This Week in D&D

Magil said:

What elements do you think they could include to attract the so-called "old school" crowd, then?

Click to expand...

I am not sayimg it is even possible for WOTC to reach their stated intent,.through addition or subtraction. The whole premise of pleasing older edtion fans while also catering to 3.x,.PF and 4e fans is a pipe dream.

I've got that ol' familiar feeling I get from these articles: disappointment, which is usually tempered by pleasant surprise when I see what they actually do in the playtest. For example, I hated the "fighter design goals" with a passion, but those goals somehow led to the CS fighter, which I am very excited about.

So that in mind, here are some responses:

"Casting mechanics at the system level, not at the class level" - I still think this idea gives up a lot of flavor and specificity in the name of "modularity." But let's see how they pull it off! I'm very glad to see warlocks got separated out of the "magic user" stew, so that they can preserve some unique mechanics. I wonder whether psions will be so lucky, as another class whose main feature pre-4e was that it provided an alternate spellcasting system.

Note that the "magic-user" metaclass they're talking about DOESN'T include the cleric. So again, do clerics get alternate spellcasting systems?

Now wizard traditions include apparently one extra cantrip and one "signature" spell that you get to cast twice. Really, what is the point of this signature spell? It sounds basically like one extra spell slot, but more limited. If they're going to introduce encounter spells, I'd think they should go whole hog with it,, especially if you get only ONE signature spell.

All the cleric changes sound like a step up from the second playtest. Yay, simplified mechanics! No more "channel divinity" that was only for healing except when it wasn't! I don't get at all why anyone insists on Turn Undead as a class feature, but sure, why not. Expanded domain powers/benefits sound great too.

One big note, though: we all get that they're officially giving up on siloing off healing, right? "Channel divinity" was an attempt to assuage the concerns of players who didn't like the pre-4e tendency for clerics to have to save all their spells for heals, but now it's gone. Does the 5e cleric even get the 3e cleric's spontaneous healing? Or does he literally have to make 30+% of his prepared spells Cure X Wounds?

Simple fighter option: sure! Options are nice! I'm not sure why this would take more than 5 minutes though. Get rid of CS, give fighters a static bonus to damage and hp (to make up for lost parry and deadly strike). There you go! Roughly on par with the normal fighter in terms of raw effectiveness, no muss and fuss.

For rogues, they're screwing with skill mastery a bit, which, sure. But how about those alternatives to sneak attack that keep getting floated? Is hide-attack-hide really the be-all end-all of rogue tactics?

Skill changes sound great, specialty changes sound... meh (I hope "stealth specialist" isn't a real title, or it's way more confusing than the previous system). Since this playtest goes up to 10, do we get "advanced" specialties for levels 6 and 9, or do you just pick a second specialty? (Either would work, I guess, but advanced specialties might be a lot more interesting.)

The throwback is opening up the 2 other parts of the '3 pillars system', and opening up spells/abilities so they can be used not only in a 'strictly combat' situation, but in RP situations as well.

4th was a tactical miniatures game rewarding tactical thinking. the system became tight and conflict resolution became quantitative. Older versions of DND had that (more as it went along), but they also promoted 'creative solutions' to problem solving.

there's something to be said about crunching numbers and doing the most damage you can, there's also something to be said about solving your problem without ever drawing you sword. Yeah, you could do this 4th... but the system didn't really promote it, its was outside of the system.

Magil said:

What elements do you think they could include to attract the so-called "old school" crowd, then?

Note, I am not asking what elements that they should exclude to get the attention of old school fans. At this point exclusion is cutting off the nose to spite the face. I am just curious as what they should include. Since Next is supposedly all about modularity, it should be completely possible for them to run these supposed "old school" mechanics alongside their new ideas, and let players and DMs pick and choose.

Click to expand...

Magil said:

What elements do you think they could include to attract the so-called "old school" crowd, then?

