D&D 5E How Can D&D Next Win You Over?

[Dannyalcatraz]

The simple, streamlined class in 4E became the Ranger and the "best" intro character.

It has the same AEDU format as every other PHB class- it is not actually simpler in mechanics, as was the fighter of prior editions.

So somehow Fighters having their own schtick is bad?

No- divvying up basic combat maneuvers into unique schticks for the various martial classes is bad. Nearly every time I read a martial power, I'm puzzled as to why a PC of a different martial class couldn't learn that technique. It's nonsensical and and purely gamist.

(Had I been the 4Ed designer and still comitted to the AEDU format, there would have been a single huge pool of martial powers that those PCs could choose from.)

Iterative attacks were lame as heck in providing class depth. While everyone else was getting cool stuff they said to the Fighter "Uh, here, just have some more attacks". Great, you gave me an edition where the last thing I want to do is play my preferred class. Trip and disarm were not interesting tactical additions either

In your humble opinion.

But others feel quite differently, and the result has been an edition where those players no longer want to play THEIR favorite class. In one case in my circle of fellow gamers, that dislike has been strong enough that the player in question has refuse to play 4Ed. That is how much he loved playing fighters until now.

 

[Shadeydm]

Iterative attacks were lame as heck in providing class depth. While everyone else was getting cool stuff they said to the Fighter "Uh, here, just have some more attacks". Great, you gave me an edition where the last thing I want to do is play my preferred class. Trip and disarm were not interesting tactical additions either.

Ok iterative attacks were so lame they made you not want to play a Fighter. So now i look at my 11th level 4E Fighter and hmm he can attack 2 different enemies once an encounter with Hack and Hew oh my gosh thats so much better than iterative attacks... Lets see I can attack one enemy twice with Rain of Blows once per encounter holy cow thats soo much better than iterative attacks. I can masterstroke a guy once per encounter for about as much damage as hitting him with iterative attacks wow this is sooo much better than fighters of previous editions its amazing.... Why can I only do these things once an encounter? Oh right because stabbing someone twice is so difficult to set up and so draining it can only happen once before I rest. Yet every single round i can stab a guy and push him 3 squares and knock him prone no rest required (tide of iron). Yes the logic is inescapable...

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

It's better because you can use it only once per encounter, ShadeyDM. That means you have to make a choice when to use it -it's not simply an automatic given, you have to find the optimal situation and the right targets because this is your only shot with it.

It's the same reason we have Vancian Magic - sure, you could just let the Wizard cast Fireball at will - but it becomes much more interesting if he has to make a decision when to cast Fireball because he won't be able to do so again until after he slept a night.

Of course we can give everyone everything all the time. We could also say that there is no reason why the Gods don't allow all their Clerics to cast Fireball and why no Archmage ever figured out how to cast Cure Light Wounds or Raise Dead.

 

[billd91]

It's better because you can use it only once per encounter, ShadeyDM. That means you have to make a choice when to use it -it's not simply an automatic given, you have to find the optimal situation and the right targets because this is your only shot with it.

It's the same reason we have Vancian Magic - sure, you could just let the Wizard cast Fireball at will - but it becomes much more interesting if he has to make a decision when to cast Fireball because he won't be able to do so again until after he slept a night.

There are differences though.
Even if I can make multiple attacks every round, it comes with a cost - slower movement. I can choose between moving and making multiple attacks already. Why do I need a once/encounter power to have that choice?

Now suppose there are multiple powers that allow me to get multiple attacks. I can take them all and fire them off in rapid succession in a fight. Why not just allow me to do that already with iterative attacks if the net effect is similar?

It's true that a fireball gets cast only once before the slot needs rest to be reused, but in the traditional D&D Vancian system, I can prep it more than once. I don't believe I can in 4e. So I lose the choice of multiple fireballs under 4e's system.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

It's better because you can use it only once per encounter, ShadeyDM

I'd argue- and I'm not alone because I've heard as much from the others in my group- that that makes it worse, not better. It's artificial and replaces RW simulation with counterintuitive gamist design.

