Playtest Update

KidSnide · Sep 25, 2012

Kamikaze Midget said:
It does undercut it. It doesn't necessarily remove it, but it does undercut it.

The idea is just to divorce class archetypes from having to have a particular recharge rate. Other mechanics can still distinguish classes. Wizards still use spellbooks and memorize magic, they just have a choice of how much power to invest in a spell (maybe even a choice they make when they prepare it!). Fighters still use flexible, dynamic maneuvers, they just get a choice of how much "oomph" to put into them in the moment.

Also, classes could be given different recharge systems without necessarily using the same mechanics. For example, wizards could be given specific spells that, when prepared, operate as at-will or per-encounter abilities, but fighters could have an optional rule where they get fewer combat expertise dice every round, but have access to a different pool of "push yourself harder" dice that recharges after a short or long rest.

-KS

DEFCON 1 · Sep 25, 2012

Manbearcat said:
I'm assuming (well hoping really) that the reason that he didn't address Races and Feats/Specialties is because that was the second playtest survey to go out. Regardless, I'm disappointed that there was not more specificity in the Fighter section. I'm glad they acknowledge Glancing Blow issues but there are plenty of other problems (such as the disparity in effectiveness of Duelist).

Yup... there was a short Twitter convo between Dave Chalker (of Critical-Hits), Mike Shea from Sly Flourish (I think) and Mearls where it was mentioned regarding Feats/Specialties that that info was going to be coming in through the second playtest survey, which is why Mearls didn't address it yet. This was because of Chalker's post on his website where he talked about not really liking Backgrounds and Specialties anymore because of the character confusion they cause.

I'm A Banana · Sep 25, 2012

KidSnide said:
Also, classes could be given different recharge systems without necessarily using the same mechanics. For example, wizards could be given specific spells that, when prepared, operate as at-will or per-encounter abilities, but fighters could have an optional rule where they get fewer combat expertise dice every round, but have access to a different pool of "push yourself harder" dice that recharges after a short or long rest.

My first stab at it, from a different thread:

Me said:
From here.

Magic Missile

Single Missile: Deal 1d4+INT force damage to one living creature. The spell is not expended, and you can cast it again on your next turn.

Missile Battery: Launch three missiles as above. The spell is partially expended, and you can prepare it again during a short rest.

Missile Massacre: Launch five missiles as above. The spell is fully expended, and you can prepare it again only during a long rest.

Cleave

A Hot Knife Through Butter: When you reduce a creature to 0 hp or fewer, spend a single expertise die to make a melee weapon attack against another creature you can reach. The expertise die returns at the start of your next turn.

Can't Stop The Spin: When you reduce a creature to 0 hp or fewer, spend a single expertise die to make a melee weapon attack against up to two other creatures you can reach. The expertise die returns after your next short rest.

Whirligig: When you reduce a creature to 0 hp or fewer, spend a single expertise die to make a melee weapon attack against all other creatures you can reach. The expertise die returns after your next long rest.

Sneak Attack

Advantageous Openings: When you have advantage, you can deal 1d6 extra damage.

Backstab: When you have surprise, your first attack, if it hits, deals 3d6 extra damage. You loose your use of Sneak Attack until your next short rest, however -- they're onto your tricks.

Assassination: When you have surprise, your first attack, if it hits, kills any creature with less than 10 hp who is not immune to poison. You loose your use of Sneak Attack until your next extended rest, however -- you need to brew more poison and apply it to your tools, something you can only do with a few hours.

Cure Wounds

Cure Light Wounds:Heal 1d8+WIS hp by touching a target. You regain the use of your Cure Wounds spell at the start of your next turn.

Cure Moderate Wounds: Heal 3d8+WIS hp by touching a target. You regain the use of your Cure Wounds spell after a short rest.

Cure Serious Wounds: Heal 5d8+WIS hp by touching a target. You regain the use of your Cure Wounds spell after a long rest.

Minor Illusion
You can use this spell while hidden, and the illusions it creates can be within 50 feet of you.

Ghost Sounds: You create an illusory noise arising from any point in range. The sounds can be anything you imagine, from quiet whispers to a dragon's roar, but you do not have fine control over the sound -- you cannot make it say specific things, or duplicate a specific creature. This use of Minor Illusion does not expend the ability.

Object Illusion: You create an illusory object, such as a wall, a pit, a table, a treasure chest, a suit of armor, etc. The object behaves as if real visually and audibly (it can be lifted, opened, broken, etc., and it makes splintering noises or clinking sounds or whatever is appropriate), but it cannot bear an actual force: things set on the table fall through, people who fall into the pit don't actually stumble, and while the chest may open (and may even contain treasure, if the caster wishes), it won't be a safe place to store your own loot. This use of Minor Illusion expends the ability until you take a short rest.

Illusory Creature: You create the illusion of a creature, such as a person, a halfling, a dog, a troll, a dragon, or a small bug. The creature behaves as if real visually and audibly (a dog might bark, or it might start reciting poetry; a dragon might roar, and its wings might ripple as it flies, the halfling's hair will wave in the breeze, and his footsteps will be audible), but it cannot bear an actual force: a weapon swung at the creature passes through air, an attempt to lift the creature lifts no weight, and any attack from the creature deals no damage. While the visual and audible reaction may be sensible (a halfling may dodge all attacks directed at it, while the dog's bite may sound like it rips through clothes), there is no actual force involved. This use of Minor Illusion expends the ability until you take an extended rest.

But yeah, suffice it to say that I basically agree with the idea of scaling this at the level of individual abilities, rather than necessarily at the class level.

