D&D (2024) Revised 6E prediction thread

[MechaTarrasque]

I would probably power up fighting styles, make a lot more of them, but have them take concentration. Fighter's big gimmick would be Martial Secrets (they have access to all fighting styles) and they get a few more than other classes. Versatility becomes the fighter's gig.

I always figured warlocks should be about things being easy for the PC. Transformations seem like the easiest thing: use your cha modifier for your strength modifier if you have a fiend patron and change into a fiend shape, cha modifier for dex modifier if you have a fey patron and change into fey shape, cha modifier for con modifier (plus temp hit points) for undead patron/undead form, cha modifier for int modifier (plus prof in one int skill and telepathy) for goo patrons/aberration form, and cha for wisdom (plus once a day commune without using a spell slot) for celestial patrons/celestial form. Invocations would be more about boosting your form. The downside (since I figure patrons want to be paid) is that bad stuff happens if you use the abilities too often during the day when you aren't fighting (and dedicated the pain you cause to your patron): grow tentacles for the goo patron, bad temper for the fiend/undead patrons, easily distractible by music or pretty nature scenes for the fey patron, urge to give away your gold to widows and orphans for the celestial patron.

Barbarians' big gimmick has two parts: the rage fighting style doesn't require concentration for them, and they can cast one specific concentration spell when they rage (fear for berserker). They have advantage on concentration checks for the specific spell, and they can keep it going if the rage fighting style ends before the spell does (no advantage on concentration without rage). Alternatively, they can use a second fighting style instead of the spell (ditto advantage on the concentration checks for the spell).

Monks would be full casters who can deliver touch spells with an unarmed strike (which they can automatically attempt with any spell with range touch). The basic monk spell list would be touch spells and transformation spells with range self. Subclasses would get other spells, so the elemental monk can toss fireballs and sword monks can cast elemental weapon. Monks would have fighting styles.

I will think on the other classes.

 

[Zardnaar]

Emphasis mine.

That's um... an opinion I have not heard expressed before.

Yeah I worded that wrong. I meant in terms of book layout, indexing etc not gameplay.

 

[Stormonu]

Giving martial characters something to do with concentration would be a nice mechanic. Maybe something like stances or improved fighting styles?

 

[Faolyn]

Giving martial characters something to do with concentration would be a nice mechanic. Maybe something like stances or improved fighting styles?

Aiming/called shots, perhaps.

 

[Stormonu]

Aiming/called shots, perhaps.

That’s a bag of rats in itself.

I’m thinking more along an enhanced fighting style, something on par with the power of a 1st level spell, but nonmagical in nature and “at will”. By confining it to Concentration, you can ensure only one “stance“ is active at any given time.

For example:

Defensive Stance: While this stance is active, you add your proficiency modifier to your AC.

Dueling Stance: While this stance is active, you can use your reaction to impose disadvantage on your opponents next melee attack. If the opponent misses with the attack, you can immediately make one melee attack attack against the opponent.

Offensive Stance: While this stance is active, you add 1d6 damage to your weapon attacks.

And so on. Abilities likely would get stronger at higher levels.

 

[Mind of tempest]

That’s a bag of rats in itself.

I’m thinking more along an enhanced fighting style, something on par with the power of a 1st level spell, but nonmagical in nature and “at will”. By confining it to Concentration, you can ensure only one “stance“ is active at any given time.

For example:

Defensive Stance: While this stance is active, you add your proficiency modifier to your AC.

Dueling Stance: While this stance is active, you can use your reaction to impose disadvantage on your opponents next melee attack. If the opponent misses with the attack, you can immediately make one melee attack attack against the opponent.

Offensive Stance: While this stance is active, you add 1d6 damage to your weapon attacks.

And so on. Abilities likely would get stronger at higher levels.

that could work, will more powerful options be available over time or will they grow in power with level up?

 

[Minigiant]

I wonder... Since "a future version" wont need to introduce D&D from nothing to many of its fans and likely wont be so focused on expanding the net of potential fans, it wont need to be as simplistic as 5e. And another discussion on this forum got me thinking.

And one thing I could possibly see is more categorization of features and properly naming them much like 3e and 4e. 5e made a lot of stuff spells to recapture old feelings and make understanding the system easier. In possible 6e, this wont be necessary. We could possibly have the 5e way off writing effects the same way, the 4e method of naming and categorizing terms, and the 3e style of having multiple subsystems in the same game.

• Cantrips
• Spells
• Rituals
• Maneuvers
• Smites
• Divine Channels
• Acton Surges
• Rages
• Hunter's Marks
• Etc

It would be not as offputting to formally name and make all these subsystems as standalone rather than class features. Then new ones could invented like Tricks and Signature Attacks, or return like Orisons and Exploits, or formalized like Songs and Sorceries.

 

[Stormonu]

that could work, will more powerful options be available over time or will they grow in power with level up?

Both, I think. The structure of the warlock’s invocations could be used as a basis for how to dole out the ability/stance/style. It shouldn’t invalidate the Battlemaster or make the Champion more complex - in the latter you might just choose one stance and keep it “on”, whereas a battlemaster might flit between different stances as needed.

 

[Justice and Rule]

Both, I think. The structure of the warlock’s invocations could be used as a basis for how to dole out the ability/stance/style. It shouldn’t invalidate the Battlemaster or make the Champion more complex - in the latter you might just choose one stance and keep it “on”, whereas a battlemaster might flit between different stances as needed.

I think something closer to the Monk, where they have a spendable resource that can be doled as needed would work. Use Matt Mercer's Grit system for recharging (On a critical hit or a kill you get it back) and it works fairly well. You could even let martials have "techniques" that they could switch in and out.

But the Warlock chassis should be used to help eliminate all the half-casters, and maybe decrease the number of full casters. A Paladin with various "blessings" similar to invocation, a few choice spells, and maybe a number of Smites equal to their proficiency or their Charisma modifier would work. Rangers... I mean, I'm more for a spell-less version, but invocations-style powers would certainly allow for interesting options. And if I want to be controversial, I'd love to see Bards get similar treatments, where they have a few powerful spells but most of their stuff is meant to be "songs".

And someone needs to figure out a niche for the Sorcerer because man they need one.

 

[jmartkdr2]

I wonder... Since "a future version" wont need to introduce D&D from nothing to many of its fans and likely wont be so focused on expanding the net of potential fans, it wont need to be as simplistic as 5e. And another discussion on this forum got me thinking.

And one thing I could possibly see is more categorization of features and properly naming them much like 3e and 4e. 5e made a lot of stuff spells to recapture old feelings and make understanding the system easier. In possible 6e, this wont be necessary. We could possibly have the 5e way off writing effects the same way, the 4e method of naming and categorizing terms, and the 3e style of having multiple subsystems in the same game.

• Cantrips
• Spells
• Rituals
• Maneuvers
• Smites
• Divine Channels
• Acton Surges
• Rages
• Hunter's Marks
• Etc

It would be not as offputting to formally name and make all these subsystems as standalone rather than class features. Then new ones could invented like Tricks and Signature Attacks, or return like Orisons and Exploits, or formalized like Songs and Sorceries.

I think it would actually be easier and less confusing to give each class it's own set of names for ability types, and only copy names when you copy mechanics as well. Because at the end of the day, a player only needs to understand one class at a time.

It might look like more work on the part of the dm, but most dms can and do lean on player to know their own stuff. Those of us who dig in will see the patterns, but that's only really useful when you're looking to homebrew new content - something that doesn't need to be obvious.