter has. If you decide to get more customized, you can swap standard abilities for more complex, optional abilities. These are the kinds of things that feats do now. But the complex stuff is balanced with what's in the core. One character is more complex, but not necessarily more powerful.

That would be the easy way to do it, for sure. Just have a prebuilt "Fighter" class, where all you have to do is copy a page or two out of the book and onto the table you go. Then have a stripped down "Warrior" class who can pick all their own feats and abilities.

Also, I am guessing "Abilities" are the new "Powers"

ON MONSTERS AT DIFFERENT LEVELS

Note: The below is pure speculation.
The easy way to do that would be templates for everything. Just take the level 14 magic-user template (debuff ability, ranged attack, and AoE attack), apply the orc race template bonuses (Rage of Gruumsh ability), then maybe slap on a primal theme template.

Or, if you don't have time for all of that, just use the handy Orc Shaman who is already stated for you to run right out of the book.

Plane Sailing · Jan 27, 2012

Leatherhead said:
Note: The below is pure speculation.
The easy way to do that would be templates for everything. Just take the level 14 magic-user template (debuff ability, ranged attack, and AoE attack), apply the orc race template bonuses (Rage of Gruumsh ability), then maybe slap on a primal theme template.

Or, if you don't have time for all of that, just use the handy Orc Shaman who is already stated for you to run right out of the book.

I think that the easier way (and what I'm reading in their responses) is no templates or anything like that.

No modification.

Just pull some orcs out of the MM and you're good to go - because attack bonuses and AC won't be scaling out the wazoo (as per 3e+), it means that even when you're 8th level those orcs still have a non-trivial chance to hit you. Sure, you've got more hp, and fancy manouvers, but you can't just ignore them.

They mention the possibility of including some Shaman or chieftans too, but the main aim is that the removal of the underlying AC/to hit scaling means that lower powered creatures are still useful.

Cheers

buddhafrog · Jan 28, 2012

Kzach said:
Once again, they're saying all the right things. The problem I have with this is in the delivery. We've seen far too many promises be broken to have any faith in the outcome. So whilst I like a lot of what I'm hearing, it's still all smoke and mirrors until I see a final product that delivers all those promises.

But at this point, you don't blame them for not showing things yet, right? They are keeping play-testing hidden so they can adjust things before it is more widely released.

At this point, all they can do is "say things," and I feel they are saying all the right things that I want to hear. I take the for what it is and am very optimistic. WotC's new leadership has been saying these things for months and I believe it is legit. Can't wait.

Hautamaki · Jan 28, 2012

Parts that stood out to me:

Higher level characters get more options, but not exponentially more powerful to the point that 1/2 to 3/4's of the monster manual becomes obsolete/trivial for them to deal with.

Built-in support for mass combat and other higher level styles of play like castle ownership, etc, that players can easily switch between in addition to dungeon crawling.

Their goal of having something for everyone seems sort of pie in the sky optimistic but at this point as we all know D&D needed a hail mary and they seem to be putting in a noble effort to that end.

Leatherhead · Jan 28, 2012

Plane Sailing said:
I think that the easier way (and what I'm reading in their responses) is no templates or anything like that.

No modification.

Just pull some orcs out of the MM and you're good to go - because attack bonuses and AC won't be scaling out the wazoo (as per 3e+), it means that even when you're 8th level those orcs still have a non-trivial chance to hit you. Sure, you've got more hp, and fancy manouvers, but you can't just ignore them.

The scaling bit is intriguing ( I wonder if more abilities is enough for progressions sake), but the rest sounds a bit too "easy". I sincerely hope there is some form of baked-in modification, I would hate it if I had to reverse engineer monsters in order get things like Orc Wizards and Orc Assassins in a game that sounds this modular.

Things to ponder about the scaling bit: Is it possible this would work both ways? Can I bust out my Colossal Red Dragon against a group of level ones?

WotC_Trevor · Jan 31, 2012

Jeffrey said:
Am I reading this wrong (blame it on a bad cold and fever) but shouldn't the word "not" be placed in Monte's reply in the first sentence between "ask to do things that are" and "specifically covered"?

Ow. It hurts to type.

It should be something like "are not covered by the rules" but I missed the key word there with all the blogging. Sorry for that one.

WotC_Trevor · Jan 31, 2012

Plane Sailing said:
I'm now curious about whether this got changed a bit in the paraphrasing, as reviewing the tweets from last night, they all seem along the line of

Monte: Identifying a D&D ranger is like looking at whether it's best represented by Aragorn or Drizzt.

- ie raising the question rather than giving the answer (unless a subsequent question clarified that, and I've not spotted that on the various twitter feeds I've looked at)

Yeah you've got it right Plane Sailing. It was more about looking at the ranger and seeing where he falls. The idea is that you could build a ranger like aragorn, or if you like a two weapon style ranger or a beast companion style ranger, you could build those as well.

That discussion point was more about looking at the question, and determining if there is one overall feel to give people, or if you can give them options to flesh out the different archetypes of ranger.