D&D 5E New D&D Next Playtest package is up (19/9/2013) [merged threads]

[PinkRose]

D&D Next has Advantage over 3.P AND 4th edition.
There's way too much to explain for someone that can't be bothered with reading the packets. You probably won't bother reading my response, so I won't bother writing one.

Question for this thread. With all the talk of dipping into multiclassing for the Proficiency, as anyone brought up the fact that the profeciency is only a +1 bonus at level 1? And that it doesn't go up if the levels in that class don't go up? So a Mage 7/Fighter 1 will only gain a +1 to STR and CON rolls while losing a casting level and the other stuff.
+1 does not sound like it's worth all the trouble unless it fits in my character story.

 

[Cyberen]

With multiclassing, WotC is, at least, approaching the most difficult and contentious part of D&D Next design.
Multiclassing is, IMHO, the most iconic feature of 3.x, for good or for ill. (You could tell where I stand concerning 3.x multiclassing when I called it "unbound madness"...).
For compatibility reasons, WotC want Next to be compatible with previous material, enabling easy conversion. Unfortunately, that means being able to easily convert 3.x multiclass characters, so Next is doomed to support free multiclassing, which result in a big free-for-all where each and every level of each and every class compete with each other. As this thread shows, this path is irredeemably broken, as level dipping invariably leads to overpowered combos, or underpowered ones.
There is still some hope ! I find this iteration has given us excellent gishes : Paladins, Rangers, Bards each very successfully cover some ground of the arcane warrior niche. I find these natural born hybrids remove a lot of pressure put on the multiclass system, natively supporting a broad range of character concepts.
On the other hand, I duly acknowledge multiclassing is needed to support some cases of organic character growth. Rather than putting ineffective requirements on ability scores in order to limit optimization dipping, I would cut the middle man and directly put a level dipping limit on a dial : for instance, a rule saying you have to take at least X levels of any class in a row (X=3 sits nicely with me, X=1 is 3.x, pick your own value of X !).

Concerning Fighters being best at hitting things :
1) I don't believe Robin Hood or William Tell would be Fighters in my book
2) the Fighter should be, and is, the last man standing
3) the attack roll should not be litterally seen as a to-hit roll, but more broadly as a balancing mechanic evaluating the quality of an attack. If you don't, you can't accept damage on a miss and other HP peculiarities. This evaluation can't take place out of context (the most important element being outcome : a "crit" can barely scratch your opponent, whereas a mid roll causing min damage can sometimes be a killing blow...).

 

[1of3]

Question for this thread. With all the talk of dipping into multiclassing for the Proficiency, as anyone brought up the fact that the profeciency is only a +1 bonus at level 1? And that it doesn't go up if the levels in that class don't go up? So a Mage 7/Fighter 1 will only gain a +1 to STR and CON rolls while losing a casting level and the other stuff.
+1 does not sound like it's worth all the trouble unless it fits in my character story.

I'm not sure what you're saying. You only have one proficiency bonus for everything you are proficient with. That bonus is form your total level, so no matter where you got proficiency with STR Saving Throws from, your bonus will be +6 at level 19.

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

D&D Next has Advantage over 3.P AND 4th edition.
There's way too much to explain for someone that can't be bothered with reading the packets. You probably won't bother reading my response, so I won't bother writing one.

Question for this thread. With all the talk of dipping into multiclassing for the Proficiency, as anyone brought up the fact that the profeciency is only a +1 bonus at level 1? And that it doesn't go up if the levels in that class don't go up? So a Mage 7/Fighter 1 will only gain a +1 to STR and CON rolls while losing a casting level and the other stuff.
+1 does not sound like it's worth all the trouble unless it fits in my character story.

Your proficiency bonus is determined by your total level, ie: the sum of all your class levels, so dipping simply opens up new things that that bonus applies to.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

So I didn't bother with the last few packages and can't be bothered with reading the last one either, but I'm a bit curious. I know this community isn't as biased as many other communities out there, so I'm going to ask here.

