D&D 5E What would 5E be like if the playtest's modularity promise was kept?

[James Gasik]

My preference of Bard would have been a non-caster rogue type with "Bardic Points" that could be used for inspiration, music effects, and magic via the Magic of Music.

So...either the Factotum or the Four Elements Monk?

 

[Minigiant]

So...either the Factotum or the Four Elements Monk?

More like the Sorcerer with double sorcery points, no spell slots, light armor, and all the bard stuff.

 

[James Gasik]

It sounds like a neat class to play, but you know what people would say? "Where's mah spells. Bards cast spells."

 

[Umbran]

Mod Note:
@GMforPowergamers and @Oofta

You guys have been warned about your clashes. You are done in this discussion.

For whatever reason, you two can't seem to keep from going at it. I suggest both of you consider using the ignore list at this point, because if I have to pull you to apart again, you are at risk of being given a vacation from the site.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

It sounds like a neat class to play, but you know what people would say? "Where's mah spells. Bards cast spells."

A spellcasting subclass could easily be added.

My hot take on the Thread's Title Question:

It would probably be a mess. I like the idea of modularity myself, but I suspect they dropped it because they couldn't get it to work as intended.

 

[Remathilis]

It would probably be a mess. I like the idea of modularity myself, but I suspect they dropped it because they couldn't get it to work as intended.

There is that too. Modular design not only has to agree with the baseline defaults, but it has to1p agree with all other modules current and future. Anyone who used 3.5's UA knows that those modules weren't designed to work together and if you weren't careful, they made unholy abominations of 3.5s already tenuous balance.

 

[Ondath]

View attachment 248765

This legitimately made me chuckle.

Also, I did not expect the thread to get so big! I really want to engage with people who added a lot of valid points about the feasibility of a modular system as well as the ideas I presented at the end, but I've had a really horrible day and a half IRL, so I wasn't able to look at the thread with a straight head. I'll try to respond when I have more time.

 

[Minigiant]

A spellcasting subclass could easily be added.

My hot take on the Thread's Title Question:

It would probably be a mess. I like the idea of modularity myself, but I suspect they dropped it because they couldn't get it to work as intended.

It really depends on the level of modularity.

Like I feel 5e is just a step or two too hardcoded to meet those first mod goals. But if you look at XGTE, TCOE, and MOTM, you can see that if 5e was peeled back and run off a few different assumptions, it could have worked.

But that's hindsight.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

It really depends on the level of modularity.

Like I feel 5e is just a step or two too hardcoded to meet those first mod goals. But if you look at XGTE, TCOE, and MOTM, you can see that if 5e was peeled back and run off a few different assumptions, it could have worked.

But that's hindsight.

Yes, at this point it would probably be 'safe' to create a few options, as long as they are not planning on changing the game drastically in the near future (which I doubt). I wonder if they'd consider it worthwhile, though, as they have reached a level of popularity that usually leads to conservation, not experimentation.

 

[Minigiant]

Yes, at this point it would probably be 'safe' to create a few options, as long as they are not planning on changing the game drastically in the near future (which I doubt). I wonder if they'd consider it worthwhile, though, as they have reached a level of popularity that usually leads to conservation, not experimentation.

I think 5e is passed the point of conservatism. Anything WOTC publishes has to include things that are "more work than doing myself". Anything without major variants, options, or customization content will have to be full adventure to sell.