D&D 5E So 5th edition is coming soon

[Jhaelen]

I understand what you are saying; I disagree. Show me.

Oh dear. Another 50 page thread in the making...

A question: Have you read 'Hammerfast'?

When I read it, my immediate thought was: This is exactly the kind of thing that's been missing from WotC's adventure modules!

It's advertised as an 'adventure site' but it's really a lot closer to the way many of the 'classic' adventure modules have been presented than any of the actual 4e adventure modules. I guess it's a kind of 'sandbox'.

It has no delve-style encounter at all and apart from a couple of stat blocks, it's almost edition/system agnostic.
It's not 'ready to play', but with a minimal investment of preparation it can be turned into a great series of adventures. It has a ton of adventure hooks, interesting npcs, locations and even a 'campaign outline'.

Now, imagine if they had added a second book to 'Hammerfast', detailing about 8-10 encounters in the delve format for one 'ready-to-play' introductory adventure. Imho, that would have been the best of both old-school design and the user-friendliness that is expected of a modern product.

 

[igniz13]

And again, people go on about what they want and not what's best for the system.

No-one looks at what 5e should achieve objectively.

Dear WoTC, do everything I want to see, don't do the things I hate.

I'm not going to break down the OP's statements, couldn't be bothered on the WoTC forum, certainly won't here.

Frankly, I can't see much need for changes on this thread that would require a completely new edition but might be better served by better approaches to adventure construction.

Don't like long combats, don't make long combats.

 

[Ycore Rixle]

Ok!

Looks like the season of 5E threads has started again.

Seriously people, instead of saying how you would do 5E, just design your own game and publish it.

It could be the next big thing.

Done and done.

Go check Spellbound Kingdoms. Buy it here.

The combat system is what I wanted to do in Book of Nine Swords, but Rich Baker had already sketched out that book's system when he turned it over to us poor freelancers. I started work on SK when I realized that that there was no way I was interested in continuing to freelance for WOTC. So, in a way, SK is my version of 5e. (Not the setting; that would need to be more generic. But the mechanics. And the setting is easily ripped out.)

Edit: Reasons the combat system is far, far better than 4e's:
1. No modifiers after the die is rolled. What you see on the die is what you get.
2. Style matters. Dagger-and-wine, Free Sword, Twin Weapon Fighting, Savage, et al. have different strengths and weaknesses.
3. It's fast. Blazing fast, really. Makes Savage Worlds combat look like Oblivion running on a Vic 20.
4. It's tactical but
4.5 It doesn't require a grid or minis.
5. It supports the gameworld as a self-consistent reality rather than the gameworld as a meaningless facade.
6. Character matters. A character's Inspirations are imprtant.
7. Banter. Insulting your opponent is an effective tactic, but not in the "Feather Me Yon Oaf" "I raise that monster's aggro" marking "He has to attack me now" way.
8. Comparatively speaking, no bookkeeping. A tiny bit is there, of course, but compared to 4e, it's nothing.

So yeah, check it out!

 

[Raven Crowking]

Oh dear. Another 50 page thread in the making...

A question: Have you read 'Hammerfast'?

Yup.

I've also retrofit 4e modules into another format, and played around with folding, spindling, and mutilating earlier edition modules into Delve format. And, until you have done so, IMHO, it is difficult to see how the Delve format changes the material. IMHO, Delve has a profound -- and profoundly limiting -- affect on the material so formatted.

(Which is not to say that a set-piece battle couldn't be presented as it would be in Delve without limiting the surrounding material. It is the whole format that causes a problem, IMHO and IME.)

So, if someone claims that it is "trivial" to put something like B2 into Delve Format, "Show Me" is, IMHO, a rational response.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Raven Crowking's contention is that if you took B2 and changed nothing but the formatting, moving it across to the Delve format, you would in doing so strip out the soul of the adventure, and so destroy it.

No. Raven Crowking's contention is that you would profoundly change the adventure, and that the constraint of making each area a preset encounter would fundamentally limit the interaction inherent in the setting as Gygax wrote it.

