Level Up (A5E) A5e is Backwards Compatible with O5e. What if it wasn’t?

[W'rkncacnter]

For example, "At that point why not just like...replace subclasses with class feats or something?" PF2e does just that.

actually, that's not quite true. most classes sort of have both. but i get what you mean.

 

[Nephilim00]

The chunky, one dimensional Cleric domains. I'd have liked to have seen lighter, mini-domains that could be mixed and matched and maybe allow for picking up another one or two at higher levels. Something that makes Clerics of different ethoses more distinct.

You want to be a cleric of Love & Thunder?

 

[Twiggly the Gnome]

You want to be a cleric of Love & Thunder?

Yeah, or War & Knowledge or Forge & Hearth, etc.

 

[xiphumor]

Congratulations. You’re a Cleric/Cleric multiclass

 

[Twiggly the Gnome]

Congratulations. You’re a Cleric/Cleric multiclass

Heh, that's sort of my point. The idea that those things would be housed in separate subclasses is such a 5Eism.

 

[Xethreau]

• vocalized and seen components would have been given more sensible names "visual" and "sound" (the acronyms would be reversed)
• feats could have been smaller, bite-size benefits comparable to 3.5/4e. Separated from ASI
• reworked CR / exp system
• reworked the adventuring day (short rest, daily resources, etc.)

 

[Timespike]

Multisubclassing would definitely be fun. I have an idea or two about how one could kind of simulate that by making multiple "half subclasses" and allowing players to pick two at character creation, but that obviously does stone nothing if you want to mix two existing ones.

 

[Faolyn]

In thinking about it some more... making bards half-casters, or even non-casters, but increasing the number and type of battle hymns and the versatility of the bardic inspiration die. Or possibly making bardic magic work like the artificer spells do. LU artificers very clearly are using technomagic, thanks to the fizzle die--they're not just casting spells and saying that it's an item that's producing the spells, but using a (very breakable) item to produce a magical effect. A lucky artificer could use a device to cast a spell many, many times before it broke.

I'm not sure what could be given to the bard to make up for the lack of casting, though. Maybe allowing them access to a tradition or two of martial maneuvers, more tool proficiencies, and a higher cap on expertise dice.

I'd also bring back a "chance to learn spell" for wizards, and bring back "spheres" for clerics, and say you can only cast spells from the spheres your god offers (or have much smaller cleric spell lists but give gods lists of extra spells they grant in addition to the extra spells granted by the cleric domain). I know this is all very second edition, but it would cause the PCs to have extremely varied spell lists rather than the, let's face it, common lists of spells that everyone picks.

 

[Morrus]

In thinking about it some more... making bards half-casters, or even non-casters, but increasing the number and type of battle hymns and the versatility of the bardic inspiration die. Or possibly making bardic magic work like the artificer spells do. LU artificers very clearly are using technomagic, thanks to the fizzle die--they're not just casting spells and saying that it's an item that's producing the spells, but using a (very breakable) item to produce a magical effect. A lucky artificer could use a device to cast a spell many, many times before it broke.

New classes don't break compatibility (even if they have the same name as O5E classes).

 

[Faolyn]

New classes don't break compatibility (even if they have the same name as O5E classes).

True. But you guys were trying to keep everything compatible and at least outwardly similar.