I've sparred, both when I was in shape and now that I'm in a particular shape (round), and at no point would anyone mistake me for a skilled combatant.* Even Ican attempt and even land multiple blows in combination multiple times within a given "encounter."





* crazy ass berserker, maybe, but not skilled.

 

[Shadeydm]

It's better because you can use it only once per encounter, ShadeyDM. That means you have to make a choice when to use it -it's not simply an automatic given, you have to find the optimal situation and the right targets because this is your only shot with it.

Yet I can tide of iron every round stabbing someone and pushing them 15 feet away and knocking them prone. Every round same opponent even over and over again. So how does it make sense that i can only hit him twice one time in an encounter? Are you telling me stabbing you twice takes more energy? Is harder to set up? Sorry not buying it... Its an artificial limitation that makes no sense.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Yet I can tide of iron every round stabbing someone and pushing them 15 feet away and knocking them prone. Every round same opponent even over and over again. So how does it make sense that i can only hit him twice one time in an encounter? Are you telling me stabbing you twice takes more energy? Is harder to set up? Sorry not buying it... Its an artificial limitation that makes no sense.

Why can the lower level Fighter not as many attacks as the higher level Fighter? Why do I need (in 3E) be Level 6 to get a second attack per round, why can I not make two. Or why can I not move and make these two attacks? What's with all these artificial restrictions?

You will probably say "you're not good enough to do that yet, and instead of giving you the attacks at high penalties, you simply don't get them at all". Then I say "Oh, I understand, it's an abstraction. Oh, so that'S why my 4E Fighter can only make his two attacks once per encounter - it's rare that you find yourself in such a situation, and instead of having me try every round with a low chance to succeed, I can do it once per encounter but guaranteed. That's a neat abstraction, and it brings an interesting tactical element to the game. I like it!"

 

[Shadeydm]

Oh, so that'S why my 4E Fighter can only make his two attacks once per encounter - it's rare that you find yourself in such a situation, and instead of having me try every round with a low chance to succeed, I can do it once per encounter but guaranteed. That's a neat abstraction, and it brings an interesting tactical element to the game. I like it!"

I'm glad you like it. To me it's taking something the Fighter was always able to do and say no not anymore "its too tiring" or "the guy can see it coming" now you can only do it once. While telling me that I can stab that guy push him 15 feet and knock him down over and over and over and thats "not tiring" and "he can't see it coming". How does that have any sense of logic to it? I think its quite jarring, unpleasant and generally speaking total nonsense.

 

[Manbearcat]

No- divvying up basic combat maneuvers into unique schticks for the various martial classes is bad. Nearly every time I read a martial power, I'm puzzled as to why a PC of a different martial class couldn't learn that technique. It's nonsensical and and purely gamist.

Is it nonsensical or is it a product of the siloing away of class abilities inherent in a class-based system and will then have narrowing implications for the PC build framework (which is, by definition, gamist)? Giving everyone free access to all martial powers (to pick and choose from) seems antithetical to the idea of a class-based system. Its not that I disagree with the idea (I would love it if 4e multi-classing just absolutely opened up the pool of powers from your multi-class rather than forcing you to spend a feat on them...certainly a negative point of the system IME), but I don't think it would be without controversy with "dyed in the wool DND MUST BE CLASS BASED" adherents.

If you need a world-based simulation explanation for it, how about an analog to Mixed Martial Arts. Amongst the prominent disciplines are:

- Wrestling
- Boxing
- Judo
- Brazillian Jiu jitsu
- Dirty Boxing
- Muay Thai

These disciplines have little to no overlap between them with regards to technique and economy of action. Their overall design aim/application within a fight (where the scope of applicable techniques narrow significantly) is extremely narrow and focused. Most MMA fighters will have a primary discipline (Class) through which their ring efforts/techniques are almost exclusively expressed. Many will have a secondary discipline (Multi-class?) that is used exceedingly sparingly when required.

 

[S'mon]

A complete core game in a $30 box plus some decent word of mouth might get me buying it. Then I might consider buying modular expansions later if I ran it.

I'm not in the market for spending $100 to see if I like it, though.