D&D General Hot Take: D&D Has Not Recovered From 2E to 3.0 Transition

[Retreater]

they fear a piazo like retroclone will hurt there bottom line, don't expect them to open more stuff up.

Well, 5e was more open than 4e, so they at least learned from that mistake. I don't think they'll go back and reopen 4e at this point, but making it a little more accessible is an option.
Already some high profile content creators (including Matt Colville) have been promoting 4e and doing actual play livestreams. I'm surprised that this hasn't been enough to throw us fans a few bones. (Or at least let us revisit the design theory of the game in playtests for the upcoming revision.)

 

[GMforPowergamers]

You can be good at way more than 2/6.

by useing the no prof to save DC you should be okay to good at all of them, but you only get better at the 2 you are prof in.

That's just what everyone gets. There's the feat that gives you an extra good save, as well as class features that do the same.

Im unsure how many classes give a third save, but the feat is very much spending a resource to be better at something, that seems to be working as intended.

Moreover, if you're a paladin (or simply near a paladin) your bonus could be as high as a +16.

that again is a class feature MEANT to make you better (or those near you better) and yes in theory you could be adding two +5 stats and +6 prof that will be rare at best... most likely you will be adding prof + 2 +3s The only classes that get good main stay saves (dex, con, wis) with those stats also prime stats are cleric and rogue... so maybe those will be a bit broken (and TBH I think only rogue mixing this with evasion do I think would cause a problem) a 7th or 8th level paliden with a 16 or 17 cha adds +3 to all saves (amazing) and also to allies within 10ft (okaish if you all bunch up) if you have a fighter with a similar (16 or 17) con and they are prof they have +3+3+3 to the save... +9 if the NPC wizard or druid throws a con save the DC will be 10+stat... since the stat is prime stat (and con isn't for the fighter) lets give them the same 16 or 17 stat... DC 13 the fighter (on there best save) needs a 4 to make it. now if they target his 8 stat or 10 stat they need a 13 or 14 to make it without the paliden aura or 10 or 11 with.

There are other bonuses (ring of protection) that could push that even higher.

magic items make you better sounds like it is working,


the entire argument seems funny in a thread where so many complain about 4e being a treadmill... when you get better at something isn't that working as intended?

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Well, 5e was more open than 4e, so they at least learned from that mistake. I don't think they'll go back and reopen 4e at this point, but making it a little more accessible is an option.
Already some high profile content creators (including Matt Colville) have been promoting 4e and doing actual play livestreams. I'm surprised that this hasn't been enough to throw us fans a few bones. (Or at least let us revisit the design theory of the game in playtests for the upcoming revision.)

i hope you are right and I wish you were... but 5e is the current (and as of now planned only/last) edition of the game they have no reason to make another edition of retro clone to compete with them.

 

[Weiley31]

I will never trade Cantrips in to gain Wizards using crossbows, after using one or two spells, back.

 

[Oofta]

Many actually see that as a GOOD thing.

What happens when 17th level characters can be challenged greatly by 1st level characters in 5e.

"Look...here's Samson, Greatest hero of our ancient age and slayer of a thousand men with the jawbone of an...err...donkey.

Oh...wait...Samson just got shot by a little boy. Hey....50 little boys just slew Samson!"

On the otherhand...in 3.5 or 4e...

"King Harold is an experienced Warrior going against the army of King Edward.

Hey...King Harold just slew the entire army of King Edward and now it is going to single combat between him and Edward...wonder if history will be different time and he'll actually win the Battle of Normandy!!"

But it's like video games that adjust enemy difficulty based on your level. Is it really growth if you can face what looks to be the exact same monster from several levels and it still hits just as often and harder but for the same percentage of your overall HP? It's a treadmill.

There's no perfect solution but in 5E I can use those low level monsters. Throw an ogres at a mid-level party and while it could still hit, the party dispatches it pretty easily. It feels like you've actually gotten better and improved. Say a "Remember when we would have run from this..." as you look up and see the other dozen ogres charging your way and realize you have a fight on your hands.

