Level Up (A5E) [+] What features should a "Advanced 5E" have?

Randomthoughts · Aug 11, 2020

Morrus said:
If you ARE interested in the idea of an Advanced 5E - 5E with a bit more crunch - what features would you want to see in it?

At this point, I don't have any concrete suggestions. I would look for something between 4e and 5e. 4e is my favorite edition but it could have used a good cleanup and some rule refinement. As I'm playing 5e more and more, I do appreciate its attempts to simplify and streamline, but it lost some of the magic of 4e.

In any case, something I look for now is whether a game is supported on VTTs. It's a big selling point if there is support.

CleverNickName · Aug 12, 2020

(from my comment in another thread):

CleverNickName said:
You could bring back some of the triggers from 3.X and Pathfinder. Casting a spell, drinking a potion, lighting a torch, loading a crossbow, standing up from prone...there was quite a long list of things that could provoke OAs besides "leaving a threatened square." That could really mix things up.

If you go that route, you might want to add ways to avoid them also. The Crossbow Master feat would let you load a crossbow without risking an OA, and the War Caster feat could let you load a crossbow without risking an OA, for example. Maybe you could spend all your movement to stand up from prone to avoid an OA, or maybe the Athlete feat could let you stand up from prone without risking an OA at all. Etc etc.

It would certainly make combat a little more tactically interesting and "advanced" anyway.

ScuroNotte · Aug 12, 2020

Being able to customize a class ie offering multiple options, similar to pathfinder 2. And not have racial bonuses fixed. Have a flat bonus given and dispersed how the player wants or just increase all attributes by +1.

Krachek · Aug 12, 2020

I would like some precision on « backward compatibility ».
I do understand that advanced character will fight equal level CR or adventure as actual character.
Is Bob using actual Phb will be able to play with Peter using the advanced phb?

Twiggly the Gnome · Aug 12, 2020

For a crunchier Cleric, I'd like to see something akin to 2e's divine spheres rather than 5e's flat domain system.

If there's a bestiary, I'd like to see Morale in the stat block, based on the nature of the creature rather than just Wisdom.

RangerWickett · Aug 12, 2020

Twiggly the Gnome said:
For a crunchier Cleric, I'd like to see something akin to 2e's divine spheres rather than 5e's flat domain system.

If there's a bestiary, I'd like to see Morale in the stat block, based on the nature of the creature rather than just Wisdom.

I think spheres were maybe a tad fiddly, but 3e's double domains (with special powers attached to each) led to some cool character options. Honestly, I think 3e cleric domains were some of the most interesting class designs of that game, though they could have been improved by having a few more abilities unlock as you level, aside from just getting more spells.

Then again, who am I to complain about spheres. I worked on the D&D 3.5 Elements of Magic - Revised, where you could assemble your own magical tradition with different options of what sorts of spells you could cast. Are you an animist? A necromancer? A beast shifter? Mix and match for extra fun.

CapnZapp · Aug 12, 2020

I like the way classes and races/ancestries are different just because.

It's the quirks and idiosyncraticities that give D&D its feel and texture. Making choices more generic just isn't the D&D way.

It won't be 5E if this is changed (to fold Ranger into Fighter as a subclass, to let the player select racial ability bonuses herself, etc) so I wouldn't expect any of those changes for this project.

aco175 · Aug 12, 2020

I would make sure that everything is looked at through 5e. Breaking down how many longswords there should be and having cool abilities for each is good, but when the DM says you find a +1 longsword we need to be able to handle it. Maybe some sort of subsets of weapons like longsword where under it is all the variants and the DM can pick one or just tell the player to pick the one he wants.

Same thing with languages and such. As the DM, I may make a dwarven temple with runes that dwarfs can read, but when the player tells me that his dwarf was raised in an elven land and cannot read them makes the game less somehow. Makes me think the PC was created more for min/maxing so he could get the elf language and create a mage dwarf for using the elf high magic and dwarf toughness feats we are talking about for individual characters. I'm not against allowing each PC to have specific abilities, but they just need to be looked at for backwards compatibility.

plisnithus8 · Aug 12, 2020

I’d like across-the-board crunch details but, more importantly, have the pieces be modular so that we can pick and choose the mechanics to add to our 5e games.

Neonchameleon · Aug 12, 2020

RangerWickett said:
So the ranger shouldn't exist as a class.

It's a person who fights in the wilderness. Or maybe it's someone who sneaks in the wilderness. Or maybe it's someone with a bit of druidic magic in the wilderness. That ought to be covered by the fighter, or the rogue, or the druid, especially if the game is increasing the depth of the Exploration pillar.

Paladins are suffused with divine power as they fight - and some even have the divine power of nature. That's a pretty clear archetype.

But rangers don't really have a niche. They're more a flavor you ought to be able to apply to any class.

Rangers are to druids as paladins are to clerics. I'm not sure where paladins really differ from war clerics tbh. 4e made primal into a separate power source - but in 5e there is a case for all of barbarian, ranger, and druid to be subclasses of other classes.

Level Up (A5E) [+] What features should a "Advanced 5E" have?

Randomthoughts

Adventurer

CleverNickName

Limit Break Dancing

ScuroNotte

Explorer

Krachek

Hero

Twiggly the Gnome

Legend

RangerWickett

Legend

CapnZapp

Legend

aco175

Legend

plisnithus8

Adventurer

Neonchameleon

Legend

Similar Threads