D&D 5E Wanting more content doesn't always equate to wanting tons of splat options so please stop.

[ccs]

It is no secret, an utility-focused dumb -if not also feebleminded- but very human-looking sorcerer(ess) who fights with spears has a talking raven familiar and goes everywhere on a floating disk dragged by an unseen servant.

Core only possible in 3.0 to PF.

How do you get the Unseen Servant to drag the Disc in 3x? In PF? Especially core only?




Concerning DMing/playing with the same people....

Well, count yourself lucky, I do what I can with what I've got..

No, I'm not lucky in that aspect, I'm in the norm. You though appear to be unlucky....
If there's people who're willing to play Vampire in groups, & are willing to play the occasional D&D game, have you tried to get a few of them to form a consistent D&D group? Even if you only play on the occasional basis?

When everything is generic enough, Roleplaying makes the character. But 5e is not that generic, and more so with the sorcerer and wizard.

5e is no less generic & flexible than any other edition. The whole game (D&D of whatever edition) is built upon making things up & adding them to your games. The printed rules are NOT the be-all/end-all. Though you will definitely find DMs who're afraid to do so. Especially ones who grew up with 3x/PF, a constant barrage of books & worse constant doses of errata. They've been conditioned not to think for themselves.

 

[jayoungr]

@MoonSong, I admit you've piqued my curiosity. Where did you come up with such a unique and specific character concept? It seems very detailed and spelled out. What was your inspiration?

Not to pre-empt MoonSong's response (and he/she may have more detailed information about the background), but I believe Moonsong wants to recreate a previous character from 3rd Edition. These threads from a year or so ago may be helpful:

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...-doomed-to-uncanny-valley-one-trick-ponieness
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...-magic-class&p=6740696&viewfull=1#post6740696

 

[pemerton]

Do those of you who DM not check your players PC's before the game starts?

Not once they get above 1st level. I tend to learn what the PCs can do when I see it in play.

I feel your pain. I'm in the same boat. 5e is equally incapable of letting me play...

HELKBOYRINE!

Stupid 5e. It's tagline should be, "Stifling creativity since 2014!"

I don't think [MENTION=6689464]MoonSong[/MENTION]'s desired PC is an overpowered monstrosity, so I don't think this comparison is really fair.

that's exactly what I was getting out- the difference between the adventures being the thing, and the characters being the thing. There's no wrong way to play D&D, but I traditionally build my characters through the adventures that they have

I think you're drawing this contrast perhaps a bit mores starkly than is warranted. The idea of character "personalisation" emerged fairly early in RPGing - for instance, games like RQ and Traveller allowed for it, though they also used random rolls in places where designs today would tend to allow choice. (But White Dwarf in the early 80s published a point-buy variant for Traveller PC building.)

One could say that the idea of personalising one's PC was born the first time someone chose to play RQ rather than D&D because s/he wanted his/her wizard to be able to use a sword.

 

[Mistwell]

The title says it all.

There are a good many of us here who wants to see more content, and more of a variety. If you are not a fan of AP's then you aren't going to spend 35 plus on a book that contains very little else that you could probably find on the internet or in older material. What this leaves a lot of us with is no choices when it comes to D&D.

Well, Baghdad Bob, what would be your perfect book from WOTC? I mean, if you could dictate the content for the next book that comes out, that meets exactly your needs, and assuming it's going to cost $35 and have roughly the amount of pages WOTC books have right now for $35, what would you want to be in it? Be specific. I don't mean "More classes" I mean specifically what classes (if that is an item on your list) or "More Spells" then what type of spells (don't have to name them all) would you want, or "More Setting Material" then specifically what setting and what parts of that setting should it cover, etc.? I mean, I am not asking for an index, but enough to really grasp the type of material you're looking for right now in a book that you feel isn't being delivered.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I don't mean "More classes" I mean specifically what classes (if that is an item on your list)

Sure.
The Psion (and the ranger update) that's already in the pipeline.
Some more Sorcerer origins.
A Warlord.
A Shaman.
An Artificer, perhaps?

or "More Spells" then what type of spells (don't have to name them all) would you want,

Spells that were unique to any new-to-5e casters added.