That goblin? Not going to be an issue. That army of goblins? Problem. Or ... zombies on TV series or movies. When the zombies were new (or in unusual situations) an individual zombie was a threat because the protagonists are just normal desk jockeys not used to fighting. But after a while? Kind of boring, just go out there and spike them. Until you get surrounded by a horde of course and then suddenly they're a threat again.

When we do vanquish that ogre, goblin or zombie horde I feel like we've earned it. It's a different feel and style that I prefer.

 

[Oofta]

Adding proficiency to all saves and a class bonus to the good ones is one thought I've had.

One of those things that would have been a good idea when 5E was implemented or for a new edition that's less compatible with 5E. I like the idea but you'd also have to increase DCs across the board for higher level encounters.

 

[Fanaelialae]

by useing the no prof to save DC you should be okay to good at all of them, but you only get better at the 2 you are prof in.

Im unsure how many classes give a third save, but the feat is very much spending a resource to be better at something, that seems to be working as intended.

that again is a class feature MEANT to make you better (or those near you better) and yes in theory you could be adding two +5 stats and +6 prof that will be rare at best... most likely you will be adding prof + 2 +3s The only classes that get good main stay saves (dex, con, wis) with those stats also prime stats are cleric and rogue... so maybe those will be a bit broken (and TBH I think only rogue mixing this with evasion do I think would cause a problem) a 7th or 8th level paliden with a 16 or 17 cha adds +3 to all saves (amazing) and also to allies within 10ft (okaish if you all bunch up) if you have a fighter with a similar (16 or 17) con and they are prof they have +3+3+3 to the save... +9 if the NPC wizard or druid throws a con save the DC will be 10+stat... since the stat is prime stat (and con isn't for the fighter) lets give them the same 16 or 17 stat... DC 13 the fighter (on there best save) needs a 4 to make it. now if they target his 8 stat or 10 stat they need a 13 or 14 to make it without the paliden aura or 10 or 11 with.


magic items make you better sounds like it is working,


the entire argument seems funny in a thread where so many complain about 4e being a treadmill... when you get better at something isn't that working as intended?

You can get better, sure. IMO, it shouldn't be so much better that an enemy only has a 5% chance of landing an ability against that save. (Not counting very rare one-time enemies like gods, for whom that's fine since it's a one off.)

Ideally, the numbers shouldn't normally skew so hard that either side has a 95% chance of success. I think that, again ideally, the success rate for both attacker and defender should cap out somewhere around 70% under normal circumstances. That strikes a decent balance between predictability and randomness.

Besides, I've never complained about the 4e treadmill (I think that claim is kind of wrongheaded to begin with) so you're barking up the wrong tree directing that at me. If both attacker and defender are actively improving their respective values, it ought to be a treadmill. Otherwise, you're favoring one over the other (which means devaluing either offense or defense respectively). IMO, if you do want to favor one, it ought to be offense since that makes for a more exciting game.

 

[Retreater]

i hope you are right and I wish you were... but 5e is the current (and as of now planned only/last) edition of the game they have no reason to make another edition of retro clone to compete with them.

The good thing is that - while WotC may plan to make no other editions - that doesn't mean the industry will stop. They will likely lose ground to more innovative design.
We gamers love to tinker with things.

 

[Garthanos]

the entire argument seems funny in a thread where so many complain about 4e being a treadmill... when you get better at something is n't that working as intended?

Sorry guys you get better and the things you are challenged by and most of the things you need to roll the dice to overcome get better too .. seems a natural thing in stories... complaining about it seems very odd to me.

why? if you get better at 1 or 2 of 6 how is that an issue? even 17th= level your best save is +6+5 for =+11

And your worst is what zero and always will be? Seems like a huge gap to me -> ... generalized competence is non-existent in this edition
Further to me every character having multiple large holes in their defenses "FOR CASTERS ONLY" to walk through is tacky.

 

[payn]

The good thing is that - while WotC may plan to make no other editions - that doesn't mean the industry will stop. They will likely lose ground to more innovative design.
We gamers love to tinker with things.

Paizo certainly didnt let it stop them.