D&D 5E Pages from the PHB

[Dausuul]

At my table, I think it's polite to make sure it's ok with the other players before bringing in wild magic like this, because you're absolutely right. The guy playing the tiefling paladin struggling for redemption is going to feel like he doesn't fit at the table with the sorcerer with a feather beard.

Well, the conflict here is really at the player level rather than the character level. If you have a player who likes wacky hijinks at the same table with a player who wants to be all grim and angsty, they're going to have to figure out how to get along, and banning wild mages or tieflings won't help. One way or another, Raistlin is going to have to coexist with Tasslehoff.

What I'm concerned about is that wild magic should not allow Tasslehoff to force Raistlin into comedy. If Tasslehoff grows a feather beard, that's fine. Raistlin can just sneer at Tasslehoff's lack of arcane discipline. But if Tasslehoff rolls a 73 and makes Raistlin intoxicated, now Raistlin has to act drunk for the sake of Tasslehoff's fun.

 

[Nellisir]

As someone who DMed a 2e wild mage with some trepidation, I rather like this surge table. And I really like the warlock picture. She's not all kitted out with straps and leather and spikes, and her fey patron has even made her carry a little pumpkin bag!

 

[Thaumaturge]

Well, the conflict here is really at the player level rather than the character level. If you have a player who likes wacky hijinks at the same table with a player who wants to be all grim and angsty, they're going to have to figure out how to get along, and banning wild mages or tieflings won't help. One way or another, Raistlin is going to have to coexist with Tasslehoff.

What I'm concerned about is that wild magic should not allow Tasslehoff to force Raistlin into comedy. If Tasslehoff grows a feather beard, that's fine. Raistlin can just sneer at Tasslehoff's lack of arcane discipline. But if Tasslehoff rolls a 73 and makes Raistlin intoxicated, now Raistlin has to act drunk for the sake of Tasslehoff's fun.

OK. That's all well and good. And I agree.

But I'm having trouble moving past the idea of Tasslehoff and Raistlin barhopping together.

So epic.

Thaumaturge.

 

[Thaumaturge]

And I really like the warlock picture. She's not all kitted out with straps and leather and spikes, and her fey patron has even made her carry a little pumpkin bag!

As someone with a D&D-curious 5 year-old daughter, I'm very much liking what I've seen of the 5e art direction. The pictures are cool and evocative, and they don't rely on sex appeal.

Thaumaturge.

 

[The Hitcher]

I will take away things I don't like, I will add things I do want. But I don't want to do either, I want the core PHB to be as close to my desires as possible, and the optional rule modules I add I would like to appear in the DMG another core book. I feel every time I have to remove something from the PHB the system fails, every time I add a rules module that isn't in the DMG the system fails.

@Paraxis: This is exactly what I'm saying: the system is designed to support user-modification, so it's not failing if a user needs to modify it to suit their needs. The designers have finally realised that there is no set of rules that are going to perfectly please everyone, and so they are incorporating modability into the system. If you see this as a strength of the system - rather than a weakness - then you're going to have a much better time with it.

And the irony is that you're ascribing high authority to the specifics of the rules in the book, but low authority to the intent of the system as a whole.

 

[Thaumaturge]

I feel every time I have to remove something from the PHB the system fails

I can understand you don't want to house rule and the like. And I think we'd all prefer a custom-tailored PHB.

The difficulty here is what you see as the system failing is pretty explicitly how the system has been built this time. Mearls and co. have been pretty clear they want to give us a big toolbox with lots of tools in it, with the knowledge we will only use a subset of the tools provided.

This is a tinkerer's edition, which is really exciting for some of us.

But I'm sorry it isn't what you want.

Thaumaturge.

 

[The Hitcher]

@Thaumaturge: Agreed on the art. The PHB features a female character front and centre, and she's both lacking in excessive curves and appropriately dressed! The warlock likewise, but she also has some freaky character going on.

 

[Umbran]

I want the core PHB to be as close to my desires as possible, and the optional rule modules I add I would like to appear in the DMG another core book.

Yes. And so do many thousands of other gamers. Hundreds of thousands, I would imagine. That makes for many, many different desires to be met. They *cannot* give you just your game in print, and at the same time give Sam over there just his game. The two of you will have to compromise - your game will have some extra stuff, and his will be missing a few things, and so on. So, whatever you may want, you have to consider what is a reasonable expectation.

From the very beginning, they've been selling this as an edition where they expect you to take things out and put other things in. Your personal feeling that if you have to edit the contents it is a failure of the system is in direct conflict with the stated design goals, of which they've made no secret whatsoever.

 

[Dausuul]

@Paraxis: This is exactly what I'm saying: the system is designed to support user-modification, so it's not failing if a user needs to modify it to suit their needs. The designers have finally realised that there is no set of rules that are going to perfectly please everyone, and so they are incorporating modability into the system. If you see this as a strength of the system - rather than a weakness - then you're going to have a much better time with it.

And the irony is that you're ascribing high authority to the specifics of the rules in the book, but low authority to the intent of the system as a whole.

I would just add that the wild mage is serving a valuable purpose. There are players who really enjoy playing wacky hijinks characters, and their fun is just as important as that of us more serious-minded folks. If forced to play "serious" characters, they usually turn into instigators and end up derailing the entire adventure. The wild mage offers an outlet for those impulses that mostly doesn't screw with the rest of the party (as I said, there are a few entries that break this rule, which I'd like to see changed).

I understand the instinctive dislike of having the wild mage presented as a standard option in the PHB. I take my campaigns pretty seriously. Featherbeard is dead opposite to my preferred atmosphere. But then I think about the kind of shenanigans certain players get up to when denied such a safety valve, and suddenly Featherbeard looks positively benign. I'd never play one, but it's an important tool that I want in my DM toolkit. You don't have to use it.

 

[DEFCON 1]

In terms of the page count placement of the Warlock... there's also always the possibility that they are putting the Background section in before the Class section because of the timeline of which a character would come to their various choices. Race choice occurs upon the birth of the character. Background choice occurs prior to becoming an adventurer. Class choice occurs as the character becomes an adventurer. So the chapters could be in order of a PC's life. And as a matter of fact... you might even possibly see the Ideals, Flaws, and Bonds inserted in there as well, possibly coming in after Background and before Class (assuming those are all a part of the standard game and not a DMG module-- even if they aren't necessarily required for all campaigns.)

This kind of temporal order of chargen chapters would be especially useful if the DMG included a module like many RPGs have that is a formatted "complete history of a character" type of chargen. Where you follow step-by-step the pathways of a PC's life starting as a child, through maturity... selecting (or rolling randomly) various pieces of the PC's history up until they become their Class and begin as an adventurer.

Not saying this is definitely what the books are doing... but I also wouldn't be surprised if they changed up the classical presentation in order to accommodate it.