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="Jester David" data-source="post: 5977787" data-attributes="member: 37579"><p>Okay then, let's get started.</p><p>I did a blog on this here:</p><p><a href="http://community.wizards.com/the_jester/blog/2012/01/14/12_things_5e_needs_to_do" target="_blank">Whoops! Browser Settings Incompatible</a></p><p></p><p>But I'll reiterate the ones related to design and expand.</p><p></p><p><strong>1) Variable Play</strong> No one play style is king. The game shouldn't dictate to DMs how to run their game. </p><p>This would include the style of game changing over the levels. While the math and balance should be the same, high level play should not be identical to lower level play but with higher numbers and "kobolds" scratched out and "abyssal plague demonaughts" written in.</p><p>This is a big catch-all category, since it includes allowing gritty and heroic fantasy, high and low magic, high and low fantasy, high and low power, etc. </p><p></p><p><strong>2) Promote House Rules</strong> Let people make the game their own. The includes providing alternate rules (alternate healing, alternate ways of taking damage, different armour rules, more ritualistic spellcasting, alternate spellcasting systems (mana), variant class designs, tactical combat options, etc.) but also explaining the reasoning for rules so DMs can make informed design decisions. </p><p></p><p><strong>3) Reward and Encourage Role-Playing</strong> It's not enough to just sit back and let it happen, you need to nurture and emphasise RPing. </p><p></p><p><strong>4) Narrative Realism</strong> I want more nods to reality and a cohesive world. While, obviously, there needs to be some funkiness where the game rules bleed through into the world for balance and fun, I want there to be attempts and effort made to make the game and rules reflect reality. Not hard "Confirmed" as true by <em>Mythbusters</em> reality but narrative reality where if you saw it in a movie you'd say "yeah, I buy that. It could happen." </p><p></p><p><strong>5) Respect New Players</strong> New players aren't dumb. You don't need to completely hold their hand and treat them like fragile flowers that will wilt at the first sign of math or a choice. And a new player is only a new player for a couple levels. At this day and age everyone who might be interested in D&D knows what an "elf" is, what a "hitpoint" is (kinda) and terms like "level" and "class". </p><p></p><p><strong>6) Balance</strong></p><p></p><p>Haven't they acknowledged this? I think the complaints for many isn't the idea of balance but the implementation of balance early in 4e. </p><p>I want balance as well. That's totally high on my list. But I want the classes to be equal yet different. Perfect balance is an impossibility. There's too much variability and moving parts. "Average" balance is probably the best compromise between variety and equality. There are always going to be encounters that favour one class or build or character more than others, there is almost always going to be an M.V.PC. in each fight. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Agreed. We do need a range of archetypes and classes. I think they've confirmed all the classes that have appeared in each edition's first PHB, which should be a nice mix. We really need a nice variety.</p><p></p><p></p><p><strong>7) Greater DM Control & Education</strong> Here's the first point where we really disagree. </p><p>I don't think bad DMs are so common that the entire edition needs to be designed to protect players from them. I think they're a minority, and it's more efficient to assume some DM skill and work to improve DM skills. Raise the bad DMs up rather than just mitigate their awfulness. </p><p>But I acknowledge that it's easier to ignore a rule than add one that doesn't exist. So there should be a adequate baseline established to firmly show DMs what is acceptable. And rules somewhere (possibly a rules module) for reducing DM fiat. </p><p></p><p>Small things:</p><p>* I'd like equal emphasis on class fantasy races and WotC IP. New players aren't initially going to care what a "beholder" or "mind flayer" are and are likely to think "displacer beasts" and "owlbears" are silly. Manticores, chimeras, cyclopses, wyverns, griffons, and unicorns are the Name races. </p><p>* The above applies to PC races as well. I love my gnomes and don't want them ghettoized in the second or third PHB but also think shifters and warforged have their place. Anything that's been a playable PC race for more than two editions should be in the first PHB or playable in the first year. </p><p>* Tighter feats. Feats are really the catch-all system in 3e and 4e. We need something to take the weight and spread out the customization. Class based options should be folded into classes (no "improved class feature X" feats). Ditto racial feats. Backgrounds and Themes can also take some of the brunt. </p><p>* Generic monsters. I don't want three different types of roper. It's a roper, that should be enough. Instead, customizing monsters (monster themes, alternate powers) should be easier. Especially for humanoids. We don't need a goblin raider and orc raider and gnoll raider. We need a goblin and orc and gnoll and some way of adding the "raider" template. </p><p>* Avoidance mechanic. I dislike the 4e defences for the sole reason stationary objects attacking the PCs is silly. "The pit trap attacks your Reflex with a 19." There needs to be an active defence and a reactive defence.