D&D 5E L&L December 16th Can you feel it?

[Derren]

The problem is that if you don't remove backstab immunity for undead an undead themed adventure can easily become boring and frustrating for a rogue's player. Things like flavor or immersion are utterly pointless and even worse destructive to the game as a whole when they make the game boring or frustrating.

Which is only an issue when the only fun the rogue player gets out of the game is combat related when he stabs things for a bucket of D6 damage.
That raises an interesting question, how many D6 is fun?

 

[jeckyllgeek]

Which is only an issue when the only fun the rogue player gets out of the game is combat related when he stabs things for a bucket of D6 damage.
That raises an interesting question, how many D6 is fun?

Things that are traditionally immune to backstab tend to make for poor roleplaying encounters.

 

[Dausuul]

Agreed. While I personally like the changes they've made to the casting mechanic, it's not traditional D&D casting.

The new wizard mechanic is certainly different from the traditional one, but it does retain much of the "feel" of the original, mostly due to the tight limits on a) number of spells prepared and b) number of spell slots. As a wizard, I have to make hard choices each day about what spells to prepare, and each battle I have to make hard choices about how many spells to cast and of what level.

At least that's my take on it. But then, I was never a big fan of Vancian casting. I can well imagine that others with more fondness for the original system might feel the differences more keenly.

Which is actually a much more interesting topic. They have a mechanic that a lot of people hate and a lot of people, sometimes the same people, consider central to their brand identity. How do you balance those needs?

In this instance, at least, it seems pretty straightforward: By including different versions of the mechanic. They're already planning to provide an optional spell point system for wizards. I see no reason why they wouldn't also include a "traditional Vancian" system. They would have to give traditional Vancian wizards some kind of benefit to balance them against neo-Vancian, but there are lots of ways they could do that; for example, allow them to scribe a handful of scrolls each time they level up or have downtime.

The challenge is what to do when there isn't such an easy out, and the obvious example of that is hit points. No need to rehash all the arguments about hit points, but they are the major bone of contention I've seen between AD&D, 3E, and 4E fans. I doubt anyone is going to be entirely happy with hit points in 5E.

 

[TerraDave]

I'm not sure how this is meant to be reconciled with the most ubiquitous of all D&D mechanics, namely, hp.

"I can be take one more sword blow before I'm killed." "I can fall down one more 10' pit trap before I'm in danger of breaking my neck?" What does either of these correspond to from the character's point of view?

The player and the character know that if they are hit by a sword or fall down a pit, that they will take damage. If they are low on hp, hence having taken damage, they may be killed or knocked out.

As an aside, there is a difference between hp and too much hp, or too easily recovered hp, or no dying at low hp. You can have a gritty game and use hp. It was the D&D default for many years.

This is the problem with D&D. Everything has to be a combat class which leads to the rogue needing to be as powerful in combat than a knight. How? Backstab!
When does D&D finally grow up and leave its wargaming roots behind and become a real RPG I wonder? Maybe never in the case that 5E fails.

Actually, in early D&D, the thief was still pretty wimpy with backstab. And every once in a while, someone would feel the need to hit the thief with the nerf-bat, just because. I think the issue is that people who like to play thieves or later rogues don't want characters that suck.

 

[TwoSix]

Which is only an issue when the only fun the rogue player gets out of the game is combat related when he stabs things for a bucket of D6 damage.
That raises an interesting question, how many D6 is fun?

4. At least 4d6 to be fun. 2d6 or 3d6 is compelling, but not yet fun. 1d6 is a yawn.

 

[Kinak]

The new wizard mechanic is certainly different from the traditional one, but it does retain much of the "feel" of the original, mostly due to the tight limits on a) number of spells prepared and b) number of spell slots. As a wizard, I have to make hard choices each day about what spells to prepare, and each battle I have to make hard choices about how many spells to cast and of what level.

I'm with you on this one. For my purposes, the new system is basically a strict upgrade of the old system.

I personally won't miss traditional D&D casting, but the way the article skims over the fact that they've changed the magic system annoys me.

In this instance, at least, it seems pretty straightforward: By including different versions of the mechanic. They're already planning to provide an optional spell point system for wizards. I see no reason why they wouldn't also include a "traditional Vancian" system. I'm not sure how you balance traditional Vancian against neo-Vancian; my suggestion would be to give traditional Vancian wizards some kind of "scribe scroll" ability, but there are lots of ways they could go about it.

In my experience, this type of compromise is overrated. Logically, a system where you can choose A or B should please everyone that wants A and everyone that wants B, but there are always people that want not-A and people who want A to be better than B.

Then, of course, there's the balance issue that you touched on. The moment they split something into two options that are supposed to be balanced, or that players will expect to be balanced, they've created endless arguments.

So, it's actually pretty easy to make "A or B" worse than just A or just B.

Cheers!
Kinak

 

[I'm A Banana]

4. At least 4d6 to be fun. 2d6 or 3d6 is compelling, but not yet fun. 1d6 is a yawn.

And 5d6 is too much fun. With 5d6, you might get too excited, too wound up, not even able to sleep. 5d6 is so excited you might throw up. It's too much d6.

 

[TwoSix]

And 5d6 is too much fun. With 5d6, you might get too excited, too wound up, not even able to sleep. 5d6 is so excited you might throw up. It's too much d6.

Wimp. We regularly party with 7d6 or 8d6. One time I even tried 8d8, but I didn't wake up for 3 days. Good times.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Wimp. We regularly party with 7d6 or 8d6. One time I even tried 8d8, but I didn't wake up for 3 days. Good times.

I had a neighbor who rolled high like that. Footloose and fancy free. Thought nothing could harm him. He rolled multiple d12s You know what happened to him?

[video=youtube;9qJFLhe2wls]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qJFLhe2wls[/video]

To think my grandfather died in Iwo Jima so punks like you could roll polyhedrons like that. It's like you don't even care! Your parents should be ashamed!

 

[TwoSix]

To think my grandfather died in Iwo Jima so punks like you could roll polyhedrons like that. It's like you don't even care! Your parents should be ashamed!

My father wasn't around much when I was growing up. When they finally found his body, frozen by the train tracks three years ago, they found d30s clenched in his fist.

d30s.

So don't tell me I don't know something about pain.

(Good clip, BTW.)