D&D (2024) YOU are in charge of the next PHB! What do you change?

[Ruin Explorer]

The WoW specs are more akin to subclasses. You still get a lot of core class abilities and mechanics.

To be clear, I don't really agree that this is the case in 2021 and this has in fact been a major point of contention in the WoW community. It used to be true, a decade or more ago, but basically from Cataclysm and WoD, the specs diverged outwards so that they had entirely different mechanics (and indeed became clearly separated instead of just about points placement), where before they'd shared a huge number. This was because it made them a lot easier to balance. This intentional separation continued to increase until Shadowlands really (IIRC they said they were dialing it back slightly in Battle for Azeroth, but didn't do so meaningfully), where a number of long-lost cross-spec abilities were reintroduced, mostly in extremely nerfed forms.

I could go on about this, but it would be extremely boring for everyone. I would refer those who want examples to the history of Paladins in WoW, who went from one class which you could basically lightly orient towards DPS, healing, or tanking, sharing literally 90%+ of abilities on launch in 2004, to by 2016-2020, basically three separate classes with entirely different roles, different mechanics on a basic level, three entirely different primary resources, and in whilst they shared a few names of abilities, even those abilities functioned very differently. In late 2020 with SL they moved them to nominally sharing the same resource (Holy Power) but the functionality of all three specs is at least as different as say, a D&D Cleric, a D&D Paladin, and a D&D Barbarian. When WoW launched it was a bit more like say Vengeance, Devotion and uh whatever that healy Paladin subclass is called. I.e. some different spells but the core of the class is the same.

Guild Wars 1 was based on Magic the Gathering, but instead of assembling a play deck, you are assembling a set of abilities for your PC and their companions and changing the loadout for missions. The initial five gods were based on the Magic colors too: Lyssa (Blue), Balthazar (Red), Melandru (Green), Dwayna (White), and Grenth (Black).

Yeah I noted MtG was the main inspiration for GW1 in another post. It made the design a lot sharper and cleaner than most CRPGs/ARPGs. It's a pity they didn't really stick with that influence into GW2, seemingly trying to come up with more of their own thing with the single-classing and weapon-based abilities.

 

[Aldarc]

To be clear, I don't really agree that this is the case in 2021 and this has in fact been a major point of contention in the WoW community. It used to be true, a decade or more ago, but basically from Cataclysm and WoD, the specs diverged outwards so that they had entirely different mechanics (and indeed became clearly separated instead of just about points placement), where before they'd shared a huge number. This was because it made them a lot easier to balance. This intentional separation continued to increase until Shadowlands really (IIRC they said they were dialing it back slightly in Battle for Azeroth, but didn't do so meaningfully), where a number of long-lost cross-spec abilities were reintroduced, mostly in extremely nerfed forms.

I could go on about this, but it would be extremely boring for everyone. I would refer those who want examples to the history of Paladins in WoW, who went from one class which you could basically lightly orient towards DPS, healing, or tanking, sharing literally 90%+ of abilities on launch in 2004, to by 2016-2020, basically three separate classes with entirely different roles, different mechanics on a basic level, three entirely different primary resources, and in whilst they shared a few names of abilities, even those abilities functioned very differently. In late 2020 with SL they moved them to nominally sharing the same resource (Holy Power) but the functionality of all three specs is at least as different as say, a D&D Cleric, a D&D Paladin, and a D&D Barbarian. When WoW launched it was a bit more like say Vengeance, Devotion and uh whatever that healy Paladin subclass is called. I.e. some different spells but the core of the class is the same.

I've played all of WoW except Shadowlands, so I know what you are talking about. I don't entirely agree, but it's not necessarily worth pursuing this line of discussion further.

Yeah I noted MtG was the main inspiration for GW1 in another post. It made the design a lot sharper and cleaner than most CRPGs/ARPGs. It's a pity they didn't really stick with that influence into GW2, seemingly trying to come up with more of their own thing with the single-classing and weapon-based abilities.

Part of the problem, much like with MtG and its growing collection of cards, is that the developers found it a nightmare to balance. That's why ANet switched to its single-classing and weapon-based abilities. It has since expanded that with specializations, which change the playstyle and abilities up for professions.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Part of the problem, much like with MtG and its growing collection of cards, is that the developers found it a nightmare to balance. That's why ANet switched to its single-classing and weapon-based abilities. It has since expanded that with specializations, which change the playstyle and abilities up for professions.

Personally I would say that GW2 is massively less-balanced than GW1 (and always has been, all the way to launch), and less innovative, and more importantly has less engaging and massively less fun gameplay than GW1, so I think they made a big mistake there. I don't think it's a mistake a company would make in 2021. Many of the most successful games on the market now are a "nightmare to balance", including virtually all digital TCGs, all MOBAs, and all the big Battle Royale shooters, but they're successful in part because they're walking a balance tightrope that also means they can have extremely engaging and sharp gameplay - which does require a lot of maintenance. It's interesting to think about GW2, which is a 2012 game, but when I played it again last year (2020), it felt a lot more old-fashioned and poorly-designed than GW1 (2005 - though really it only got good in 2006) which I played a bit again in 2018, and even than SL-era WoW (which surprised me - it used to feel more forward-looking than WoW).

I'd love to see a pen and paper RPG which took a really strong inspiration from Magic, without becoming a TCG or LCG itself, just like in terms of ability design.

 

[Aldarc]

I'd love to see a pen and paper RPG which took a really strong inspiration from Magic, without becoming a TCG or LCG itself, just like in terms of ability design.

Dare I say it? Sure. Why not? I would honestly consider looking at something like 4e D&D, which also would a be strong candidate for using power cards and "assembling a deck" of useful abilities. There is arguably some conceptual overlap into things like power source and MtG color.

 

[Peter BOSCO'S]

I would like to see more (probably most) spells scale, not just the damage spells. Most up-cast protective spells would probably have longer durations, and not greater effect; so a L9 Shield spell still gives only +5 AC, but it lasts for 9+ full rounds.

Oh, and a much better index.

 

[Stalker0]

I would like to see more (probably most) spells scale, not just the damage spells.

I think this is another way to help smooth out the concentration system a bit, providing options with your scaling.

Example: Bless - Gain an extra creature for every spell level above 1st. Alternatively, if cast as a 4th level spell it no longer requires concentration.

 

[Peter BOSCO'S]

They are basically full casters without the 9th level slot in 5E. That’s is. I think the original poster on the 3/4th caster was making a joke.

No, I was being serious. I think that bards are too powerful as is, but making them half casters would make them too week. A three quarters caster would top out with 7th level spells at L17, just as a half caster gets L5 spells at L17. (The Bards L8 spell Glibness is pretty cool, I would keep it, but make it a L7 spell.)

Three quarter casters would get cantrips, like full casters and unlike half and quarter casters. However at L1 cantrips would be all they had; no L1 slots until L2.

 

[MichaelSomething]

I want to think bigger then just a PHB. I would produce a music CD full of songs that explained basic D&D concepts. Instead of a DM having to explain something ( like skill checks), they could play a snappy song instead.

 

[Stormonu]

I want to think bigger then just a PHB. I would produce a music CD full of songs that explained basic D&D concepts. Instead of a DM having to explain something ( like skill checks), they could play a snappy song instead.

"Initiative, Initiative, what's your function?"

"Setting up combats and giving turns."

 

[ECMO3]

Get rid of bards