Lists of what I am not allowing will be passed around the room.

GX.Sigma

Adventurer
Not quite. The core will be core. There will be a number of optional "bolt on" modules to that core. What you've seen so far is pretty much core stuff, though the traits and backgrounds are not core.
I think it's more like a lot of things are "dials," and there has to be a default setting for the dial. The default setting for backgrounds and themes are that they're in, but you can optionally set that dial to "off." The default setting for Alignment will likely be "in, but with few or no mechanical consequences." Then you can turn that dial up or down.

(sauce: https://twitter.com/mikemearls/status/207974318636933122)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Kurtomatic

First Post
mimebox.gif
 

Mercule

Adventurer
...hm? Spending a minute in the dark so your eyes adjust is supernatural? Does that make me a wizard?
Read the power. The rogue can see in complete darkness as if it were shadowed. I.e. it isn't 3e low-light vision. It's darkvision-lite.

If I misread it, I'll be plenty tickled.
 

player's can't have expectations until after they have spoken with their DM.

I've run every RPG that way since the early 80s. You want to play in my game you build a character for that game - usually with me helping. You have an old character you want to bring in - I'll likely let you adapt him, but not blind as written.

Every PC goes through a DM vetting process.
 


"One big option" means that everything, down to the core, is supposed to be optional. If you want Next to be more like 4th edition then you will have options that you add or remove. If you want more of a 3rd edition feel then the same thing.

D&D Next equals build your own edition.

:)

As a HERO system veteran of 25 years, this prospect does not bother me. In fact I look forward to it. :D
 

AngryMojo

First Post
:)

As a HERO system veteran of 25 years, this prospect does not bother me. In fact I look forward to it. :D

I think this is the core of what's happening. D&D Next is effectively making the transition into "generic system" territory, and that shift comes with some baggage. I'm an avid Savage Worlds guy, and if I'm running a swashbuckling pirates game I disallow any races outside humans as well as modern day weapons and anything else I find inappropriate to the campaign. I don't complain about it, none of my players feel entitled to those things just because they're in the core book. That's just part of the territory with generic systems.

That being said, generic systems aren't for everybody. As large as a game that D&D is, it's not the only game out there. It may be a bitter pill to swallow, but if having to decide which optional rules or modules to use is such a turn-off that it becomes a deal-breaker for you then D&D Next probably won't be your game.
 

Oni

First Post
I'm not expecting this to really be that big of a deal. I imagine the DMG is going to come with templates of which modules to pick to get your game closet to the style of your edition of choice. Most of the time it'll be as simple as saying we're going to use this package and change this and this, and that'll be the end of it.
 

mlund

First Post
They'll be some confusion between Core Rules, Modules, and House Rules though. Some people are just ridiculously offended and defensive when you call anything in their personal home-brew scenarios "house rules." They've kind of latched onto an "everything is optional!" mantra to reject this horribly traumatic label.

There's Core Rules - the underlying premises on which you build your custom D&D game as opposed to something like Vampire or GURPS. Modules are built to fit onto these premises - adding to or subtracting from them with a deliberate purpose and professional development and balancing.

House Rules are things Players and DM's implement outside of Core and Modules in order to make their game more fun. Maybe they want to play historic Greyhawk so they don't have Dragonborn. Maybe they hate the idea of "damage on a miss" or "unlimited magic" so they start banning the Slayer feat and all Cantrip spells. These kind of a la carte changes to the Core Rules without the benefit of professional development, balance, or publishing are precises House Rules and they come with no warranties.

If enough tables have to adapt House Rules to address a particular game feature that just doesn't work, then you probably have a design defect.

"This PHB comes with Dragonborn. I hate Dragonborn. People shouldn't call it a House Rules when I ban Dragonborn," is not a design defect. (Substitute whatever pet-peeve you want for the word "Dragonborn" - "automatic damage," "hit dice," "clerics with shields," "warlords," whatever.)

- Marty Lund
 
Last edited:

Elf Witch

First Post
I am not sure what the OP is getting at every game I DM I go through and make a list of what is I am changing and what is allowed and not allowed.

Some I do in ever game like house rule out the five foot step. Other times it is for flavor like saying no dwarves or we are using the prestige paladin from unearthed arcana.

As a player I always ask what books are we allowed to use, what are your house rules if the DM does not volunteer them up front.

I don't view this as adversarial DMing. I have never felt that just because something is in the book that is works for every game.
 

Remove ads

Top