Note, I am not asking what elements that they should exclude to get the attention of old school fans. At this point exclusion is cutting off the nose to spite the face. I am just curious as what they should include. Since Next is supposedly all about modularity, it should be completely possible for them to run these supposed "old school" mechanics alongside their new ideas, and let players and DMs pick and choose.

Click to expand...

THAC0

I'd also ask the converse: what should be proffered to appeal directly to 4Eers?

Stormonu said:

THAC0

I'd also ask the converse: what should be proffered to appeal directly to 4Eers?

Click to expand...

The ability to once per day use HD as an action, called second wind

VinylTap said:

there's something to be said about crunching numbers and doing the most damage you can, there's also something to be said about solving your problem without ever drawing you sword. Yeah, you could do this 4th... but the system didn't really promote it, its was outside of the system.

Click to expand...

Maybe skill challenges?

Warrior, Magic-User, Priest, and Rogue as class categories with things like this:

Warrior: (Best Weapons, AC, and Combat Maneuvers; Large HD)
- Fighter (Combat Superiority)
- Marshall [Warlord] (Leadership)
- Barbarian [Berserk] (Rage)

Priest: (Divine Magic, Customized By Deity, Medium HD)
- Cleric (Requested Spells)
- Favored [Soul] (Imbued Spells)
- Druid (Natural Spells)

Magic-User (Arcane Magic, Weak Weapons & AC, Small HD)
- Wizard (Spell Books)
- Sorcerer (Innate Magic)
- Warlock (Pacts)

Rogue (Expert Skills, Enemy Debuffs, Good Weapons & AC, Medium HD)
- Thief (Sneak Attack)
- Scout (Skirmish)
- Scoundrel (Dirty Fighting)

Then you have overlap classes - the ones that live in the space overlapped by two class categories:
Paladin: Fighter/Cleric (Smite Infidels)
Ranger: Fighter/Rogue (Hunting & Nature)
Gish: Fighter/Magic-User (Weapon Magic)
Bard: Rogue/Magic-User (Skald's Aura)

etc.

- Marty Lund

4th and previous editions really are different games focused at different people (ultimately), with a different play experience. Obviously there's a lot of overlap but its like saying WC3 and DOTA are the same game...

Obviously the Power Pattern based balance of 4E isn't coming forward. With that off the table, there are still a lot of good things from 4E that can convert forward:

Healing Surges -> Hit Dice
Encounter Powers -> Short Rest Recovery / 5 Minute Limits
Rituals -> Ritual Casting Options
At-Will Martial Powers -> Basic Attack Rider Options
At-Will Spells -> Cantrips / Orisons
Skill Challenges -> Less Mechanically Broken Challenge System
Better Monster and Encounter Design

A lot of the Tactical Combat optional module content is probably going to be cribbed directly from 4E and maybe some from Dungeon Command.

- Marty Lund

I'll just repost here what I posted on Wizards' site:

Disappointment. That's really all I can say. My disappointment mainly stems from the news about the sorcerer. No, the heritage they gave was not like the sorcerer from 3E, but that's what I thought was exciting about it. It was different, but it still evoked that draconic heritage. And then there was the potential the class had for being very diverse among its heritages. Like, a party full of sorcerers would be able to adventure together without another class if they wanted, just by taking different heritage options. A dragon sorcerer instead of a fighter, an arcane sorcerer instead of a wizard, a divine sorcerer instead of a cleric, and so on. I liked that. That idea made me happy. Now, I'm wondering if they'll even bother with the sorcerous heritage options, or if the sorcerer is just going back to its boring 3E days.

I'm glad to see they're rethinking Skill Mastery. I'm not happy to see the skill list expand more, unless there's a way to pick up more skills later (which is totally okay for an optional module).

I'm still not happy with Sneak Attack requiring advantage, or the rogue as a whole, really, due to its relegation to "skill monkey." But, I'll wait for the next iteration of classes in a packet.

Overall, though, the news about the sorcerer really killed any excitement I might take from the other news. It was just that big of a deal for me.