D&D 5th Edition!!! (WITH POLL!!!)

[pemerton]

the canonical tools, even the rule books, don't allow or at least facilitate house rules and DM creations

As it happens, there's a page devoted to house rules in the 4e DMG. From p 189:

As Dungeon Master, you wear several hats: storyteller, rules arbiter, actor, adventure designer, and writer. Some DMs like to add a sixth hat to that stack: rules designer. House rules are variants on the basic rules designed specifically for a particular DM’s campaign. They add fun to your D&D game by making it unique, reflecting specific traits of your world.

A house rule also serves as a handy “patch” for a game feature that your group dislikes. The D&D rules cannot possibly account for the variety of campaigns and play styles of every group. If you disagree with how the rules handle something, changing them is within your rights.​

It then goes on to give advice on designing and implementing house rules, with two worked examples.

 

[Dice4Hire]

Overall I like 4E and would build off it.

--- to cut down the importance

+++ to make more important

feats --
base classes -
Prestige /paragon classes +
Themes ++
Races ++
Magic items --
Ability score bonuses ---
Skills --
Out of combat skills, feats, powers ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

[Jimlock]

3. Above all we can all agree that magic users should be far more powerful and versatile than warriors, completely shutting fighters out of the game by fifth level; because that's where fun lies.

ehhmmmm... No, above all we CANNOT all agree that magic users should be far more powerful and versatile than warriors, completely shutting fighters out of the game by fifth level; because that's no fun at all

5. Optimization, optimization, optimization. Because that's what D&D is all about.

Sadly, there too many people nowadays who think that that's what D&D is all about.

 

[enpeze66]

hopefully there will be soon a 5th edition. I suggest

going back to the wonderful way BECMI and 1st edition AD&D was played. This was best of D&D IMO.

BUT

-presenting it in a modern way
-streamlining the rules. Rooting out consequently the baggage of nonsense of those old editions (eg. negative ACs are nonsense, put in positive ACs!)

now to the combat - it should be presented in 3 tiers
1st tier - no tactical grid
2nd tier - easy to learn basic tactical grid system
3rd tier - individual and modular spot rules to incorporate one for one if the GM likes.

-not more than 100 pages of rules!
-modular approach with basic rules and optional rules etc. In the basic module there should be only the 4 basic D&D classes (fighter etc.)
-If one wants to play monsters as PCs then he should go and play WoW. this means: no Tieflings and no Dragonborns as playable races in the basic game. Only the 4 usual races Elf, Dwarf, Halfling and Humans.
-no hit points bloat as 3rd and 4th edition sports and no healing surges. Go back to the Hps of 1st edition. this keeps the combats short and deadly.

Why does the poll not have such an option? Why does the TO automatically assume that everyone who likes the versions of pre 3rd edition likes also such abominations like THACO? With this assumption its not possible for me to vote at all in this "poll".

 

[Balesir]

ehhmmmm... No, above all we CANNOT all agree that magic users should be far more powerful and versatile than warriors, completely shutting fighters out of the game by fifth level; because that's no fun at all.

Ehhmmmm - you do realise that post was about the most tongue in cheek one in this entire thread, don't you? Try reading it again.

On some random topics:

I realise that lots of folk would love to see a "simulationist" D&D. I sympathise; I would love to see the D&D worlds treated in a proper, sim-focussed system. But realise that such a system would look nothing much like "classic" D&D - and if it did, you would be swamped by optimisers wondering why the system is so "broken" now that they can exploit it mercilessly and with impunity. D&D, by its nature, both because of its core systems (hit points, xps, levels) and because of its position in the market (most popular = most players = inevitable gung-ho "play to win"-ners who will, by nature, dominate where they touch). To have the core of the brand be simulationist-focussed won't work from a marketing perspective, so I don't think you'll see it again.

A modular system is problematic for the same reasons. Modules would work OK-ish for a narrativist-focussed game (c.f. HeroQuest), but not for a simulationist or a gamist one. In gamist-focussed groups the modules would become part of the "game play" - inevitably one would give better chances for success than another. Then there would be the issues of balancing the game for all the possible options - a nightmare! For simulationist-focussed groups a world that exhibits different "physics" at different times would be simply anathema.

Finally, expecting a game to be balanced and "gamist-focussed" in its rules and "simulationist-focussed" in its interaction between the rules and the "fluff" (so that all possible rules actions "make sense") and yet be simple and quick - great god on a unicycle, who is going to create this miracle??

 

[Jimlock]

Ehhmmmm - you do realise that post was about the most tongue in cheek one in this entire thread, don't you? Try reading it again.

Ehhmmmm - you do realise that post was about the most tongue in cheek one in this entire thread, don't you? Try reading it again.

 

[Argyle King]

Two Words: Random Books


All books would be shipped out inside of a box that just says "D&D Books." Some books like the PHB, MM, and DMG would be commons. Others would be more rare.

 

[Jimlock]

Considering the civil unrest... here's a fictional thought...




D&D fans, like a swarm of zombies invade WotC ans Hasbro offices...

They lock management and pro-MMORPG-designers into anti-puplishing fields in the cellar.

Now, through the democratic process of voting (remember all zombies are equal!) the zombies

decide among themselves on the game's direction.

Then they publish 5th edition, and once the books hit the shelves,

they leave (their hunger has been satisfied!).


...Now why do i STILL see Hasbro making good money out of this?

 

[Windjammer]

Serious question - who at WotC would even be able to design a compelling 5E?

Anyone there who even remotely touches the heights of Tweet and Heinsoo?

 

[Kaodi]

I think the way to go is to take copper and tin to make bronze.

Oh, wait, this is not a thread about metallurgy? D&D you say? Oh my...

In that case: I think the way to go is take take 4E and Pathfinder to make 5E.

5E ought to have 4E's gamist approach to building obstacles (be they monsters, traps, or skill challenges), but try to incorporate elements of Pathfinder's more simulationist approach to building characters and the world.

Maybe that is too vague, but vague can work.