D&D 5E D&D podcast!

[Blackwarder]

Not enough. They should have been able to put out a document with every class from all 4 editions stating how they were going to approach them six months ago. Didn't need hard mechanics, but where in the Class, Subclass or Build, Theme, or Specialty trees it was going to lie. It's been a year, we should be getting the modules to playtest by this point.

Blah, I think the way they are doing it right now is the correct one, naily the basic game down and then build on the rest of it. Doing it the way you suggested would be like putting the cart ahead of the horses...

Warder

 

[TwoSix]

Blah, I think the way they are doing it right now is the correct one, naily the basic game down and then build on the rest of it. Doing it the way you suggested would be like putting the cart ahead of the horses...

The core should have nailed down by now. And deciding on the relative broadness or narrowness of classes isn't really something that can be playtested anyway. You playtest the mix of mechanics you end up putting into the class.

 

[Obryn]

The core should have nailed down by now.

This is what I get hung up on. It seems late in the game not to have stuff like damage and healing - which are as central as they come, mechanically speaking - nailed down.

-O

 

[Blackwarder]

The core should have nailed down by now. And deciding on the relative broadness or narrowness of classes isn't really something that can be playtested anyway. You playtest the mix of mechanics you end up putting into the class.

You said that they should have done so six months ago...
And by the sound of it they have been play testing classes before releasing them to us and some of them have gone through revision and changed drastically and if you end up with a warlord who is a fighter with different menuveres than why not call it a fighter with specific menuveres?

Warder

 

[TwoSix]

You said that they should have done so six months ago...
And by the sound of it they have been play testing classes before releasing them to us and some of them have gone through revision and changed drastically and if you end up with a warlord who is a fighter with different menuveres than why not call it a fighter with specific menuveres?

And that's fine, as long as a paladin is a fighter with some supernatural abilities. Broad or narrow classes. One or the other.

 

[Blackwarder]

This is what I get hung up on. It seems late in the game not to have stuff like damage and healing - which are as central as they come, mechanically speaking - nailed down.

-O

Damage and HP and such is fairly easy to change, we should see the math tweaks in the next packet iirc from the podcast, and we have seen several healing mechanics in the packets from day one, some of them are clearly intended to be optional/part of a rule module.
considering the difference of opinions you got about things like healing I don't think that you can "nail it down"... unless by nailed down you mean settled on one way and that would just go against what R&D are trying to achieve, the closest you'll come is the decision that in the basic game the only fast healing is by magic with no other rule.

Warder

 

[Blackwarder]

And that's fine, as long as a paladin is a fighter with some supernatural abilities. Broad or narrow classes. One or the other.

Looking at the current fighter I don't see how you can fit a paladin into it without reverting to a bastardized classless system, I'm guessing that if there weren't fighter menuveres than we would have seen the warlord as a dedicated class but considering the fact that mechanicly the warlord is just a fighter with a distinct set of menuveres I don't see why it should get a superset class... IMHO.

Warder
P.s I played a warlord for two years and I can clearly picture how I can build him back in DnDNext.

 

[TwoSix]

Looking at the current fighter I don't see how you can fit a paladin into it without reverting to a bastardized classless system, I'm guessing that if there weren't fighter menuveres than we would have seen the warlord as a dedicated class but considering the fact that mechanicly the warlord is just a fighter with a distinct set of menuveres I don't see why it should get a superset class... IMHO.

Fighter/cleric with a "Champion" theme. Or even a specific "Paladin" theme if you're inclined.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

Damage and HP and such is fairly easy to change, we should see the math tweaks in the next packet iirc from the podcast, and we have seen several healing mechanics in the packets from day one, some of them are clearly intended to be optional/part of a rule module.
considering the difference of opinions you got about things like healing I don't think that you can "nail it down"... unless by nailed down you mean settled on one way and that would just go against what R&D are trying to achieve, the closest you'll come is the decision that in the basic game the only fast healing is by magic with no other rule.

Warder

Um, no

HP and healing determine the pace and feel of the whole game, particularly whether the game is combat as war or combat as sport. You can't just slap together something at the last minute and call it good design, or add in some arbitrary modularity without addressing how HP and healing affect everything else.

 

[TwoSix]

Um, no

HP and healing determine the pace and feel of the whole game, particularly whether the game is combat as war or combat as sport. You can't just slap together something at the last minute and call it good design, or add in some arbitrary modularity without addressing how HP and healing affect everything else.

Yep. They needed to be testing multiple versions of those rules, not worrying about the right ratio of martial damage dice.

And they could easily do fit in healing rules for both CaW and CaS within their adventuring day concept. Conceptually, a 4e game with no-daily classes, with a multiple wave encounter separated by skill challenges isn't that different from an adventuring day with at-will and dailies. The exploration portions of the adventuring day are just extended skill challenges.