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jester David, post: 5977787, member: 37579"] Okay then, let's get started. I did a blog on this here: [url=http://community.wizards.com/the_jester/blog/2012/01/14/12_things_5e_needs_to_do]Whoops! Browser Settings Incompatible[/url] But I'll reiterate the ones related to design and expand. [b]1) Variable Play[/b] No one play style is king. The game shouldn't dictate to DMs how to run their game. This would include the style of game changing over the levels. While the math and balance should be the same, high level play should not be identical to lower level play but with higher numbers and "kobolds" scratched out and "abyssal plague demonaughts" written in. This is a big catch-all category, since it includes allowing gritty and heroic fantasy, high and low magic, high and low fantasy, high and low power, etc. [b]2) Promote House Rules[/b] Let people make the game their own. The includes providing alternate rules (alternate healing, alternate ways of taking damage, different armour rules, more ritualistic spellcasting, alternate spellcasting systems (mana), variant class designs, tactical combat options, etc.) but also explaining the reasoning for rules so DMs can make informed design decisions. [b]3) Reward and Encourage Role-Playing[/b] It's not enough to just sit back and let it happen, you need to nurture and emphasise RPing. [b]4) Narrative Realism[/b] I want more nods to reality and a cohesive world. While, obviously, there needs to be some funkiness where the game rules bleed through into the world for balance and fun, I want there to be attempts and effort made to make the game and rules reflect reality. Not hard "Confirmed" as true by [i]Mythbusters[/i] reality but narrative reality where if you saw it in a movie you'd say "yeah, I buy that. It could happen." [b]5) Respect New Players[/b] New players aren't dumb. You don't need to completely hold their hand and treat them like fragile flowers that will wilt at the first sign of math or a choice. And a new player is only a new player for a couple levels. At this day and age everyone who might be interested in D&D knows what an "elf" is, what a "hitpoint" is (kinda) and terms like "level" and "class". [b]6) Balance[/b] Haven't they acknowledged this? I think the complaints for many isn't the idea of balance but the implementation of balance early in 4e. I want balance as well. That's totally high on my list. But I want the classes to be equal yet different. Perfect balance is an impossibility. There's too much variability and moving parts. "Average" balance is probably the best compromise between variety and equality. There are always going to be encounters that favour one class or build or character more than others, there is almost always going to be an M.V.PC. in each fight. Agreed. We do need a range of archetypes and classes. I think they've confirmed all the classes that have appeared in each edition's first PHB, which should be a nice mix. We really need a nice variety. [b]7) Greater DM Control & Education[/b] Here's the first point where we really disagree. I don't think bad DMs are so common that the entire edition needs to be designed to protect players from them. I think they're a minority, and it's more efficient to assume some DM skill and work to improve DM skills. Raise the bad DMs up rather than just mitigate their awfulness. But I acknowledge that it's easier to ignore a rule than add one that doesn't exist. So there should be a adequate baseline established to firmly show DMs what is acceptable. And rules somewhere (possibly a rules module) for reducing DM fiat. Small things: * I'd like equal emphasis on class fantasy races and WotC IP. New players aren't initially going to care what a "beholder" or "mind flayer" are and are likely to think "displacer beasts" and "owlbears" are silly. Manticores, chimeras, cyclopses, wyverns, griffons, and unicorns are the Name races. * The above applies to PC races as well. I love my gnomes and don't want them ghettoized in the second or third PHB but also think shifters and warforged have their place. Anything that's been a playable PC race for more than two editions should be in the first PHB or playable in the first year. * Tighter feats. Feats are really the catch-all system in 3e and 4e. We need something to take the weight and spread out the customization. Class based options should be folded into classes (no "improved class feature X" feats). Ditto racial feats. Backgrounds and Themes can also take some of the brunt. * Generic monsters. I don't want three different types of roper. It's a roper, that should be enough. Instead, customizing monsters (monster themes, alternate powers) should be easier. Especially for humanoids. We don't need a goblin raider and orc raider and gnoll raider. We need a goblin and orc and gnoll and some way of adding the "raider" template. * Avoidance mechanic. I dislike the 4e defences for the sole reason stationary objects attacking the PCs is silly. "The pit trap attacks your Reflex with a 19." There needs to be an active defence and a reactive defence. [/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