D&D (2024) One D&D is one D&D too much (-)

[Lanefan]

Having never played it I can't comment on the game directly, but it sounds like you are describing a system which is fair but unequal in character powers. Essentially the slayer plays one game and the minions play a different game with different rules and goals along side of them, leaving id assume everyone having a good time.

Star Wars games work that way, don't they? You've got the Jedi, and then everyone else.

 

[Staffan]

Star Wars games work that way, don't they? You've got the Jedi, and then everyone else.

Our Star Wars: Age of Rebellion game didn't last long enough for the PC who took the "Force-sensitive emergent" specialization (in addition to their main one), but my impression was that getting anywhere with the Force took a lot of XP. You need to both dump XP into the specialization's talent tree, unlock force powers (e.g. Move, Heal/Harm, Boost), and then dump a lot of XP into the force power's own talent tree.

In addition, raw "oomph" for force powers is very limited unless you allow players access to specializations from the sibling games. When you first take a force-sensitive specialization, you get a force rating of 1. That means you roll 1 force die, which is a d12 which has two sides giving you 1 force point to spend on activating a force power, and three sides giving 2 force points. So with one die there's a 58% chance of just not succeeding at all. The Force-sensitive emergent talent tree has one talent at the deepest level giving +1 force rating (so the talent itself is fairly expensive, and you also need to buy at least four cheaper talents before taking that one), for a force rating of 2 (which is a 34% chance of failure). In order to get a higher force rating than that, your GM needs to allow you to buy into specializations from other books. There's a similar talent tree in Edge of the Empire, and of course almost all the specializations from Force & Destiny are force-oriented, but I don't think there are any talent trees with more than one talent for +1 force rating, and it's pretty much always at the deepest level.

In other words, becoming a powerful force user in FFG's Star Wars games is extremely XP-hungry, but has a high ceiling.

It should be noted that this means force use is somewhat segregated. In Force & Destiny games, all the PCs are expected to be some variety of force user, but in the others it's a highly optional thing you can buy into and that likely won't be a powergaming move at all.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

It is just how the timing of the table works.

Hahahaha yeah I hope so, but I've found that WotC seem to be hopelessly unrealistic about that, and likes to suggest timings which are just rarely going to work, like, the incredibly annoying "After you roll but before the DM tells you if you succeed", which is like, 100% dependent on how quick the DM is to tell you that, and whether you're good at interrupting if they start trying to. I'd go as far as to say it's borderline ableist/discriminatory because not everyone is that quick on the draw for all sorts of reasons. Even ignoring that it basically makes it a game of "can you shout fast enough", which like, fine if this is snap or spoons or something, not so great for an RPG.

My feeling is that, unlike a lot of stuff, they don't have "standardized" approaches to the timing of re-rolls or applying buffs or the like, and I think they need to acquire standardized approaches. Ones that work at all tables. So like, even if the DM jumps in with "MISS!" the split second the die stops rolling, you can use your re-roll.

Note that the DMG contains absolutely no advice about this from the DM's side either, AFAICT, no "pause after a roll but before announcing the results" or something. And even that would be silly because in an exciting game people would just forget.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Star Wars games work that way, don't they? You've got the Jedi, and then everyone else.

WEG D6 and WotC d20 ones didn't. Force-users are notionally roughly balanced with those who are not. In practice in both rules-sets I didn't feel like Force-users had a consistent advantage in mechanical terms, but obviously they have some options others do not (depending on exactly what powers they have). In WEG D6 Force-users tend to be skill-poor to the point where they kind of rely on more competent PCs a lot of the time though. The more recent one might. Ars Magica does, but everyone has multiple characters to offset that.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Everyone could be... but the point is not everyone is special.

And those people are called Non-Player Characters.

Edit: Which is to say, if the argument is that only some people at the table get to feel special. That's a problem. The role of an adventurer shouldn't be decided that some of them are special and others aren't so that the special people can feel even better.

DnD is a team game, everyone on the team gets to feel special.

 

[wicked cool]

i wonder when the actual deadline will be for 1 D&D. We are in 2022 and they just released this information . When does this get to the "pre final draft" and has to be edited etc.

 

[Micah Sweet]

WEG D6 and WotC d20 ones didn't. Force-users are notionally roughly balanced with those who are not. In practice in both rules-sets I didn't feel like Force-users had a consistent advantage in mechanical terms, but obviously they have some options others do not (depending on exactly what powers they have). In WEG D6 Force-users tend to be skill-poor to the point where they kind of rely on more competent PCs a lot of the time though. The more recent one might. Ars Magica does, but everyone has multiple characters to offset that.

The funny thing is, in fiction people with magic powers are almost always stronger than those without, and the balance is made up for narratively.

 

[TheSword]

Yeah, that is a nerf. I'll be asking for that to get a buff in the document. Might also ask for "Healing Kits" to be significantly changed.

I’d like to see that happen on any medicine check with a healer kit - spend a HD

With the healer feat doing double plus a few other things.

 

[TheSword]

Our main group is adopting the UA changes wholesale and are going to run with them through Scarlet Citadel.

It’s seems to me they are broken down into two groups…

1/ Things I think are improvements : linking more to background, 1st level feats, grappling, crits, changes to some of the feats like Lucky etc.

2/ Things that I could care less about - Ardlings, whether races can be small or not, changes to other feats etc.

There is not one thing in this play test that would fall into a third category of 3./ things that drive me to incandescent rage, so that’s a win. I can recognize that small humans and ardlings are going to appeal to some people and don’t really cause me any offense so I don’t really see the point of getting in a tiz about it.

Give the feedback and let WOC make the decisions based on the feedback. I do think it is possible for WOC to provide additional things for the new wave players without taking away from oldies.

 

[nevin]

the problem with equal and fair is they are reliant on perspective and no two people have the same perspective. Every character should get their chance to shine but trying to give other people fair and equal in a way they agree with is like herding cats.