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
*Dungeons & Dragons
With Respect to the Door and Expectations....The REAL Reason 5e Can't Unite the Base
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="TwinBahamut" data-source="post: 5977497" data-attributes="member: 32536"><p>Very well, then, if you are set on this idea of compromise... Prove to me that you actually want to make a compromise. Tell me how you will make such a compromise in a way that will leave different perspectives equally satisfied. Tell me how you have been willing to compromise. Tell me where you are willing to make additional compromises if necessary.</p><p></p><p>I'm going to do the same, but before I begin I want to make something clear. If you make a single additional statement accusing me (or anyone else) of being unwilling to compromise, then I'll simply assume that all of your statements past and future are being made in bad faith.</p><p></p><p>First off, there are a number of things I <em>absolutely</em> must see in the next edition of D&D. These are things that the absence of is an immediate dealbreaker.</p><p>1) The designers need to acknowledge that many fans want game balance. To be honest, the game doesn't need to actually be balanced, but the designers need to recognize that imbalance is not what we want. Effort needs to made to discuss game balance and provide it for those who want it.</p><p></p><p>2) The game needs to have a variety of classes and other major options, and they need to be meaningful and effective options. A game that tries to establish the Fighter/Rogue/Cleric/Wizard system as the only set of classes won't ever work for me. I don't want a game which assumes every team has a Cleric.</p><p></p><p>3) The game can't be hideously offensive. It can't be filled with terrible racism, disgusting art, or contain screeds decrying particular political or religious views. It also shouldn't act as a giant soapbox for the designers to rant about their gaming preferences. I'd say that I shouldn't need to say this one, but D&D has a problem with this kind of thing and 5E in particular has drawn some ire due to this kind of stuff already.</p><p></p><p>4) The game can't depend on DM fiat in order to function. It's fine for people who want to play that way to play that way, but it must not replace rules for people who don't like that style.</p><p></p><p>Next, I guess I'll list a few things I really want to see, and wouldn't be inclined to buy the game unless it included them:</p><p>1) The game needs options to create complicated characters who make interesting tactical choices. This particularly applies to a "fighter" type class. I don't mind if there is a 3E Fighter or Slayer class, as long as I can use a Warblade or 4E Fighter class instead.</p><p></p><p>2) The game shouldn't be built around the idea of "magic solving everything". People shouldn't need magic to solve problems, and that includes things like healing and counteracting magical threats. At the very least, if such magic is necessary, it shouldn't be restricted to certain classes, and should instead be useable by everyone (such as with rituals).</p><p></p><p>3) The game must be open to non-traditional fantasy. The game can't get mired in Vance and Tolkein, and instead should branch out to all possible sources of inspiration. Myth, videogames, anime, sci-fi... Anything should be acceptable.</p><p></p><p>4) The math really needs to work, and shouldn't break down at higher levels. The whole game needs to be thoroughly playtested, and things shouldn't be preserved without appraisal just because of tradition.</p><p></p><p>As for a few more specific mechanics or concepts I want to see in, but would accept if they don't get in...</p><p>1) Healing Surges</p><p>2) No "Generalist" Wizard</p><p>3) Replacing the Fighter with a range of better-defined martial classes.</p><p>4) No "+x" items or magical item dependency.</p><p>5) 4E-style defenses and saving throws</p><p>6) No feat system (should be replaced with something better)</p><p>7) Well-defined class and monster roles</p><p>8) Prioritization of fun D&D IP race choices like Dragonborn and Warforged over boring, generic choices like gnomes and elf subraces.</p><p></p><p>That's nowhere near complete, but it's a start.</p><p></p><p>So, what's your list? Once we have that, we can start to compromise.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TwinBahamut, post: 5977497, member: 32536"] Very well, then, if you are set on this idea of compromise... Prove to me that you actually want to make a compromise. Tell me how you will make such a compromise in a way that will leave different perspectives equally satisfied. Tell me how you have been willing to compromise. Tell me where you are willing to make additional compromises if necessary. I'm going to do the same, but before I begin I want to make something clear. If you make a single additional statement accusing me (or anyone else) of being unwilling to compromise, then I'll simply assume that all of your statements past and future are being made in bad faith. First off, there are a number of things I [i]absolutely[/i] must see in the next edition of D&D. These are things that the absence of is an immediate dealbreaker. 1) The designers need to acknowledge that many fans want game balance. To be honest, the game doesn't need to actually be balanced, but the designers need to recognize that imbalance is not what we want. Effort needs to made to discuss game balance and provide it for those who want it. 2) The game needs to have a variety of classes and other major options, and they need to be meaningful and effective options. A game that tries to establish the Fighter/Rogue/Cleric/Wizard system as the only set of classes won't ever work for me. I don't want a game which assumes every team has a Cleric. 3) The game can't be hideously offensive. It can't be filled with terrible racism, disgusting art, or contain screeds decrying particular political or religious views. It also shouldn't act as a giant soapbox for the designers to rant about their gaming preferences. I'd say that I shouldn't need to say this one, but D&D has a problem with this kind of thing and 5E in particular has drawn some ire due to this kind of stuff already. 4) The game can't depend on DM fiat in order to function. It's fine for people who want to play that way to play that way, but it must not replace rules for people who don't like that style. Next, I guess I'll list a few things I really want to see, and wouldn't be inclined to buy the game unless it included them: 1) The game needs options to create complicated characters who make interesting tactical choices. This particularly applies to a "fighter" type class. I don't mind if there is a 3E Fighter or Slayer class, as long as I can use a Warblade or 4E Fighter class instead. 2) The game shouldn't be built around the idea of "magic solving everything". People shouldn't need magic to solve problems, and that includes things like healing and counteracting magical threats. At the very least, if such magic is necessary, it shouldn't be restricted to certain classes, and should instead be useable by everyone (such as with rituals). 3) The game must be open to non-traditional fantasy. The game can't get mired in Vance and Tolkein, and instead should branch out to all possible sources of inspiration. Myth, videogames, anime, sci-fi... Anything should be acceptable. 4) The math really needs to work, and shouldn't break down at higher levels. The whole game needs to be thoroughly playtested, and things shouldn't be preserved without appraisal just because of tradition. As for a few more specific mechanics or concepts I want to see in, but would accept if they don't get in... 1) Healing Surges 2) No "Generalist" Wizard 3) Replacing the Fighter with a range of better-defined martial classes. 4) No "+x" items or magical item dependency. 5) 4E-style defenses and saving throws 6) No feat system (should be replaced with something better) 7) Well-defined class and monster roles 8) Prioritization of fun D&D IP race choices like Dragonborn and Warforged over boring, generic choices like gnomes and elf subraces. That's nowhere near complete, but it's a start. So, what's your list? Once we have that, we can start to compromise. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
With Respect to the Door and Expectations....The REAL Reason 5e Can't Unite the Base
Top