D&D 5E Imagine This: 5E in five easy steps

[UngainlyTitan]

I would not be happy with starting from 3.x. I have always flet thatthe divergence of high and low saves and BAB was too great at high level and a core problem with the game.

I also feel that the 3.x power curve was too great. 4e's flatter and more linear power prgression is much better.

However, I would be inclined to make the core game flatter than either.

 

[Mallus]

My point in bringing it up was to show what you can do with a 3.x style approach once you strip out all the elements that are part of class, spell or other subsystem design.

Aren't you stripping out everything that makes it a "3e-style approach"? What's left? 6 stats and a unified ability bonus table?

Personally, I'd start with something closer to 2e. It's more modular, and not intended to serve as an extensible framework.

 

[Hassassin]

Personally, I'd start with something closer to 2e. It's more modular, and not intended to serve as an extensible framework.

But isn't an extensible framework exactly what you need as a core of a modular system.

 

[Mallus]

But isn't an extensible framework exactly what you need as a core of a modular system.

Maybe that wasn't the best choice of words. Maybe "integrated" would have been better?

There's an "object-oriented" quality to the 3e framework. Like most object-oriented approaches, it can lead to increased and unnecessary complexity if you're not careful.

There's a more "procedural" approach to pre-3e D&D. Lots of discreet procedures for doing work which aren't derived from a set of base classes.