Here's the link for any who want to discuss
https://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20140324
https://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20140324
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
D&D 5E Legends & Lore 03/24/2014
- Thread starter Rydac
- Start date
GX.Sigma
Adventurer
I like starting equipment packages. It seems such an obvious game design choice. Actually, I was just about to point out that 4e did it too, but I just checked, and it actually didn't. That's the sign of a great innovation: you can't imagine ever doing it any other way.
The random table thing is awesome too. I want more stuff like that.
I do feel that choosing spells can be a similar problem, though. I hope they have similar pre-selected spell packages (take these spells if you want to be an illusionist, take these if you want to blast stuff, etc.).
The random table thing is awesome too. I want more stuff like that.
I do feel that choosing spells can be a similar problem, though. I hope they have similar pre-selected spell packages (take these spells if you want to be an illusionist, take these if you want to blast stuff, etc.).
Li Shenron
Legend
Quite a harmless L&L article today, let's see how we manage to start a fight about it... 
I did see myself and my past gaming groups in what the article says about spending too much time when picking equipment, therefore I agree that "starting packages" can be a good thing (3.0 already had them, although by "package" they also means suggested skills and feats).
The limit of a starting package is maybe that if you want to deviate from it, you might have to do some little calculations for removing something from the equipment, get the money back, then replace it with something else. It's not a big deal really, but today's article suggests they might make this even easier by having a few multiple choices, especially for weapons/armor/shield. Overall I think this is probably the best that can be done.
Some players go through the weapons and armors lists, trying to find an optimum choice. One thing I really liked about 3.0 weapons, was that there was instead hardly an optimum choice, and that meant that you could just pick any one weapon from the highest category you had proficiency in, and it would have been a good choice. Not so with armors unfortunately, there really was an optimum armor choice, or more precisely there were several clearly inferior choices, which isn't good.
What typically bogs down equipment selection (note that I'm thinking about 1st level PCs here, so I'm not even including magic items) IMXP, is that there is a large amount of inexpensive mundane items that "might be useful". Stuff that makes light, stuff to eat or drink, stuff to carry other stuff, ropes, sticks, minor chemical substances, stuff for reading and writing... The problem is that if you have even just enough money for half a dozen of these minor items, players start thinking "what could we still possibly add to our equipment that might come in handy", and that can take a long time to decide.
Furthermore, this is exacerbated by the modern tendency of players to think only about themselves, which means every player at the table is going through the shopping list, without realizing that you only need one character (traditionally the Rogue) with a backpack full of mundane trinkets that might come handy.
I did see myself and my past gaming groups in what the article says about spending too much time when picking equipment, therefore I agree that "starting packages" can be a good thing (3.0 already had them, although by "package" they also means suggested skills and feats).
The limit of a starting package is maybe that if you want to deviate from it, you might have to do some little calculations for removing something from the equipment, get the money back, then replace it with something else. It's not a big deal really, but today's article suggests they might make this even easier by having a few multiple choices, especially for weapons/armor/shield. Overall I think this is probably the best that can be done.
Some players go through the weapons and armors lists, trying to find an optimum choice. One thing I really liked about 3.0 weapons, was that there was instead hardly an optimum choice, and that meant that you could just pick any one weapon from the highest category you had proficiency in, and it would have been a good choice. Not so with armors unfortunately, there really was an optimum armor choice, or more precisely there were several clearly inferior choices, which isn't good.
What typically bogs down equipment selection (note that I'm thinking about 1st level PCs here, so I'm not even including magic items) IMXP, is that there is a large amount of inexpensive mundane items that "might be useful". Stuff that makes light, stuff to eat or drink, stuff to carry other stuff, ropes, sticks, minor chemical substances, stuff for reading and writing... The problem is that if you have even just enough money for half a dozen of these minor items, players start thinking "what could we still possibly add to our equipment that might come in handy", and that can take a long time to decide.
Furthermore, this is exacerbated by the modern tendency of players to think only about themselves, which means every player at the table is going through the shopping list, without realizing that you only need one character (traditionally the Rogue) with a backpack full of mundane trinkets that might come handy.
Though starting equipment pacckages are hardly an innovation, as Small But Vicious Dog would tell you*. Even the random tables have appeared elsewhere, possibly first in Traveller.
*Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, for those unfamiliar with the reference.
Jan van Leyden
Adventurer
Yes, but the ability to learn from good and better examples is good!
This talk about equipment packages brings me to another point: will the prices for equipment be more simulation like or more effect based? In other words, how expensive will a plate mail be?
Plaguescarred
D&D Playtester for WoTC since 2012
Having a default option to pick from instead of choosing is fine by me. I like that default equipment comes from 2 sources and thus help differenciate PCs further. 2 fighters of different background and fighting styles will have very different equipment for exemple.
The giant table of random weird trinket sounds really fun and flavorful addition!
The giant table of random weird trinket sounds really fun and flavorful addition!
delericho
Legend
Leaving aside weapons and armour for the moment...
Gear either matters, or it doesn't. And, in most games, it really doesn't - the player may spend hours picking out his 'perfect' set of equipment, lovingly transcribe it onto his character sheet, calculate the encumbrance to the ounce... but he'll then never again reference it in play. Because dealing with torches, or counting iron spikes, or asking if they're carrying chalk is just not something the group associate with high adventure.
(Conversely, there are other games where it really is important - games with a much more survivalist/horror bent, or which try to 'realistically' model the process of dungeon-crawling. Games in which the difference between one torch and two really can be the difference between life and death.)
For the first type of game, even these suggestions are overkill. By all means have players pick a weapon/armour combo for their character, and assign them a small amount of money. But, frankly, it would be better to give them an "Adventurer's Kit" and just assume they have all the other stuff they need. Done.
And for the second type of game, these suggestions are useless. If it really does matter what gear characters have, then any model where it's assigned in packages is unhelpful - if the decision is important, the player needs to make it.
Will that do it?
Gear either matters, or it doesn't. And, in most games, it really doesn't - the player may spend hours picking out his 'perfect' set of equipment, lovingly transcribe it onto his character sheet, calculate the encumbrance to the ounce... but he'll then never again reference it in play. Because dealing with torches, or counting iron spikes, or asking if they're carrying chalk is just not something the group associate with high adventure.
(Conversely, there are other games where it really is important - games with a much more survivalist/horror bent, or which try to 'realistically' model the process of dungeon-crawling. Games in which the difference between one torch and two really can be the difference between life and death.)
For the first type of game, even these suggestions are overkill. By all means have players pick a weapon/armour combo for their character, and assign them a small amount of money. But, frankly, it would be better to give them an "Adventurer's Kit" and just assume they have all the other stuff they need. Done.
And for the second type of game, these suggestions are useless. If it really does matter what gear characters have, then any model where it's assigned in packages is unhelpful - if the decision is important, the player needs to make it.
Will that do it?
Yes, but the ability to learn from good and better examples is good!
This talk about equipment packages brings me to another point: will the prices for equipment be more simulation like or more effect based? In other words, how expensive will a plate mail be?
Personally I'm hoping for effect based. Historical price lists exist, vary enormously according to where they come from, when they come from, and quality of the gear. About the best I can come up with is that the equipment a soldier wears costs about six months wages, and that's fairly true over a wide range of periods and places.