I mean, as much as I'd love to convince everyone who adores encounter magic that they are better off playing a Sorcerer than a Wizard, I don't think that's going to sell, anymore than telling me that I need to play a Wizard with at-will abilities is going to sell. The concepts aren't intrinsically linked anymore for D&D in general. We can't have a purely Vancian wizard without tossing out a chunk of 4e players, and that's not acceptable for the game in general (though it might be acceptable for your table.

).

BobROE · Sep 25, 2012

GMforPowergamers said:
I agree 100% if you don't play the playtest you might as well yell at WoTC Hq "don't pay attantion to me"

Yes, though it raises the question as to why a given person isn't playing the playtest.

By default it's probably going to be a relatively small subset of the gaming populous as a whole, but who's participating and why people choose to participate or not is somewhat important.

Especially if WotC is trying to widen it's user base.

Jeff Carlsen · Sep 26, 2012

Kamikaze Midget said:
My first stab at it, from a different thread:

*snip*

While I think you have the right idea, I think this takes it too far and feels forced. Instead, I would suggest that there simply be some spells that, once prepared, function as an encounter or at will spell. This makes it really easy to treat those spells as modules and helps prevent a forced symmetry.

Crazy Jerome · Sep 26, 2012

ZombieRoboNinja said:
Yeah, dunno what to do about that beyond the outreach they're already doing at conventions, etc.

I guess there's something to be said for keeping things simple for "casual" roleplayers who don't hang out on ENWorld, but I think they're doing pretty well on that front.

One thing they could be doing is constantly improving their survey methods.

For example, how they got out of that last round of surveys that "turn undead as a spell" was not popular I have no idea, since the way they did the spell questions had to be a major turnoff to a lot of respondents. All a survey like that does is suggest a followup question.

If it were me, I'd do a bunch of narrow, very simple surveys based on hints from the broader data. Do one three times a week. "Do you think you prefer turn undead as spell, channel divinity, stand-alone power, or other?" Then maybe tied to a couple of related questions, such as, "Do you enjoy playing clerics?"

Some of the questions will not yield much information. My example might be terrible. But do enough of these on a regular basis, and the questions will get more insightful as time goes on.

I'd also like to see some ranking questions that were more focused. For example, "You've been asked to play an arcane caster and have agreed. Would you prefer wizard, sorcerer, warlock, or no preference?" Follow up: "Would you normally consider an arcane caster as a choice, or only when asked or filling a party need?"

I'm A Banana · Sep 26, 2012

Jeff Carlsen said:
While I think you have the right idea, I think this takes it too far and feels forced. Instead, I would suggest that there simply be some spells that, once prepared, function as an encounter or at will spell. This makes it really easy to treat those spells as modules and helps prevent a forced symmetry.

I'm in!

I'd expect it to raise unholy heck if they don't nail the names on the spells, though. "Rargh, Fireball is an encounter power, 5e is for powergamers, ngngngngngnggngngngngngng."

But heck, in this light, they can probably take some 4e powers/spells/exploits/etc. and convert them pretty directly.

Yeah, works for me.

As long as we're avoiding hammering a particular class into a particular recharge niche by requiring certain abilities that must come in one form or the other, I think we'll be fine.

CAFRedblade · Sep 26, 2012

For Vancian casters, I wouldn't mind an option to prepare spells at a higher level slot (not sure how high) which enables multiple uses per day, or simply per encounter, all at the same effects as the lower prepared slot. Perhaps with an option to overcharge it and burn it as a full daily at the actual prepared slot level.

Level 3 Fireball, in appropriate slot does 3d6 damage.
Prepared in a level 6 slot, it has multiple uses, perhaps one per slot level, or is just an encounter spell.
Then if you haven't yet used the spell or another unthought of limiting factor, you can burn it completely for 6d6 damage.

Perhaps this would work similarly for a charm spell, at the higher spell level, you can naturally charm more powerful creatures, or Multiple low level creatures..

Klaus · Sep 26, 2012

Kamikaze Midget said:
I'm in!

I'd expect it to raise unholy heck if they don't nail the names on the spells, though. "Rargh, Fireball is an encounter power, 5e is for powergamers, ngngngngngnggngngngngngng."

But heck, in this light, they can probably take some 4e powers/spells/exploits/etc. and convert them pretty directly.

Yeah, works for me.

As long as we're avoiding hammering a particular class into a particular recharge niche by requiring certain abilities that must come in one form or the other, I think we'll be fine.

Why not take a page from the 3.5e Reserve Feats? If you take this feat/specialty (Recharge Mage?), you can cast minor versions of spells you prepare, yadda-yadda. A Recharge Mage that prepares fireball can cause minor bursts of fire, etc, etc.

hbarsquared · Sep 26, 2012

CAFRedblade said:
For Vancian casters, I wouldn't mind an option to prepare spells at a higher level slot (not sure how high) which enables multiple uses per day, or simply per encounter, all at the same effects as the lower prepared slot. Perhaps with an option to overcharge it and burn it as a full daily at the actual prepared slot level.

Something like this is what I hope for. The use of spell slots as "currency." I like the idea of choosing how to prepare fireball on a daily basis as either 3d6 or 6d6, or either as a daily or an encounter.

I also think permanent sacrifice should also be an option. Lose two or three or four level 2 daily spell slots to make a level 1 spell at-will?

That way the base wizard is all Vancian/daily, with built in replacement options for recharging and at-will, instead of tacked on at-will and recharge abilities.