D&D is not a supers game.

[Dannager]

But we all were, once.

Considering my first ever PC died- last man standing in a long, standard dungeon crawl (and still low-level)- I have to say that I'm with TrippyHippy- my view of what is "unsatisfying" or "flawed" clearly differs from pemerton's & Dannager's. Having experienced what I expererienced, I can say that the old style design can definitely deliver a satisfying play experience, "will" and "flawed" assumes something that is simply not true- that we all interact with the rules in the same emotional way.

What I am advocating is that you do more harm to the game by making 1st-level characters fragile than you do good. Yes, you enjoyed your first D&D experience despite the loss of your PC (or perhaps because of it, for reasons unknown), but you probably would have enjoyed it if you hadn't died, too. The fact of the matter is that there's a pretty good chance that a brand new player enjoying D&D for the first time is more likely to have his experienced soured by losing his first character at the very beginning of the game than he is to have his experience soured by having his character live to hit 2nd level. That's what this boils down to. If you want fragile 1st-level characters as an option, that's certainly something you could advocate. But as the default, it's an idea that would do more harm than good.

 

[IanB]

The part of all this discussion I don't understand is why having one's preferred method of play in the game as an option isn't good enough. It has to be the default or the game is ruined forever. There is probably no house rule in the game that is easier to make than starting PC hit points, in any direction.

I want 3e-style multiclassing so bad I can taste it, but I'm not going to boycott the company if it only makes it in as an optional module. This whole argument just makes no sense to me from the get-go.

Furthermore it relies on assumptions we simply should not make at the moment. The rogue in the playtest doesn't have pickpocket, but we don't know there won't be some other background or scheme that does. Hit points seem slightly high now but they've said they were pumped up to test the core mechanics, so we don't even know what the actual starting level will be. And so on.

 

[Mercutio01]

The part of all this discussion I don't understand is why having one's preferred method of play in the game as an option isn't good enough. It has to be the default or the game is ruined forever.

Here's the answer for why, whether I agree with it or not: The default assumption is what most players and DMs assume. It's why the variant rules in the DMG, although they are there and available, see far less use than the ones presented in the PHB. Having it as an option makes it seem less valid than the default, and thus creates problems whenever someone chooses that option rather than the default.

Luckily, I tend to game with people who are friends and thus reasonable when it comes to agreeing to options. It's got a lot more to do with the social contract inherent in setting up the group. If the social connections are more adversarial, then anything that isn't the core rule is met with resistance.

 

[Campbell]

The first step to making rules variants more accessible is including them in the PHB close to the relevant section so that players can access them in play. A player should never have to reference the DMG in play. The other effect this has is encouraging all players to discuss the sort of game they want to play. 2e did this and a lot of groups ended up using a good portion of optional rules.

As far as PC backgrounds go I would actually like to see 5e take it a step farther. All too often PCs seem to be entirely disconnected from their communities to the point where it seems they do nothing but adventure. I would like to see an optional Community module reminiscent of RuneQuest or the lifepaths in Burning Wheel that helps to provide PCs with connections to the world. Of course the backgrounds that describe a PC's profession are a good start.

 

[TrippyHippy]

What I am advocating is that you do more harm to the game by making 1st-level characters fragile than you do good. Yes, you enjoyed your first D&D experience despite the loss of your PC (or perhaps because of it, for reasons unknown), but you probably would have enjoyed it if you hadn't died, too. The fact of the matter is that there's a pretty good chance that a brand new player enjoying D&D for the first time is more likely to have his experienced soured by losing his first character at the very beginning of the game than he is to have his experience soured by having his character live to hit 2nd level. That's what this boils down to. If you want fragile 1st-level characters as an option, that's certainly something you could advocate. But as the default, it's an idea that would do more harm than good.

There are a whole lot of sweeping assumptions in all of this. Previous editions had 1st Level Characters with less HP, and they recruited new players fine. Current alternative versions of D&D (Pathfinder, C&C) have similar lower levels of HP at 1st Level and again seem to recruit new players fine too. The only version of D&D that differed from the original approach of single HD+ Con bonus, was 4th Edition. There is simply no evidence to suggest that initiates of previous editions had off-putting experiences compared to 4th edition.

You are also assuming that the lower HP point totals inevitably lead to characters dropping like flies. In my experience it just means that it tones down the level of combat heaviness a DM throws at players at starting levels, whilst also making players a bit more cautious. This is not necessarily a 'bad thing'. All you do when you make PCs power up is escalate the power levels of everything else too. At the same time, you are just removing the scope for differing D&D experiences by effectively removing low level play from the game.

 

[TrippyHippy]

The part of all this discussion I don't understand is why having one's preferred method of play in the game as an option isn't good enough. It has to be the default or the game is ruined forever. There is probably no house rule in the game that is easier to make than starting PC hit points, in any direction.

I want 3e-style multiclassing so bad I can taste it, but I'm not going to boycott the company if it only makes it in as an optional module. This whole argument just makes no sense to me from the get-go.

Furthermore it relies on assumptions we simply should not make at the moment. The rogue in the playtest doesn't have pickpocket, but we don't know there won't be some other background or scheme that does. Hit points seem slightly high now but they've said they were pumped up to test the core mechanics, so we don't even know what the actual starting level will be. And so on.

The whole point of having a playtest is to provide feedback. We have no idea how the game will change after each stage of the playtest, but if we don't speak up about the aspects of the game we see in front of us, then nobody will hear our concerns. My concern is that 1st level characters are too powered up, and consequently it doesn't feel like D&D should to me (at lower levels). Entirely legitimate and honest feedback.

 

[pemerton]

As far as PC backgrounds go I would actually like to see 5e take it a step farther. All too often PCs seem to be entirely disconnected from their communities to the point where it seems they do nothing but adventure. I would like to see an optional Community module reminiscent of RuneQuest or the lifepaths in Burning Wheel that helps to provide PCs with connections to the world. Of course the backgrounds that describe a PC's profession are a good start.

I posted some ideas on using Backgrounds in this thread, although in the context of adjudicating skill checks rather than building connections to the community.

 

[Steely_Dan]

I posted some ideas on using Backgrounds in this thread, although in the context of adjudicating skill checks rather than building connections to the community.

Hopefully this "community" will not have too much of an impact on the new edition.

 

[pemerton]

Hopefully this "community" will not have too much of an impact on the new edition.

You didn't like my ideas on how to use backgrounds?

 

[Steely_Dan]

You didn't like my ideas on how to use backgrounds?

Oh, nothing to do with your Backgrounds - very cool, like your ideas; I'm talking about the D&D "community".