In the 4e designer blogs, the designers talked about how cool it was in B2 that creatures in the caves would flow out of one area and into the encounter where the PCs were at (but only when it was appropriate). Being able to do so is one of the promises of 4e that the Delve works against.

In the Delve you have two discrete encounter locations, each of which tell you where everyone is starting. If you flow one encounter into another, not only do you upset the careful balance, but you need to flip between two-page spreads. And, of course, the next encounter area is empty.

Doing this frequently in a setting that had been fluid (like B2 as originally written) and you end up with a lot of wasted design work. You also end up with a lot of page-flipping. You end up strongly encouraged, IMHO and AFAICT, to simply not do it.

What was a fluid and dynamic setting becomes a static series of set-piece battles.

It doesn't "lose it's soul", and it may still be a fun adventure. But it is no longer the same adventure.

The format matters.



RC

 

[delericho]

No. Raven Crowking's contention is that you would profoundly change the adventure, and that the constraint of making each area a preset encounter would fundamentally limit the interaction inherent in the setting as Gygax wrote it.

Oops. I apologise for putting words in your mouth. My mistake.

 

[triqui]

Releasing everything, even just 4 races and 4 classes in one book will not happen. 3 books make more money.

If you only release one book with all the essential rules...many who would normally buy 3 books will ONLY buy that first book. They will ignore the rest, even if the rest have other classes like Barbarian, or Druid, or Paladin...and races such as the Half-Orc.

They will consider the basic one rulebook as the core...and everything else as an add on.

Simply put, 3 books for $35 each make more than one book at $35, or even one book at $50, or even one book at $75.

I think 5e is in development, and there are feelers out there seeing what works and what doesn't.

I think Computers and internet will be an important aspect of 5e, as that's the general trend in which literature (via Kindle, and other arenas), media, and entertainment are moving. I'm not certain how much it will be a part of it however...perhaps more...or a little less than it is now.

I think there are those who want a simpler game, and there are those who want an evolved game.

We'll see where it goes. Who knows, maybe the next sacred cow to bite the dust won't be HP, but will be stats...so instead of a stat from 3-18...it will be a stat between -1 to +4 (or +5 if you are a certain race).

While I agree that three book mean more money from existing players, I find fhis a doubled edged sword. Three books also become a deterrant for new players. Its not eaay to spend 100+ dollars in a game you havent played ever. Specially if you can get more bamng from your bucks from the 900lb gorilla of enterteinment industry, the videogames.

It's better to sell 1 40$ book to 1 million players, than selling 3 books to 250.000 players. It's even better than selling 3 books to 350000 playes, especially if you think 10% of your player base will suscript to DDI. Even if 1 million x40 < 350000 x120, getting 100000 guys to pay monthly is way better than getting 35000 guys to pay monthly

 

[Raven Crowking]

Oops. I apologise for putting words in your mouth. My mistake.

No worries.

And, just to be clear, I am not saying it would not be trivially easy to run these modules using the 4e ruleset. I am only talking about the (hidden? non-obvious?) ramifications of the Delve format, used in any ruleset.


RC

 

[KarinsDad]

11. Healing: more distinction between magical and non-magical healing

This.

I hate the fact that everyone and his brother can heal (or gain temporary hit points, or gain regeneration, or gain resistance), plus everyone can take a Second Wind.

They had to up the damage of the monsters in order to even threaten PCs anymore.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

This.

I hate the fact that everyone and his brother can heal (or gain temporary hit points, or gain regeneration, or gain resistance), plus everyone can take a Second Wind.

They had to up the damage of the monsters in order to even threaten PCs anymore.

As a big fan of the warlord I disagree
That feels like a big hit to the martial heals.

I like second wind as a daily instead of encounter though... With some powers letting people recharge it.


We played around with second wind as a daily and all defenders get at 3rd level a second use of it,and healing and inspiring ward just recharged it, and gave d6s of temp hp... It did not work out as well as we hoped