D&D 5E 5E Can't Fail If It Focuses

[ren1999]

5th Edition can't fail if -- it keeps the basic 4th edition structure of hit points, ability modifiers and defenses to keep loyal 4th edition customers..

..and starts to add limits that many people wouldn't object too much to yet really specify and clarify the game mechanics.

No character can go above 30th level unless they become immortal.
Ability scores can't exceed 30 and modifiers can't exceed +25.
Magic items and spells can't stack over +3 on any one ability or defense.
Feats and powers can't stack over +3 on any one ability or defense.
Everybody gets a limit of 30 power slots maximum and learns 2 powers + int mod per level-up.

Core book designers will clean up and remove all duplicate Spells, Prayers, Feats, Skills and Powers as a group and really empower and level-up scale the unique powers to make them tempting for characters.

Skills will use one DC Table, preferably

S'mon's Difficulty Class Table
10: Easy Heroic task
15: Moderate Heroic task
20: Hard Heroic Task, Easy Paragon Task
25: Moderate Paragon Task
30: Hard Paragon Task, Easy Epic Task
35: Moderate Epic Task
40: Hard Epic Task

Consider Paul's XP Method
Each encounter or separate skill challenge is worth 1XP
Each boss encounter is worth 2XP
Characters level-up after 20XP.

Further modules will allow any new power or feat, etc.. even if a duplicate or similar.

Designers will look back at why Gold Box video game D&D is still popular to this day. The gaming experience made sense and wasn't a hassle. Characters had a Guard, Bandage option. Etc.. This can be worked into a table top experience too.

Designers will stay away from a do-it-yourself rules game. They may offer optional rules but there should be core rules that everyone should know is what defines the game.

 

[CleverNickName]

I don't know if it constitutes a "failure" or not, but I probably wouldn't play the game you just described. I am hoping for an all-new game system, not a retooled 4th Edition.

 

[Dausuul]

5E can fail if it sucks. Nothing you posted here precludes 5E sucking.

More seriously, presuming that the goal of 5E is to bring lost gamers back into the fold, the worst thing they could do is take 4E and give it a fresh coat of paint. Nobody who left because of 4E will be lured back by that.

Myself, I'm currently a 4E player, but my interest was fading and I was tinkering with my own system even before D&DN was announced. If D&DN looks like what you describe, I'll dump both it and 4E and run something else.

 

[Janaxstrus]

5th Edition can't fail if -- it keeps the basic 4th edition structure of hit points, ability modifiers and defenses to keep loyal 4th edition customers..

..and starts to add limits that many people wouldn't object too much to yet really specify and clarify the game mechanics.

No character can go above 30th level unless they become immortal.
Ability scores can't exceed 30 and modifiers can't exceed +25.
Magic items and spells can't stack over +3 on any one ability or defense.
Feats and powers can't stack over +3 on any one ability or defense.
Everybody gets a limit of 30 power slots maximum and learns 2 powers + int mod per level-up.

Core book designers will clean up and remove all duplicate Spells, Prayers, Feats, Skills and Powers as a group and really empower and level-up scale the unique powers to make them tempting for characters.

Skills will use one DC Table, preferably

S'mon's Difficulty Class Table
10: Easy Heroic task
15: Moderate Heroic task
20: Hard Heroic Task, Easy Paragon Task
25: Moderate Paragon Task
30: Hard Paragon Task, Easy Epic Task
35: Moderate Epic Task
40: Hard Epic Task

Consider Paul's XP Method
Each encounter or separate skill challenge is worth 1XP
Each boss encounter is worth 2XP
Characters level-up after 20XP.

Further modules will allow any new power or feat, etc.. even if a duplicate or similar.

Designers will look back at why Gold Box video game D&D is still popular to this day. The gaming experience made sense and wasn't a hassle. Characters had a Guard, Bandage option. Etc.. This can be worked into a table top experience too.

Designers will stay away from a do-it-yourself rules game. They may offer optional rules but there should be core rules that everyone should know is what defines the game.

Yah...not interested in re-skinned 4e. It certainly could fail that way.

I hope it's more new ideas with an old school feel than 4.75.

 

[B.T.]

5th Edition can't fail if -- it keeps the basic 4th edition structure of hit points, ability modifiers and defenses to keep loyal 4th edition customers..

..and starts to add limits that many people wouldn't object too much to yet really specify and clarify the game mechanics.

No character can go above 30th level unless they become immortal.
Ability scores can't exceed 30 and modifiers can't exceed +25.
Magic items and spells can't stack over +3 on any one ability or defense.
Feats and powers can't stack over +3 on any one ability or defense.
Everybody gets a limit of 30 power slots maximum and learns 2 powers + int mod per level-up.

Core book designers will clean up and remove all duplicate Spells, Prayers, Feats, Skills and Powers as a group and really empower and level-up scale the unique powers to make them tempting for characters.

