D&D 5E L&L The Next Phase

[Gundark]

http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20130923

Discuss

 

[Darth Illithid]

Sounds interesting if they can pull it off. The tactical combat module could be pretty good if they pull from 4E. I'm a little disappointed that none of the tactical combat stuff made it into the playtest, but I'm still looking forward to it.

 

[Mistwell]

Wow, interesting article...will take some time to digest.

 

[the Jester]

God but I want a good domain management/mass combat system.

 

[The Myopic Sniper]

I kind of wish they would extend the public playtest for a few more packets. I kind of see where they are going, but I think there were a lot of things that they could have run through the public grinder that only barely got touched on.

 

[The Myopic Sniper]

"As I’ve mentioned elsewhere, these systems are aimed at specific subsets of players. Testing them in public would just result in a lot of people that the system isn’t aimed at giving us negative feedback. Thus, we’re showing these systems to groups that we know are in the target audience."

All the things that were mentioned seemed more geared to what I am looking for out of the game, perhaps not in the same campaign, but this gives me a lot more hope for the modular approach.

 

[Kinak]

I can see where he's coming from with not wanting to have everyone giving feedback on subsystems that aren't "for" them.

But, at the same time, the subsystems that are "for" me don't really sound very appealing. I love tactical combat, for example, and spend a lot of time running combats... but C&T meets 4e? That doesn't sound like something I'm going to be investing in.

Ah well, I'll be curious to see what they actually show us of these systems. At present, I don't think I'll buy the game. But maybe something in these modules will change my mind.

Cheers!
Kinak

 

[thecasualoblivion]

Sounds interesting if they can pull it off. The tactical combat module could be pretty good if they pull from 4E. I'm a little disappointed that none of the tactical combat stuff made it into the playtest, but I'm still looking forward to it.

The magic of 4E combat came from powers and roles, not a grid system and a generic combat chapter. You aren't going to manage 4E style play with the core classes.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

I can see where he's coming from with not wanting to have everyone giving feedback on subsystems that aren't "for" them.

But, at the same time, the subsystems that are "for" me don't really sound very appealing. I love tactical combat, for example, and spend a lot of time running combats... but C&T meets 4e? That doesn't sound like something I'm going to be investing in.

Ah well, I'll be curious to see what they actually show us of these systems. At present, I don't think I'll buy the game. But maybe something in these modules will change my mind.

Cheers!
Kinak

I feel the same way exactly. Their description of the tactical module combined with base 5E is not what I want out of a game at all. Their description of build your own subclass as the height of character customization is similarly disappointing, given how little subclasses actually do from what we've seen.

 

[Darth Illithid]

The magic of 4E combat came from powers and roles, not a grid system and a generic combat chapter. You aren't going to manage 4E style play with the core classes.

I realize that, but 4E did grid combat very well. Adding in some forced movement options and some options for control effects on spells might make it a little more 4E-like than Next is now.