D&D 5E (2014) 28/1/13 L&L D&DNext goals part Four

[gweinel]

One thing that worries me is that if all these good modules will be supported. Will the Damage Reduction of the armors work with the published adventures and setting? The gritty healing mechanics? The tactical combats? If not the usefulness will be reduced significally...

 

[TerraDave]

I have been quite pleased with the 4 "goals" articles, including that list.

But, as has been repeated many times, its now and still about the doing.

 

[TwoSix]

One thing that worries me is that if all these good modules will be supported. Will the Damage Reduction of the armors work with the published adventures and setting? The gritty healing mechanics? The tactical combats? If not the usefulness will be reduced significally...

I get the feeling there will be adaptation suggestions within the rules portion, but not the modules. NEXT seems to want to support a tinkering ethos, where they give you the tools, but not detailed assembly instructions.

 

[The Human Target]

How long after the initial launch will it take to get all this stuff?

Seemingly years.

That puts a damper on my enthusiasm.

 

[malcolm_n]

1) Facing is a big part of tactical rules, not sure why anybody wouldn't want them both. I try not to use tactical anyway (we even managed a story-driven 4e game that was very fun), but I see the need for it.

2) Do they mean encounter powers or just, "I'm extra powerful"?

3) Please consider the 7th Sea/Swashbuckling Adventures concept of Flaws (was kinda in UA 3.5). Loved roleplaying those with my friends.

4) story-based approach: As in less dice? interesting.

5) I always love an option to reward spectacular things (why PF hero points are fun)

6) Variant Xp is nice to have spelled out. We usually do this anyway.

7) Firearms? Finally! If not at the start, maybe when you refresh Eberron?

8) mass combat is nice, since right now we kinda wing it (or use the 3.5 rules-ish)

9) Fast play rules for multiple creatures could be very good or very bad.

10) I might actually try sea battles if they're worth it.

11) Please bring back realms management. And Birthright! We want Birthright

12) I'm sure there are some who want to hunt reagents. I may on some occasions.

13) I've heard of Crit hit/fail tables from 2e, never used them but willing to try.

14) DRmor from Star Wars makes a return. Cool

15) vitality/wounds also from Star Wars. Alrighty

16) Alternate magic. Like Spell points? Sounds like we almost already have that now, but I'll hold judgement to see.

17) Genre-specific rules could be fun for their settings. Can we finally have Ravenloft back instead of just as a bored game (yes, pun intended)?

 

[DEFCON 1]

One thing that worries me is that if all these good modules will be supported. Will the Damage Reduction of the armors work with the published adventures and setting? The gritty healing mechanics? The tactical combats? If not the usefulness will be reduced significally...

I think these will go along with the mantra that Advanced modules are for DM tinkers. So that *if* you are that kind of DM who is tinkering with your campaign to use Armor as DR... then it also falls upon you to tinker with the published modules you buy and use to replace armor to DR in those as well.

After all... it's going to be impossible for every published module to provide stat blocks that include every Advanced module ruling in them, because they'll just become unwieldy. I would imagine each module will probably pick and choose which Advanced rules will be needed and used and thus represented in it. In other words... a seafaring module will probably include explanations on using the Sea Battles Advanced module within it. An adventure module about war might expect you to incorporate the Mass Combat Advanced rules. But in both cases... if you wanted to use the Advanced 'Recovery by Encounter' rules rather than the Standard 'Recovery by Day' rules... the module probably wouldn't mention anything about it and instead expect you to just figure out how to tinker and adapt those rules to the adventure module itself.

At some point... you as the DM have to take some personal responsibility when it comes to creating/adapting things to your campaign. You can't expect WotC to do all the work for you all the time.

 

[Remathilis]

This article proves to me WotC knows what its doing.

Basic is for fans of rules-lite D&D for new players. Its simple, self-contained, and internally consistent.
Standard is akin to 3e or AD&D in terms of complexity. Its fairly self-contained, but has a lot more options.
Advanced is for tinkers and homebrewers; it requires some work to use, but doesn't break the game using them.

That is how you design a D&D game.

The take-home message from 3e was "too much complexity drags the game down". The take-home message from 4e seems to be "you can't sell one universal D&D experience". Advanced sounds a lot like Unearthed Arcana, but with a lot more support and testing.

 

[delericho]

How long after the initial launch will it take to get all this stuff?

My guess? Some of it will become available with the "Dungeon Master's Guide" (which will be shortly after launch, but probably not on Day One). Other modules will likely appear quite soon, in an "Unearthed Arcana"-type book.

I would not be even remotely surprised if some of the stuff never made it to print - just as some of the Power Sources 'promised' in the 4e PHB1 never quite materialised, 3.5e never got a "Complete Warrior 2", and so forth.

After all... it's going to be impossible for every published module to provide stat blocks that include every Advanced module ruling in them, because they'll just become unwieldy.

In print, that's certainly true. But if their primary way to deliver adventures was via the DDI (and it probably should be), then in theory at least it should be possible - they could have a configuration screen on the online Monster Vault allow the DM to specify his chosen modules, have the adventure link to that 'master' copy of the stat-blocks, and so have the adventures automatically re-skin for whateter combination the DM uses.

Of course, doing all of this would require a very significant amount of work, probably for relatively little gain. So while technically possible, it may be practically impossible.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

When I think about the ease of converting adnd modules to 3e or 4e, i can´t imagine how it could be difficult to adopt adventures to advanced dndnext. Really, an adventure can actually suggest some advanced rules. Armor as DR could easily be included then. (AC 15 / DR 5)

 

[D'karr]

When I think about the ease of converting adnd modules to 3e or 4e, i can´t imagine how it could be difficult to adopt adventures to advanced dndnext. Really, an adventure can actually suggest some advanced rules. Armor as DR could easily be included then. (AC 15 / DR 5)

Adventures is exactly how certain expanded "rules" were introduced in 1e. I remember ability checks being an "alternate" rule that was codified in some of the 1e era adventures.