log in or register to remove this ad

 

Level Up (A5E) 3.99 Edition

GMMichael

Guide of Modos
The creation of Advanced 5e can be seen as an evolutionary step:

3.00 edition
From the primordial muck of AD&D 2e came some innovations: simplified saving throws, THAC0 became an attack bonus, and skill proficiencies became skill points.

3.50 edition
Partial actions removed, swift, immediate, and move actions added, cover & concealment simplified, animal companions became a subsystem, and polymorph was "fixed."

3.75 edition A.K.A. Pathfinder
Combat maneuvers simplified special attack actions, perception was born, dead levels disappeared, and magicians (wizards, sorcerors) got more hit points. Polymorph may have been fixed again.

3.85 edition A.K.A. 5.0 edition
The game became leaner and meaner, dropping modifiers for advantage, removing attack of opportunity tables, limiting magic with attunement and concentration, and absorbing D.N.A. to gain rests (and thus, encounter and daily powers) and healing surges.

3.99 edition
So here we are. The game wants to continue evolving, and it has a rich history of features hidden or buried in its D.N.A. Lots of this history is open-licensed. Since other threads are discussing mutations to the game (the creation of new features or modified 5e features), my question to you is: what needs to come back that has already been in the game? What was streamlined-out that shouldn't have been so?

Some things I'd like to see are d4 magicians, non-square character spaces, spot & listen, and magic item madness (removal of attunement and concentration). I'd also like to see bards returned to their rightful place as the worst class in the game, back when they got four skill points per level, and one level of special abilities. (Just kidding. Sort of.)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

what needs to come back that has already been in the game?

I don't think calling it 3.99 is fair. Even if certain concepts they probably need to be modified and/or expanded upon to fit the 5E core game. I dont see the point of just grabbing a rule from any previous edition of the game and dropping it back in wholesale. Honestly if that were the case I could just do that for free myself.
 


6ENow!

The Game Is Over
So, is the goal of Level Up to restore what was lost, or rebuild it better than before. :unsure:

My guess would be the second option... not that there aren't things to be gleaned from the first.
 

CleverNickName

Limit Break Dancing
I mean, I'm a fan of pretending that 4th Edition never happened (just kidding, don't @ me) :p, but I don't agree that 5th Edition is just a higher-evolved Pathfinder.

I don't think 5th Edition needs to be fixed, and I don't think the intent of the "Level Up" project is to patch a broken game. Expansions and modifications to the game are great to have, and they are interesting to talk about. I want more crunch, and I'm looking forward to seeing what the chefs at ENWorld cook up for us. But it isn't a necessary step in the evolution of the game. The game is doing just fine.

That wasn't the case for 3rd and 4th Edition. Strong as they might have been, sales were slumping, popularity was dropping, and they were losing customers to other products after just a few years. But that's not the case for 5th Edition: six-plus years after its release the brand has never been stronger, popularity has never been higher, and sales have never been better. So I'd be very surprised if a 6th Edition of the game is released anytime soon. (It's still fun to speculate about, though.)
 




The next challenge will be rules enough simple for newcomers, but the right balance between power and flexibility to allow universtal genre. My suggestion is two different pillars of leveling-up, one the classic (more hit points and bonus for attack and save) and the other would be as the talent tree, the things PC learn. It would be like a mmo where the PC is nerfed when comes back to a lower level zone but still "remember" the unlocked talent slots. Then the PCs could learn to be martial artists, or better shooters with firearms, or pilots of mechas. This also could allow superheroes games where the power of level is almost frozen, but the players still can spent XPs to unlock different talent trees, for example about driving vehicles or being the captain of a ship.
 


... Seriously, it's great to see people excited, and I look forward to what gets produced. But how is this not edition warring?
I mean, I'd argue that its not edition warring and just. Wrong.

5E is not based on the 3E framework and calling it 3.85 just isn't right. 5E's its own thing and isn't tied to 3E's various parts. Its certainly learnt from them, but it isn't derived on that whole system that once was
 

GMMichael

Guide of Modos
... Seriously, it's great to see people excited, and I look forward to what gets produced. But how is this not edition warring?
Because we're not passing judgment on which edition was best. We're looking for rules to add to make 5e more crunchy.

I don't think calling it 3.99 is fair. Even if certain concepts they probably need to be modified and/or expanded upon to fit the 5E core game. I dont see the point of just grabbing a rule from any previous edition of the game and dropping it back in wholesale. Honestly if that were the case I could just do that for free myself.
So the good features of the past are lost to the mists of time? Yeah, you could houserule stuff back into your game. You could write an entirely new game. But can you playtest it, add new art, and get community support by yourself?

