D&D 5E 02/08/13 New playtest packet to released today. [Udate: PACKAGE OUT!][
Warbringer
Explorer
There is a symptom in the rules I'm reading that are cool at the surface, a pain in implementation. Consider, edited for nda:
Brutal Display
When you score a critical hit, each of your enemies .... must succeed on a ...[ability] saving throw or be frightened of you until the end of your next turn. If the critical hit reduces the target to ..., the enemies make the saving throws with disadvantage.
Awesome in concept, pain in the a$$ ... tracking all creatures in range, all stats at hand, now all the token tracking for those that saved and those that didn't ... condition tracking is the bane of 4e... and FYI a fighter can do this with different attacks against different saves with different conditions ...
Brutal Display
When you score a critical hit, each of your enemies .... must succeed on a ...[ability] saving throw or be frightened of you until the end of your next turn. If the critical hit reduces the target to ..., the enemies make the saving throws with disadvantage.
Awesome in concept, pain in the a$$ ... tracking all creatures in range, all stats at hand, now all the token tracking for those that saved and those that didn't ... condition tracking is the bane of 4e... and FYI a fighter can do this with different attacks against different saves with different conditions ...
Olgar Shiverstone
Legend
Weel, then I might like the rules... still caps a t 20
Yeah, just notice that cap wasn't only for character creation, which I'd assumed on first read scan. Seems to defeat the value of ability score increases -- if you're playing the "simple" game you can raise your prime requisite once or twice and then have to stop.
I think I'd waive that ability score cap after character creation.
- Break -
Just noticed that the 2d level Ranger pre-gen is an elf who dual-wields scimitars. *Choke* *Puke*
And the dwarf fighter is "proficient" in riding, cards, and dice. What does that mean? Edit: Proficient with card & dice means advantage on checks when gambling with those items (from the "Gaming Set" equipment description). Still trying to figure out riding, but am assuming it is advantage as well -- yep, its under "horse".
This document needs some thorough proofreading and cross checking to find these kinds of "lost" rules. It's like the writers were channeling Gary Gygax -- rules turn up in the oddest places.
Buckler is missing an item description.
Last edited:
Waiving the cap after character creation misses the point of having a cap. In the basic feat-less game once your primary ability is at 20, you need to improve other abilities.
The Myopic Sniper
Hero
I have only done a quick skim of the areas with the biggest changes. It is really nice to see all the stuff that has been talked about for months in print. It looks really sharp to my eyes and have no major objections. If it plays as well as it reads, this has gotten me excited about D&DNext again.
RangerWickett
Legend
So did they not implement the 'legendary monster' stuff that was mentioned a few weeks ago? Monsters still look kinda boring. I do appreciate, though, that the spell lists are more fully detailed, so you don't have to memorize every spell in the game (or else flip back and forth).
The one thing I found interesting is that while the Wizard class name was changed to Mage... the Mage's tradition involving a spellbook and spell schools was called Wizardry. But also that other traditions exist (like Sorcery and Witchcraft).
So it appears as though there's like a double layer of subclasses here. You have the arcane Mage with three subclass traditions-- Wizardry, Sorcery, and Witchcraft (Warlockery)... and within each of those subclass traditions will probably be individual sub-subclasses-- the wizardry spell schools, the sorcerous paths, and the witchcraft pacts I'd imagine.
Dunno the reason to put wizards, sorcerers, and witches/warlocks all into a single overclass... but I presume it must just have something to do with wanting to link all the arcane classes together for some reason? Not sure the point of that yet... but there probably is one.
So it appears as though there's like a double layer of subclasses here. You have the arcane Mage with three subclass traditions-- Wizardry, Sorcery, and Witchcraft (Warlockery)... and within each of those subclass traditions will probably be individual sub-subclasses-- the wizardry spell schools, the sorcerous paths, and the witchcraft pacts I'd imagine.
Dunno the reason to put wizards, sorcerers, and witches/warlocks all into a single overclass... but I presume it must just have something to do with wanting to link all the arcane classes together for some reason? Not sure the point of that yet... but there probably is one.
Falling Icicle
Adventurer
I just noticed that all wizards, I mean mages, now get 2 free spells per level and can ritually cast any ritual spell in their spellbook (not just those they have prepared). I approve.
I don't know, but the impression I get from L&L is that stuff they mention is at least 2 playtest packets ahead.
Kobold Avenger
Legend
From my quick read-through...
-In my opinion 4 ability score increases/feats is too little, 5 should be the minimum.
-Paladin is a lot more palatable now that there's no alignment restriction. And the moving special abilities around makes it easier for other alternate "oaths".
-Barbarian finally got it's own subclasses too, though I think some work needs to be done with the Totem Warrior.
-Don't like the removal of skills, I know they're trying to make them optional, but to me they're an essential part of the game.
-They still don't give good examples of how you could use the Hinder action.
-Humans are still overpowered.
-Still don't like half-orcs, they need something else other than just being tough as their theme. On the other hand those half-orc stats are good for an actual full-orc race write-up.
-I like that mage traditions, along with many other things actually do stuff beyond 10th level.
-For the Monk of 4 Elements, fire seems to be the poorest of the 4 choices on all of them except maybe disciple, where it's just an OK choice.
-Obviously it seems like Fighter is where they put most of their energy into developing. I like the variety of the paths.
-I know they don't want to show all the different subclasses/paths/traditions/whatever yet, as they're still trying to find out "Is this the right direction?" but most of them shown so far seem like steps in the right direction.
-In my opinion 4 ability score increases/feats is too little, 5 should be the minimum.
-Paladin is a lot more palatable now that there's no alignment restriction. And the moving special abilities around makes it easier for other alternate "oaths".
-Barbarian finally got it's own subclasses too, though I think some work needs to be done with the Totem Warrior.
-Don't like the removal of skills, I know they're trying to make them optional, but to me they're an essential part of the game.
-They still don't give good examples of how you could use the Hinder action.
-Humans are still overpowered.
-Still don't like half-orcs, they need something else other than just being tough as their theme. On the other hand those half-orc stats are good for an actual full-orc race write-up.
-I like that mage traditions, along with many other things actually do stuff beyond 10th level.
-For the Monk of 4 Elements, fire seems to be the poorest of the 4 choices on all of them except maybe disciple, where it's just an OK choice.
-Obviously it seems like Fighter is where they put most of their energy into developing. I like the variety of the paths.
-I know they don't want to show all the different subclasses/paths/traditions/whatever yet, as they're still trying to find out "Is this the right direction?" but most of them shown so far seem like steps in the right direction.
Similar Threads
