D&D (2024) (+) New Edition Changes for Inclusivity (discuss possibilities)

[FlyingChihuahua]

It has not been proven. Even if you apply a name to it, that doesn't prove persuasion doesn't work. If naming something proved it were true, then my naming the marketplace of ideas philosophy would have proven it's true.



That's absolutely something each speaker needs to deal with in their speech if they want to be persuasive. All that does it make it difficult. If changing minds were easy, everyone would change their mind about everything all the time.

A college debate class confronts these issues head-on. In terms of proof, you can "prove" to you that persuasion of some people is in fact possible even when they have deep bias.

Have you never changed anyone's mind about anything which they were predisposed to be biased to believe prior to you trying to persuade them? I mean, even when a teenager, did you never persuade a parent to let you do something they were biased to be predisposed to say no to before you tried to persuade them otherwise?

We're gonna have to agree to disagree here I feel.

 

[Minigiant]

Can you think of a better name for that archetype that fits within D&D?

Champion?

Part of me wants D&D to create 3 different warrior classes with 3 generic names.

Fighter for the Warrior with Action surge
Champion for the Warrior with a Super Mode
Hero for the the Warrior with Stamina Points

 

[Sadras]

And the Market Place of Ideas concept just runs into another problem with human psychology. That problem being confirmation bias. Each person will just see the person they supported having "won" the debate.

Bringing this back to D&D - if you consider Enworld as this Marketplace of Ideas, I'm sure many of us have benefited from the different styles and techniques other posters have shared here even if they were contrary to one's personal style, I know I certainly have - even with those I have and do challenge most on these boards. So good arguments do work.

I wish people were more open to more frank discussion than quickly accusing the other side of the worst.

 

[DnD Warlord]

So if I could write the basic ideas for 6e

I would make 8 classes 2 martial (figher/rogue) 2 divine (priest/paliden(champion))2 nature (druid(shaman)/ranger(wayfinder)) 2 arcane (wizard/warlock)
Each one gets one class that gets 3 or 4 combat feats (class features for combat) and 1 or 2 non combat talents (class features for non combat) then each class gets 1 on even level and 1 on odd levels.
All spells, a bunch of 4e ‘powers’ all get written up as combat talents and non combat feats.

so maybe a warlock takes eldritch blast as a combat feat and detect magic as a non combat talent

a rogue may take sneak attack and sly flourish as combat feat and expertise in a skill as a non combat talent.

there will be 1 big list of both combat feats and non combat talents anyone can take. (Lucky, skilled, weapon prof, armor prof, ritual caster, languages)

each “power source” will have its own list... so arcane will have spells, and divine will have miracles ect...

each class will have its own list.

some of these will be always on bonuses some will be at will some will come back on short rest and some on long rest... they will have prerequisite the same way warlock
invocations

HD will be lower (fighters d8s rogue d6 wizard d4 warlock d6). You only get a HD at odd levels at even levels you get a set amount (1,2 or 3) but everyone gets con scorehp at 1st level. Most NPC only have con score (and low threat monsters) getting more HD is a bug

Example builds will be level 1-5 as choices already picked (that will also be free in srd )

Races will be broken down into heritage and culture. Heritage and culture will also have bonuses that level up with you.

backgrounds will be more generic.


more skills and tool profs spelled out and give additional non combat abilities as they are prerequisite for some non combat talents

 

[DnD Warlord]

Can you think of a better name for that archetype that fits within D&D?

As I just spelled out just take rage and make it an option for fighters and rangers to take... but rename it (I don’t know if super mode works or not but maybe)

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

As I just spelled out just take rage and make it an option for fighters and rangers to take... but rename it (I don’t know if super mode works or not but maybe)

But then you're losing out on the potential extra gimmicks that you can add to Rage.

 

[DnD Warlord]

But then you're losing out on the potential extra gimmicks that you can add to Rage.

Did you read my whole idea?
Make “super combat mode” a combat feat anyone can take then put enhancements in each power source have ways to enhance it (martial being more rage like, arcane more blade song like, divine more battle meditation, ect) then build in som combat feats and non combat talents for other benefits

In the PHB it may not be fully fleshed out but you can hen have a bunch of splat books adding more (how many class features can we pull from this edition alone)

 

[Minigiant]

I would make 8 classes 2 martial (figher/rogue) 2 divine (priest/paliden(champion))2 nature (druid(shaman)/ranger(wayfinder)) 2 arcane (wizard/warlock)
Each one gets one class that gets 3 or 4 combat feats (class features for combat) and 1 or 2 non combat talents (class features for non combat) then each class gets 1 on even level and 1 on odd levels.

For inclusivity I'd go with 15 classes: 5 power sources and 3 classes in each

1. Arcane
   1. Sorcerer
   2. Warlock
   3. Wizard
2. Divine
   1. Avenger
   2. Cleric
   3. "Paladin"
3. Martial
   1. Champion(Barbarian)
   2. Fighter
   3. Hero
4. Nature/Primal
   1. Druid
   2. Ranger
   3. Shaman or Warden
5. Skill
   1. Bard
   2. Noble
   3. Rogue

This creates a class for each playstyle gimmick without a need for feat chains or power systems that confuse new players or turn off roleplayers.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Can you think of a better name for that archetype that fits within D&D?

Berzerker is the most common suggested alternative.

 

[Wishbone]

For inclusivity I'd go with 15 classes: 5 power sources and 3 classes in each

1. Arcane
   1. Sorcerer
   2. Warlock
   3. Wizard
2. Divine
   1. Avenger
   2. Cleric
   3. "Paladin"
3. Martial
   1. Champion(Barbarian)
   2. Fighter
   3. Hero
4. Nature/Primal
   1. Druid
   2. Ranger
   3. Shaman
5. Skill
   1. Bard
   2. Noble
   3. Rogue

This creates a class for each playstyle gimmick without a need for feat chains or power systems that confuse new players or turn off roleplayers.

Bringing back the Avenger gets my endorsement. Though I miss the Monk as an option.