Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
The New Playtest: Why return the failed 3e mechanics?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ZombieRoboNinja" data-source="post: 5992662" data-attributes="member: 54843"><p>Let me preface this by saying that overall I really like the new playtest. But weirdly, they seem to be backsliding into some of the same mistakes that THEY have pointed out as problems in 3e.</p><p></p><p>First, it looks like BAB is back, but now it's more arbitrary and confusing. Wasn't this one of the cool innovations of 4e, that you didn't have to consult a class-specific chart to figure out your attack bonus? How will this work for multiclassing? A level 4 fighter already has a BAB points higher than a level 4 rogue, which is which is, IIRC, exactly the same as in 3e. (Yes, I know the rogue closes the gap a bit again at 5th, but still.) And magic BAB is a separate scale, so a multiclass fighter/wizard will suck more at both aspects. Isn't this a Bad Thing for bounded accuracy?</p><p></p><p>Second, I find it hilarious that they take the 3e feat that WOTC people have used as the paradigmatic example of a bad feat, 3e Toughness, and brought it back unchanged. First off, the feat doesn't scale (so it doubles a first-level wizard's HP but is barely noticeable by higher levels). Second, if you want more HP, you should be adding more Con. Third, "Having a lot of HP" is not a Specialty. (I get that this and Jack of All Trades are stand-in specialties, but still.) This is exactly the sort of boring, straight-mechanical-bonus feat that I thought they were getting rid of. (Ditto for Two-Weapon Defense.)</p><p></p><p>Third, they made a point of saying that clerics would get non-spell heals for the express purposes of cordoning off their healing from other abilities, so that they wouldn't feel restrained to being healbots. But instead, they've STILL got Cure X Wounds (which must be prepared), but now they'll be expected to use all their Channel Divinities to heal as well. (Oh, and clerics now have the weirdest Vancian system I think I've seen. It's like wizards plus sorcerers, but more complex than either.)</p><p></p><p>And while I'm venting, every PC can now one-shot every other PC at first level, unless the target is a Hill Dwarf fighter and/or has Toughness.</p><p></p><p>Again, overall I like the playtest, but what's the deal with these weird changes?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ZombieRoboNinja, post: 5992662, member: 54843"] Let me preface this by saying that overall I really like the new playtest. But weirdly, they seem to be backsliding into some of the same mistakes that THEY have pointed out as problems in 3e. First, it looks like BAB is back, but now it's more arbitrary and confusing. Wasn't this one of the cool innovations of 4e, that you didn't have to consult a class-specific chart to figure out your attack bonus? How will this work for multiclassing? A level 4 fighter already has a BAB points higher than a level 4 rogue, which is which is, IIRC, exactly the same as in 3e. (Yes, I know the rogue closes the gap a bit again at 5th, but still.) And magic BAB is a separate scale, so a multiclass fighter/wizard will suck more at both aspects. Isn't this a Bad Thing for bounded accuracy? Second, I find it hilarious that they take the 3e feat that WOTC people have used as the paradigmatic example of a bad feat, 3e Toughness, and brought it back unchanged. First off, the feat doesn't scale (so it doubles a first-level wizard's HP but is barely noticeable by higher levels). Second, if you want more HP, you should be adding more Con. Third, "Having a lot of HP" is not a Specialty. (I get that this and Jack of All Trades are stand-in specialties, but still.) This is exactly the sort of boring, straight-mechanical-bonus feat that I thought they were getting rid of. (Ditto for Two-Weapon Defense.) Third, they made a point of saying that clerics would get non-spell heals for the express purposes of cordoning off their healing from other abilities, so that they wouldn't feel restrained to being healbots. But instead, they've STILL got Cure X Wounds (which must be prepared), but now they'll be expected to use all their Channel Divinities to heal as well. (Oh, and clerics now have the weirdest Vancian system I think I've seen. It's like wizards plus sorcerers, but more complex than either.) And while I'm venting, every PC can now one-shot every other PC at first level, unless the target is a Hill Dwarf fighter and/or has Toughness. Again, overall I like the playtest, but what's the deal with these weird changes? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
The New Playtest: Why return the failed 3e mechanics?
Top