I mean, I'm a fan of pretending that 4th Edition never happened (just kidding, don't @ me) :p, but I don't agree that 5th Edition is just a higher-evolved Pathfinder.
Then this might not be the thread for you. Maybe another thread title would help your perspective: "Level Up: Heritage and Inspiration?"
 

Saelorn

Hero
I strongly disagree with the premise that 5E has anything to do with 3E (rules-as-physics, long-term consequences, symmetrical rules), when it is so clearly derived from 4E in every way that matters (infinite magic, trivial healing, rules-as-game). Maybe you could argue that it's purely its own thing, taking different things from different editions; but it's definitely not an iteration of 3E.
 

GreyLord

Hero
Drawing on some of the evolution of 5e thus far...IF (big if there) there is another edition, progression along lines which have already shown some promise....

1. Possible elimination of Races, introduction of more in depth backgrounds. These backgrounds would not just be things that have to do with occupations (like sage or soldier) but also with one's heritage and culture. You could expect cultural and heritage feats or features to also be incorporated.

2. Ability to play as PC's of other types of cultures or heritages than we have now. For example, perhaps one wants to have a goblin engineer type background, or perhaps in the Forgotten Realms play a Thay Scholar background. By using culture and heritage you can increase the possibilities.

3. A greater group of monsters and spells, some of which are in supplements now, being included in the core rules.

4. Magic item creation and more inclusion of magic items.
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
... Seriously, it's great to see people excited, and I look forward to what gets produced. But how is this not edition warring?
Edition warring is so 2007! It really hasn't been a major problem for about a decade. We haven't really moderated it here for at least that long (though now I say that, it's gonna suddenly explode and get all out of hand and we'll have to start doing it again!)
 

So the good features of the past are lost to the mists of time? Yeah, you could houserule stuff back into your game. You could write an entirely new game. But can you playtest it, add new art, and get community support by yourself?

If you read my post I didnt say that the good things of the past were left to time, I said they need to be updated to work with the 5E core rule set. But if it comes down to it I could play with myself, wouldnt be the first time.
 

glass

(he, him)
I strongly disagree with the premise that 5E has anything to do with 3E (rules-as-physics, long-term consequences, symmetrical rules), when it is so clearly derived from 4E in every way that matters (infinite magic, trivial healing, rules-as-game).
Not in any way that mattered to many 4e fans (no nice things for martials, no healing surges*, greatly reduced balance, reduces monster complexity combined with added lookup to name just a few).

Maybe you could argue that it's purely its own thing, taking different things from different editions; but it's definitely not an iteration of 3E.
5e is a bit of an odd duck when it comes to lineage. In a lot of areas, it runs screaming from anything resembling 4e, but then it takes group skill checks from 4e unaltered. In the most part, it seems to be tryng to heark back to 3e and older (without overall resembling the mechanics of any particular older edition), but then it completely removes vancian magic. It is very strange.

_
glass.

* Just to be clear, 5e HD are not healing surges. Healing surges do two things; HD are orthoganal to one of those things and do the opposite of the other.
 

I see 5ed as a product of a wise and careful process. They didn't try to make something revolutionary nor old school. They hit right the good spot. For what I see from 5ed advanced is a step back in old school habit. It will be hard to add crunch keeping the same aim as 5ed.
 


dave2008

Legend
Not in any way that mattered to many 4e fans (no nice things for martials, no healing surges*, greatly reduced balance, reduces monster complexity combined with added lookup to name just a few).
As a 4e fan I am going to disagree here a bit (though I do note you said "many 4e fans," and I can't argue with that as I have no idea what "many" 4e fans liked or wanted). I do think 5e fighters get nice things (things 4e ones didn't get) like multiple attacks and action surge and flexibility of fighting styles and maneuvers I find better than the 4e fighter powers. I know when we converted our group to 5e, the fighters really appreciated the change. I do agree healing surges and HD do different things, but for our group HS were an untapped resource that we house ruled a bunch of things into (liek recharging encounter and daily powers) and we are able to do that with HD as well and, IMO, it works just as well if not better. We never had an issue with needing to control healing which is the major benefit of HS over HD. Finally, as lover of the 4e monster builder and 4e monsters, I actually think in some ways 5e design is superior. I definitely think 5e legendary monsters and lairs are an improvement of 4e solo monsters. But I do love the 4e minion, standard, elite, solo parading and the monster roles. I think adding monster roles back intto 5e monsters (and they added variety) would be good, Also, if you look at the more recent books, the monsters tend to have much more interesting designs (and be mroe 4e like in that regard). The big issue with 5e monsters is that 5e doesn't make use of all of the tactical options 4e had, and the monsters suffer for it.
 

Presents for Goblins

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top