D&D General Mike Mearls sits down with Ben from Questing Beast

[Zardnaar]

Obviously, like the diversity of boardgames, there can be a be a diversity of roleplay designs.

If the goal is to reach the widest audience possible, probably it is wisest to use 5e as the starting point. It did and still does represent the emerging consensus of D&D players. For 2014, the ones who filled out the surveys were mostly grognards from earlier editions. Now for 2024 5e is pretty much the only D&D most players have known during their lifetimes, if they started playing around the age of 10.

Even Odyssey seems to use 5e as its chassis. Its levels 1 thru 10 correspond to 5e. Probably, one can pull a monster from the 2024 Monster Manual and play it as-is for an Odyssey campaign, and viceversa. If the Odyssey Magic-User class was a new "prestige class" with only ten levels, I suspect one can play it as-is in a 5e campaign.

5e design is remarkably robust. It can tolerate much modification and still seem to carry on. Tweak it to taste. Each setting can make 5e its own.

In my homebrew I replaced 4E engine with 5E. Reason was everyone knew the 5E engine and you can tweak it to Fort/Ref/Will for example. Reverse OSR saves everything is DC 20 add your save modifier.

You could make a more evolved B/X, 3E,4E, new edition etc.

 

[TiQuinn]

I have played 1e and understand it. (It is why I care about narrative immersion and worldbuilding so much.) The points that you mention seem already doable within 5e.

More dungeon focused. So purchase adventures that are dungeon crawls.

Simpler character options at creation. Use defaults. Such as, there are only four classes: Artificer, Paladin, Fighter, and Rogue. Every Fighter is a Battlemaster, etcetera.

Magic items for character customization. Create new feats whose abilities narratively represent attunement to a magic item. Either supply the item as part of loot. Or allow the character to know how to create this magic item.

Even creating new feats is a normal part of 5e.


What else is necessary to achieve the feel that your table is looking for?

Okay, give me five or six basic classes. Give them first level class abilities and a spell progression for those classes that have spells. Remove subclasses entirely. Remove feats entirely. Remove most abilities gained by leveling leaving a few that occur every four levels or so. Remove ASIs. Remove attunement slots. Characters primarily grow and gain abilties through adventuring and finding magic items.

I’m sure you can do it in 5e. I’d rather do it in 2e, and leave all the things I mentioned in 5e.

 

[Yaarel]

Okay, give me five or six basic classes.

No problem. Pick five or six classes that fit the tropes of the setting best. I assume, this means remove the fullcasters. So: Artificer, Barbarian, Fighter, Monk, Ranger, Paladin, and Rogue. That is seven. To decide which one or two to drop, I would go with the TV tropes, the fivesome band.

Maybe for flavor emphasis, something like:

Smart: Artificer
Heart: Paladin
Strong: Barbarian or Fighter
Rebel: Rogue
Jock (wellrounded): Monk or Ranger

Give them first level class abilities and a spell progression for those classes that have spells.

Also. It is easy to have a "level 0" in 2024. Just use the background feat and skills, plus add say 8 hit points, simple weapons, and a choice of two: leather armor, shield, mage armor, two martial weapons, or a cantrip. No, class benefits yet. This helps tables that want to start off "fragile".

Remove subclasses entirely.

For each class, the setting designer picks the one subclass that works best. In other words, one choice is no choice. There are no (other) subclasses.

Remove feats entirely.

Feats are instead "slots" for magic items.

Remove most abilities gained by leveling leaving a few that occur every four levels or so.

Slow down the rate of level advancement. In my games I do the following.
To get from level 1 to level 2, requires three standard encounters. Then to get to level 3 requires six standard encounters. And so on.

Levels 1-4: 3, 6, 9,
Levels 5-8: 12, 15, 15, 15
Levels 9-12: 12, 9, 9, 9
Levels 13+: 9 each level

I follow the standard 5e math, making a point to zoom thru low levels.

But tweak to taste. If your table likes low levels, then stretch out the number of encounters it takes to reach the next level. Eventually go "epic" at level 9 or whichever level. Meaning, one gains a feat at each new level instead of any class abilities.

Remove ASIs. Remove attunement slots. Characters primarily grow and gain abilties through adventuring and finding magic items.

Feats (including the feat that improves abilities) are instead "slots" to attune to a powerful magic item.

I’m sure you can do it in 5e. I’d rather do it in 2e, and leave all the things I mentioned in 5e.

It takes almost no effort to do any of this. For a table, the DM needs to decide which options get into the setting, then use session zero to make sure all the players are aboard. The actual setting can be done on the fly. Start local, and fill out the map as players explore. Take notes to remember what was where.

 

[Scribe]

I dont think its that crazy to pinpoint the shift.

It was Tashas.

 

[Malmuria]

Think I want a modern OSR D&D. Not a clone or something that's not D&D.

A variant 3E or 5E as such leaning more towards OSR side of things.

Worlds without number?

 

[Hexmage-EN]

I'm about halfway through the interview. I feel like Mearls is overstating how much more tactical 5.5 is than 5E and how much more people are focusing on builds when in my experience they're about the same. The mention of monsters doing more than one damage type with an attack as a new 5.5 innovation is odd to me as we had creatures dealing multiple damage types from the 2014 Monster Manual itself (such as the vampire's bite). I will give him that tying feats to backgrounds was a bad idea (though thankfully easy to homebrew away), but as someone for whom weapon masteries was the most exciting new innovation in 5.5 I'm very much opposed to the idea that it creates unneeded tactical complexity (my second 5E PC was a battlemaster fighter/hexblade warlock with pushing attack, repelling blast, and grasp of Hadar, so another way to push enemies is very welcome).

 

[Yaarel]

@TiQuinn
Think of magic items as a kind of multiclassing.

Instead of gaining a level in a class, one can gain a feat at the next level. This feat is a "slot" to attune to a magic item. Then the DM selects or creates magic items while using feats as a measure for how powerful to make each magic item.

This likewise stretches out the class levels, to keep the feel low level, and still stays moreorless on par with the math of a typical 5e game.

 

[Jaeger]

Think I want a modern OSR D&D. Not a clone or something that's not D&D.

A variant 3E or 5E as such leaning more towards OSR side of things.

same, a grittier, low magic 5e with simplified classes

Take a look at Old Swords Reign, and Into the Unknown.

Both are attempts to distill 5e to OSR levels.

Personally I like the way Old Swords Reign does characters, and the procedural stuff from Into the Unknown.

Also seen ACKs, C&C fighters and 2E fighters (with Fighters Handbook) in action somewhat lately.

ACKSII does fighters rather well, probably the best of the three.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Worlds without number?

Excellent choice! One of my favorite systems.

 

[mamba]

Even Odyssey seems to use 5e as its chassis. Its levels 1 thru 10 correspond to 5e. Probably, one can pull a monster from the 2024 Monster Manual and play it as-is for an Odyssey campaign, and viceversa. If the Odyssey Magic-User class was a new "prestige class" with only ten levels, I suspect one can play it as-is in a 5e campaign.

I don’t think this is true