D&D 5E So did they just drop modularity ? This is what has me worried.

Crazy Jerome · Aug 20, 2012

Remathilis said:
Willpoints are equal to the number of spell-levels that character can cast on the wizard chart.

1.) Total up the total spell levels (IE: 3 1st, 2 2nd, 1 3rd = 10 will).
2.) Use those to determine wizard spells per day.
3.) Use Sorcerer list for number of spells known.

Done.

No game can be completely module. The idea is to create a game where PCs (and DMs) can dial the complexity up or down (grid v. gridless, full heal or partial heal, skills/feats yes or no, lots of magic/little magic). Its not DIY Fantasy. Never was.

I think this is what they intend, but with each class having perhaps a handful of such "conversions" spelled out in the rules as an option. If there are 20 spell-casting systems, they won't show you how to use every one of them with a wizard. They will pick out the 2-5 that are either really easy to explain or likely to be popular, and give you those. So with a wizard, they might spell out how to use cleric or sorcerer casting instead of the default, but not explain how to use druidic or bardic or warlock or whatever.

Umbran · Aug 20, 2012

hamstertamer said:
So they are doing it completely backwards then.

Decide what the class is then make the mechanics fit that class.

Well, by that logic, then, there can never be anything that uses a spell-point mechanic that we could call a wizard - wizards already have vancian magic, period. Since that mechanic has been known to fit that class, no other mechanic can ever be used. The conversation is now over. Good day.

Or, we could be just slightly less picky, and note that some mechanics can, in fact, be re-themed. But first, we want to see how they work in play, where the balance points sit, and then we can work that mechanic into one or many classes, to suit.

Moreover, we can remember that they are playTESTING. When you have leisure to test (leisure, like, a year and more of it still to come), the order in which you do things doesn't matter that much. You can fiddle around, and see what works, let yourself be inspired, and adjust. "You must choose your flavor first and choose mechanics to go with it," only holds when you don't have much space to fiddle with it and get feedback from the players.

Jester David · Aug 21, 2012

I imagine they will have some kind of modularity later, so you can have a mana based wizard.

But having a warlock and sorcerer means you don't need an optional module to have a spell casting class you like. There's a range for everyone in the base game.

Tony Vargas · Aug 21, 2012

triqui said:
I think people is missing the point. They didn't say you could play any class you want, with any ruleset you please to do so. What they said, is that you can find a place in a 5e table, whatever is your playstyle or edition of choice.

That means that if you like Vancian magic, you can play 5e. Use a Wizard. If you don't like Vancian magic, you can play 5e too. Use a Sorcerer. If you want fighters with a ton of maneuvers, different options, and combat stuff, you can play a 5e fighter and use Combat Superiority. If you rather preffer a simple fighter that hit and do damage, 2e style, just use Combat superiority as extra damage and you are done.

THAT's what they promised. They never said you could play a wizard like 2e, 3e, 4e, essentials, BECMI, alternate Unearthed Arcana and NeverWinter Nights videogame style in the same table.

What Mr. Mearls did say in L&L, among other things, was:

"Game Design
The new system must create a mechanical and mathematical framework that the play experience of all editions of D&D can rest within. One player can create a 4th-Edition style character while another can build a 1st-Edition one. Complexity and individual experiences rest in the players' hands. That experience is more important than the specifics of the math..."

Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (D&D Next Design Considerations)

outsider · Aug 21, 2012

Evenglare said:
Just because a sorcerer's magic originates from a different place doesn't mean magic should work different. If that were the case, since a cleric's magic originates from a God then their magic should work differently from a wizard , who's magic originates from the weave (or wherever magic comes from)

You can blame the "All the 4e classes are the same! Fighters have spells now!" complaints for this. People demanded separate subsystems for everything, and that's what they are giving us.

Remathilis · Aug 21, 2012

outsider said:
You can blame the "All the 4e classes are the same! Fighters have spells now!" complaints for this. People demanded separate subsystems for everything, and that's what they are giving us.

That's a Good Time (TM).

Player: I want to be an arcane caster...
DM: Well, we have the wizard. He's a traditional slot caster...
Player: Looks limiting.
DM: How bout a sorcerer? He' uses spell points...
Player: Looks hard to track...
DM: How bout a warlock? He has abilities that refresh over time...
Player: That sounds good. Where are my 4d6?

This what they are talking about. Want a classic 1e-style mage? Go wizard. Want something resembing a 4e caster? Go warlock. Both at play at the same table.

They never said "You can play a 4e wizard with a 2e wizard", merely something that resemble each...

Lord Mhoram · Aug 21, 2012

outsider said:
You can blame the "All the 4e classes are the same! Fighters have spells now!" complaints for this. People demanded separate subsystems for everything, and that's what they are giving us.

After seeing the Warlock and Sorcerer I have to say that if what you say is true, it just might be the single best thing to come out of D&DN.

Evenglare · Aug 21, 2012

Remathilis said:
They never said "You can play a 4e wizard with a 2e wizard", merely something that resemble each...

That's a shame then, it seem's ill stick with 4th edition or 13th age. There seems to be no class that resembles a wizard with spell points, as I dont want to be a sorcerer with a high charisma and bloodline heritage that morphs overtime. I was hoping I could play a wizard with spell points. It seems that 5th edition has lost me as a consumer. I was really hoping that this wasn't the case. I had very high hopes when this was first announced.

fba827 · Aug 21, 2012

having a sorcerer with spellpoints does not exclude the eventuality of the final wizard having a spellpoint optional module. Moreso if you take in to account that wizard is suppose to be a common class whereas warlock and sorcerer are predefined as rarer and thus more specific and complex. given commonality of wizards i suspect they'll (eventually) have more option in the actual game (be it part of core or as a supplement)

the point in my saying all that is, if you want a spellpoint option for wizards, be sure to note as much in your survey feedback when that is sent out.

slight tangent: for the purpose of gathering feedback, having distinctly different spell methods given different classes is extremely more streamlined for asking questions and comparing rather than having to qualify each question with the subsystem of spell casting used. so this may be a case of assuming that the lack is an absolute rather than the lack simply meaning it isn't part of their initial core design for baseline development.

Grimmjow · Aug 21, 2012

Evenglare said:
So they released the warlock and sorcerer, that's cool and all but then I began to remember them talking about modularity and playing the game you want to run. So I was under the impression that magic systems would be modular, but with the release of warlock and sorcerer those classes seem to be tied to the magic system of their choice. This ISNT what they initially promised. The original verbiage implied that you would be able to play a wizard and then how you cast your spells were whatever kind of spell system that the DM had for his campaign.

Originally they wanted each class to be extremely basic and then from there you would be able to attach modules to build up complexity as you see fit. Now with the introduction of warlock and sorcerer it seems those classes are very specific and antithetical to what was originally promised.

Sorc and warlock are different classes from the wizard. There could be different ways for them all the cast spells at a later date. I wouldnt worry to much about it in playtest number 2