D&D 5E New D&D Next Playtest Packet Is Here!

RevTurkey · Aug 16, 2012

Opportunity Attacks. It's rules creep and the quantification and codification of the game that I don't like so much. So many conditions attatched to them

Call them what you like but I prefer the simpler mechanics of say B/X or RC.

I think that you should definately have a module to play such things in more depth like in 3rd Edition or more tactically as in 4th Edition but I think the game out of the blocks would be better to be more streamlined.

If WOTC don't do that then they will lose the chance to regain players lost to older editions and retro clones and also make a higher barrier to entry for new players

To be clear... I have played and enjoyed EVERY edition of D&D and AD&D but as this is a playtest I am just expressing my preferences.

As I said, I haven't put this through it's paces yet, so we shall see

Balesir · Aug 16, 2012

RevTurkey said:
Opportunity Attacks. It's rules creep and the quantification and codification of the game that I don't like so much. So many conditions attatched to them

Call them what you like but I prefer the simpler mechanics of say B/X or RC.

OK, so you are really asking that the rules around opportunity attacks be kept/made simple and clean. That makes perfect sense, to me, and I can even agree with it*, whereas calling to remove OAs completely seems like an invitation to disaster.

*: partly because I think 4e actually got OAs pretty well right; they are triggered by free moving or ranged attacking when next to an enemy, and that's it. That particular bit of 4e really is very simple; the "Immediate" actions less so...

synthapse · Aug 16, 2012

Walking Dad said:
I don't like this. I forbids some classic D&D fighting styles (two scimitars) and a lot of real world ones. But it adds the stupid two whips and two rapiers

Scimitars are finesse weapons, so they can be used for dual-wielding.

I wouldn't consider using two rapiers "stupid"; fighting with a brace of rapiers is a classic real-world style of fighting.

I expect some sort of feat (or the like) allowing use of the katana in one hand, just as I expect there to be a way to use the bastard sword one-handed as well. That would open up samurai dual-wielding.

Walking Dad · Aug 16, 2012

synthapse said:
Scimitars are finesse weapons, so they can be used for dual-wielding.

I wouldn't consider using two rapiers "stupid"; fighting with a brace of rapiers is a classic real-world style of fighting.

I expect some sort of feat (or the like) allowing use of the katana in one hand, just as I expect there to be a way to use the bastard sword one-handed as well. That would open up samurai dual-wielding.

Didn't read the material as I got annoyed to register a 2nd time

Ok, scimitars are suddenly a light/finesse weapon (I only knew or 3.x using this distinction and scimitars weren't it).
What kind of rapier? The primary piercing weapon? Which style uses two at once? I'm honestly curious. Using a rapier and some kind of parrying weapon is different kind of beast altogether.

Consonant Dude · Aug 16, 2012

Dice4Hire said:
You are talking about one tiny bit of the rules, so quitting 5E over that seems a bit extreme.

And it is a part of the rules that many people have houseruled in one way or the other since 3E came out.

It appears to be a tiny bit of the rules but it comes attached with the whole spatial positioning playstyle. I'm a 3rd edition veteran and it's far from being easy to houserule. It is of no interest to me or my groups to go down that path again and the appearance of such rules in the basic game are enough to turn me off.

That's just a matter of taste, mind you. I'm sure plenty of people welcome such rules, others might be indifferent. But I don't want such rules.

synthapse · Aug 16, 2012

Walking Dad said:
Didn't read the material as I got annoyed to register a 2nd time

Ok, scimitars are suddenly a light/finesse weapon (I only knew or 3.x using this distinction and scimitars weren't it).
What kind of rapier? The primary piercing weapon? Which style uses two at once? I'm honestly curious. Using a rapier and some kind of parrying weapon is different kind of beast altogether.

I'm not entirely sure which style first used the brace of rapiers, but I'd guess it was from Italian dueling styles.

Here's a link talking about the style: The Arte of Defense

And here's a video of some practice:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AseqZulqrEA]Case of rapiers/florentine demonstration - YouTube[/ame]

Nikosandros · Aug 16, 2012

Balesir said:
I really don't understand the cries to remove opportunity attacks, when every edition of D&D bar none have had them. Granted, in the early editions they weren't called "opportunity attacks" - they were just a "free hack" that you got if the enemy broke melee contact - but they were functionally exactly the same thing. They were just ruled in with loose and sometimes confusing wording, rather than a clean, simple and well defined rule under a specific name ("opportunity attack" in 4e, or "attack of opportunity" in 3.X).

Why remove something that has worked in a necessary function since 1974?

I don't get it either. I've had this exact same discussion with a few of my players that hate opportunity attacks in 3.x/4e, but have no problems with free attacks on fleeing opponents in AD&D.

Walking Dad · Aug 17, 2012

synthapse said:
I'm not entirely sure which style first used the brace of rapiers, but I'd guess it was from Italian dueling styles.

Here's a link talking about the style: The Arte of Defense

And here's a video of some practice:

Case of rapiers/florentine demonstration - YouTube

Alright, there is one... but the text description made it sound almost as obscure and hard to learn than dual-wielding katanas. I still don't like this as the default rule, epically that wielding two rapiers is easier than a longsword and a dagger.

VinylTap · Aug 17, 2012

Walking Dad said:
Alright, there is one... but the text description made it sound almost as obscure and hard to learn than dual-wielding katanas. I still don't like this as the default rule, epically that wielding two rapiers is easier than a longsword and a dagger.

People in the middle ages had less distractions, so more time to practice esoteric fighting styles.

fba827 · Aug 17, 2012

i'm sure everyone has noticed by now but i didn't see it mentioned in this thread so i thought i'd say it in case random people didn't notice and were just watching this thread rather than other announcements from gencon that it was happening...

If you redownload the playtest packet today (when you go tot he login page it is the 'signup page' but on the sign up page there is a link if you already have an account to actually login), they added something to the classes section (sorcerer and warlorck) and also added an adventure.