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
WotC Developer Google Hangout on Youtube
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="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 6045081" data-attributes="member: 2067"><p>Rolling random thoughts:</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"> I kind of like the idea of using "expertise dice" for non-combat stuff, though I wonder if this will lead to "spamming" certain abilities. If a fighter is never deprived of his ability to intimidate, will he just keep growling at everyone? It's just something to keep an eye on.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"> I don't need the rogue to be "as good" as the fighter, and I don't want, when playing a rogue, to have to pay a lot of attention to a lot of moving bits in combat. Give me a rogue that works like the original playtest fighter (ie: backstab, and not much else) and I'm happy. I need the ability, as they're talking with the fighter, to turn off those options. It sounds like it won't be a real problem, which is cool. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"> Dead levels are derp. Of COURSE those things are incomplete. On the other hoof, high-level complexity is a real problem, and "power swaps" are an awkward way to handle that. I'd rather have a low-level ability scale than have to switch what I have known for X levels into something else random. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"> I'm a fan of limited spells (for Wizards). I do also adore the idea of changing a big chunk of spells to free rituals, or giving them ritual options. It's basically a "cast it from a spellbook" option. I'm in, at least for wizards. I'm not so sure that non-wizards should have that option, but I like it as an option for wizards. Still want an option to drop at-will spells, but now that I'm wearing my thinkin' cap, it shouldn't be too hard. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"> I lurv the idea of expertise-dice gishes, and I'm chuffed to see that at least one internal version of the cleric has recognized that the cleric is the original d&D gish. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"> I can hypothetically accept the assassin as a sub-division of rogue, as long as it comes with what I expect, and not with extra baggage. I think it could happen, because the rogue is a lot bigger than the AD&D thief was, and that's fine.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"> I can accept that non-magical healing is an option they want to support, and I like that they're thinking that "CLW, but not magical" isn't what they want for non-magical healing. Warlords absolutely fall into a weird place where they exist more as rules constructs than as fictional archetypes, since their archetype overlaps with fighters. I think it's interesting to see that they noted the bard/warlord overlap, and I think there's some rich ground to explore there. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"> Prefer the bard as a combo trickster/healer/warrior/multiball/gishthing. They don't need to be pigeonholed into "trickster" archetype anymore than rogues need to be pigeonholed into "thief" archetype. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"> Jimminy christmas, Mearls sounds like he doesn't like attrition. "Oh, everyone gets half HP." Ew (IMO). I think they're healing conversation focused a bit too much on mortality and not enough on <em>pacing</em>, which I think is the heart of the problem.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"> I keep thinking that if skills in NEXT become feats...or "proficiencies" (a la 2e's NWPs) this cognitive dissonance will dissipate. Areas of focused expertise where you get a narrow bonus have been the province of feats in 3e and 4e! Add them to specialties and classes and call it good! </li> </ul></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 6045081, member: 2067"] Rolling random thoughts: [LIST] [*] I kind of like the idea of using "expertise dice" for non-combat stuff, though I wonder if this will lead to "spamming" certain abilities. If a fighter is never deprived of his ability to intimidate, will he just keep growling at everyone? It's just something to keep an eye on. [*] I don't need the rogue to be "as good" as the fighter, and I don't want, when playing a rogue, to have to pay a lot of attention to a lot of moving bits in combat. Give me a rogue that works like the original playtest fighter (ie: backstab, and not much else) and I'm happy. I need the ability, as they're talking with the fighter, to turn off those options. It sounds like it won't be a real problem, which is cool. :) [*] Dead levels are derp. Of COURSE those things are incomplete. On the other hoof, high-level complexity is a real problem, and "power swaps" are an awkward way to handle that. I'd rather have a low-level ability scale than have to switch what I have known for X levels into something else random. [*] I'm a fan of limited spells (for Wizards). I do also adore the idea of changing a big chunk of spells to free rituals, or giving them ritual options. It's basically a "cast it from a spellbook" option. I'm in, at least for wizards. I'm not so sure that non-wizards should have that option, but I like it as an option for wizards. Still want an option to drop at-will spells, but now that I'm wearing my thinkin' cap, it shouldn't be too hard. [*] I lurv the idea of expertise-dice gishes, and I'm chuffed to see that at least one internal version of the cleric has recognized that the cleric is the original d&D gish. :) [*] I can hypothetically accept the assassin as a sub-division of rogue, as long as it comes with what I expect, and not with extra baggage. I think it could happen, because the rogue is a lot bigger than the AD&D thief was, and that's fine. [*] I can accept that non-magical healing is an option they want to support, and I like that they're thinking that "CLW, but not magical" isn't what they want for non-magical healing. Warlords absolutely fall into a weird place where they exist more as rules constructs than as fictional archetypes, since their archetype overlaps with fighters. I think it's interesting to see that they noted the bard/warlord overlap, and I think there's some rich ground to explore there. [*] Prefer the bard as a combo trickster/healer/warrior/multiball/gishthing. They don't need to be pigeonholed into "trickster" archetype anymore than rogues need to be pigeonholed into "thief" archetype. [*] Jimminy christmas, Mearls sounds like he doesn't like attrition. "Oh, everyone gets half HP." Ew (IMO). I think they're healing conversation focused a bit too much on mortality and not enough on [I]pacing[/I], which I think is the heart of the problem. [*] I keep thinking that if skills in NEXT become feats...or "proficiencies" (a la 2e's NWPs) this cognitive dissonance will dissipate. Areas of focused expertise where you get a narrow bonus have been the province of feats in 3e and 4e! Add them to specialties and classes and call it good! [/LIST] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
WotC Developer Google Hangout on Youtube
Top