What advantages has D&D Next got over 4th Edition D&D? What advantages has D&D Next got over 3.P? I just want a summary for all the stuff I lost between the start of the playtest and now, if someone can do it for me it'd be amazing

The advantages, as i see it, are faster combat, since there is no dithering over powers or wondering what the current attack bonus is due to buff and debuff effects. As far as I can see there are no obvious gotcha builds, which IMHO was a bane in 3.x

 

[The Mormegil]

There's way too much to explain for someone that can't be bothered with reading the packets. You probably won't bother reading my response, so I won't bother writing one.

Any reasonable response you would write is less than a page long, which is distinctly less than the playtest packet has. I'm sorry, but where exactly would you like me to go to gather opinions on the new edition other than where people gather to discuss it? I was under the impression that this was the latest thread about D&D Next, and that the people who read and answer this thread were passionate enough about it to post on these forums. If you don't want to answer my question, don't do that, nobody forces you to; however you should at least acknowledge that the reasons I have for asking this question are fair, rather than dissing it.

 

[PinkRose]

EDIT: Found my answer in the multiclass section.
Seems a fix would be to go by class level, no? So a 19Bard/1Fighter doesn't gain a +6 to CON & STR rolls as well as INT & CHA.

 

[Iosue]

What advantages has D&D Next got over 4th Edition D&D?

Less involved character generation/leveling.
Faster combat.
More compatibility with materials from earlier editions.
Turn-based exploration rules.

What advantages has D&D Next got over 3.P?

Less involved character leveling (i.e., no need to plan ahead)
Easier DM prep.
Turn-based exploration rules.
Buffed fighters and nerfed casters.

 

[Kinak]

So I didn't bother with the last few packages and can't be bothered with reading the last one either, but I'm a bit curious. I know this community isn't as biased as many other communities out there, so I'm going to ask here.

What advantages has D&D Next got over 4th Edition D&D? What advantages has D&D Next got over 3.P? I just want a summary for all the stuff I lost between the start of the playtest and now, if someone can do it for me it'd be amazing

Fair warning: I don't have a ton of experience with 4e, but I'll try to answer both.

Compared to 4e it's a bit more freeform and classes offer different structures and complexity levels. Combat can be divorced from the grid in 4e, but it's undenyably easier in 5th. Similarly, it's possible to improvise in 4e, but some people would find it easier to do so in 5th (mostly due to the lack of power cards). Still, it doesn't have the same depth of customization or tactical play.

Compared to 3rd/Pathfinder, it's potentially more rules-light and, more importantly, characters can be made simpler. It's closer to 3rd than 4th, but it doesn't have the depth of customization that 3rd/Pathfinder does.

Overall, the major benefits I see are: less book keeping in combat, multiple attacks that use the same modifier, being able to opt out of feats if you just want the numbers, advantage/disadvantage as a bigger "circumstance bonus," and certain builds being simple enough to run as a beginner at any level.

All those things lead, in play, to faster combat and more time to do other stuff (or more combats, I mean, whatever).

That said, the classes are very narrow compared to 4th, 3rd, or Pathfinder. You don't really get a ton of options, which will make some players downright claustrophobic. The game also feels quite complex for giving so few options.

So, if you need something that's, say, between 2nd and 3rd Edition in terms of complexity and character options, it might be worth looking at. Until we can judge the final version, though, I'd suggest borrowing the elements you like for your current game.

Cheers!
Kinak

 

[Blackbrrd]

EDIT: Found my answer in the multiclass section.
Seems a fix would be to go by class level, no? So a 19Bard/1Fighter doesn't gain a +6 to CON & STR rolls as well as INT & CHA.

An even easier fix would be to just drop the extra bonus as you level up? You can already level up the ability scores, so why add scaling in a second place as well? The problem in my eyes is when you are asked to roll perception and have 10 wis and no proficiency, you add +0, even at level 20. A character with +5wis and proficiency gets +11 (I believe?). The difference is just too big in my opinion. The difference between +5 and +0 from stats is enough in my eyes.