And psionic powers - preferably not spells - enough to at least tickle the high points of past editions' implementations. Maybe some of the old attack/defense modes for us grognards to chuckle over.

And maneuvers, including enough to enable the Warlord's support function, if it's included.

or "More Setting Material" then specifically what setting and what parts of that setting should it cover, etc.?

Don't need it. But if it helps, sure, link it to a setting with some genericising options, like SCAG. Eberron sounds good, mabye Adventures in Xen'drik or Sarlona?

 

[nswanson27]

Sure.
The Psion (and the ranger update) that's already in the pipeline.
Some more Sorcerer origins.
A Warlord.
A Shaman.
An Artificer, perhaps?

Spells that were unique to any new-to-5e casters added.

And psionic powers - preferably not spells - enough to at least tickle the high points of past editions' implementations. Maybe some of the old attack/defense modes for us grognards to chuckle over.

And maneuvers, including enough to enable the Warlord's support function, if it's included.

Don't need it. But if it helps, sure, link it to a setting with some genericising options, like SCAG. Eberron sounds good, mabye Adventures in Xen'drik or Sarlona?

I like your list. I can't wait for the first one to come out.

 

[Maxperson]

I like your list. I can't wait for the first one to come out.

You're going to have to if WotC keeps on course.

 

[CAFRedblade]

Sure.
The Psion (and the ranger update) that's already in the pipeline.
Some more Sorcerer origins.
A Warlord.
A Shaman.
An Artificer, perhaps?

Spells that were unique to any new-to-5e casters added.

And psionic powers - preferably not spells - enough to at least tickle the high points of past editions' implementations. Maybe some of the old attack/defense modes for us grognards to chuckle over.

And maneuvers, including enough to enable the Warlord's support function, if it's included.

Don't need it. But if it helps, sure, link it to a setting with some genericising options, like SCAG. Eberron sounds good, mabye Adventures in Xen'drik or Sarlona?

Hrmm.. more Sorcerer origins would be nice. They did add the Storm option in SCAG, good start.
Warlord not in name, but some of it's utility of healing is with the Purple Dragon Knight from SCAG as well, probably as good as we'll get for now.
I think early versions of Artificer, Shaman, Psion were in UA articles over the past year and a bit, as was the recent update to the Ranger.
I'm a bit fan of Eberron, so I'm REALLY hoping for some kind of release like SCAG next year with updates and class options and more fleshed out
rules for House Marks beyond the UA articles that currently exist, something a little more balanced/playtested.

Now Sorcerer got spell points.. so not sure how Psionics should be handled, I think it needs to interact with or interfer with magic, but the mechanics should
differ somehow... otherwise the default is a cold war of magic vs. psionics. Which could be a cool setting background.
Well, I think they've done a pretty good job of new spells for new casters, in all the supplements from PHB, Elemental Companion, and SCAG...
There are a bunch that are new to me, and I've got copies of both the 2ed complete Arcane and Divine spell compendiums. That's a lot of spells
that could be updated for use in 5th ed.

edit: spelling, doh!

 

[Parmandur]

Sure.

The Psion (and the ranger update) that's already in the pipeline.

Some more Sorcerer origins.

A Warlord.

A Shaman.

An Artificer, perhaps?



Spells that were unique to any new-to-5e casters added.



And psionic powers - preferably not spells - enough to at least tickle the high points of past editions' implementations. Maybe some of the old attack/defense modes for us grognards to chuckle over.



And maneuvers, including enough to enable the Warlord's support function, if it's included.



Don't need it. But if it helps, sure, link it to a setting with some genericising options, like SCAG. Eberron sounds good, mabye Adventures in Xen'drik or Sarlona?

Pretty sure that's all on the docket for the fabled book of crunch, except the Warlord. Mearls has dropped hints that Shaman would be an Artificer subclass with a nature bent.

 

[Corwin]

I don't think @MoonSong's desired PC is an overpowered monstrosity, so I don't think this comparison is really fair.

Are you labeling my character concept as "an overpowered monstrosity"? Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man. There are plenty of systems that could handle it just fine. And the comparison wasn't about "powerfulness", or "monstrositiness," but one of "specificity." MoonSong's character was hyper specific. Like mine.