Skills will use one DC Table, preferably

S'mon's Difficulty Class Table
10: Easy Heroic task
15: Moderate Heroic task
20: Hard Heroic Task, Easy Paragon Task
25: Moderate Paragon Task
30: Hard Paragon Task, Easy Epic Task
35: Moderate Epic Task
40: Hard Epic Task

Consider Paul's XP Method
Each encounter or separate skill challenge is worth 1XP
Each boss encounter is worth 2XP
Characters level-up after 20XP.

Further modules will allow any new power or feat, etc.. even if a duplicate or similar.

Designers will look back at why Gold Box video game D&D is still popular to this day. The gaming experience made sense and wasn't a hassle. Characters had a Guard, Bandage option. Etc.. This can be worked into a table top experience too.

Designers will stay away from a do-it-yourself rules game. They may offer optional rules but there should be core rules that everyone should know is what defines the game.

This sounds awful. I'm not interested in playing 4e with your personal house rules, and I suspect that the majority of other people aren't, either. Your suggestions completely miss the mark of why 3e players don't like 4e, which has nothing to do with "ability scores above 30" or "PAUL'S XP METHOD."

I guarantee that if 5e comes out and it's major changes are "feats don't stack bonuses" and "S'mon's difficult class table," it will go down in flames as the worst, most moneygrabby edition in D&D history.

As a final note, your suggested power acquisition method is terrible. Thirty powers at once is too many, and getting them based on your Intelligence modifier is ridiculous.

 

[slobster]

I like 4E. I like 3.X. I even have some affection for silly AD&D and BECMI (Don't hate me, this isn't an attack on your own preferred ranking for D&D editions. Just a statement of personal preference).

But those games already exist, and I don't want to pay 120$ to see them offered again in a slightly rebalanced form. I want 5E to take a few risks, change a few assumptions, but treat the long history of D&D with reverence. It should be a game that most previous D&D players instantly recognize and feel comfortable in, but that includes the lessons we (the D&D community) have learned over the past 40 or whatever years.

You're not going to please everyone. You just aren't. Suck it up, make a good new game, and for Mystra's sake don't wage any edition warring when you start advertising the system in a few months.

 

[the Jester]

5th Edition can't fail if -- it keeps the basic 4th edition structure of hit points, ability modifiers and defenses to keep loyal 4th edition customers..

..and starts to add limits that many people wouldn't object too much to yet really specify and clarify the game mechanics.

Sure it can.

 

[Remathilis]

5th Edition can't fail if -- it keeps the basic edition structure of hit points, ability modifiers and defenses to keep loyal customers..

..and starts to add limits that many people wouldn't object too much to yet really specify and clarify the game mechanics.

No character can go above 36th level unless they become immortal (done via an immortal quest.
Ability scores can't exceed 18 and modifiers can't exceed +3.
Magic items can't go over +3, +5 for swords
A character can't gain more than a -10 AC.

Additionally, if they make optional rules to allow mystics, elves, dwarves and halflings advance to 36th level (rather than they're current level limit) and fix the weapon mastery rules, it will be the greatest edition ever.

 

[trancejeremy]

I like 4E. I like 3.X. I even have some affection for silly AD&D and BECMI (Don't hate me, this isn't an attack on your own preferred ranking for D&D editions. Just a statement of personal preference).

You see, this is why 5e will fail. What you deride as silly to me (and a lot of others) were clearly by far the best and most playable versions of D&D, while 3e was flawed badly and 4e well, I'd get banned (again) if I were honest in how I feel about it.

It's not even so much the rules, but the philosophy of the game. One focuses on "balance" and "fairness" and lengthy combats described in minute detail, while the other is more sandboxy and where no, characters aren't all equal, and is more a strategic game of managing resources than tactics.

 

[slobster]

It's not even so much the rules, but the philosophy of the game. One focuses on "balance" and "fairness" and lengthy combats described in minute detail, while the other is more sandboxy and where no, characters aren't all equal, and is more a strategic game of managing resources than tactics.

Yikes. Didn't mean to demean your play preferences. But what you said that you like, sandboxy and strategy and resource management, I've experienced and really enjoyed in 3E or 4E. I've played games that emphasized "theater of the mind", and never used a grid at all, and I loved them. I've had wide-open sandboxes where the GM had no idea where a session was going to end up, and they were great. We've played games where a few characters were fantastically powerful compared to the rest of the party, and while I think that should be a conscious choice made by a group who knows what they are getting into rather than core assumptions of the system, I support wholeheartedly anyone who likes that style.

When I say I think fondly of some of the "silly" aspects of previous editions, I mean stuff like system shock and teleportation mishap and weapons vs. armor tables. I think they are too fiddly and over-the-top for the modern mainstream gamer, but they are also extremely evocative of a certain playstyle and subgenre. And hell, they can be a lot of fun. So if they show up as modules in 5E I will be happy, but if they appear as part of the core rules without a disclaimer telling you how lethal and how arbitrary they can be, I think it will throw a lot of beginning gamers for a loop.

But of course, that is my opinion and I respect that plenty of people disagree. I certainly don't mean to offend, or to condescend. Play what you like!