D&D 2E (5e + PF2e)/2?

[dave2008]

Wut? Wasn't the whole point not that monsters would need to be ridiculousy over-CRed to be a threat?

Yes it was. But then I guess I decided what was the point of the confusion. What does it matter if CRs go up, it is just a number. One of the reasons I did it was so that you could have monsters with lower hit accuracy and high hit points. However I have developed another work around I think I like better. Use HD to calculate proficiency for monsters. So this is the current plan (loved to hear your thoughts):

1. Use HD to determine prof. bonus.
2. Calculate CR normally except as noted in 1.
3. Elite is a tag that tells you to uses 3/4 hit points per HD (so 9 on a d12 instead of 6.5)
4. Paragon is a tag that tells you to use full hit points per HD (12 on a d12)

PS I am already doing this in my home game and it is working well.

 

[dave2008]

@dave2008 I use creative Reactions, creative Inspiration (and spell upcasting), liberally interpreted forced movement, and a bit more attention to damage type (bludgeoning/piercing/slashing) in my 5e game. I find this adds a nice level of tactical depth without making the game more complicated. I'm sure this is because I handle a lot of these elements ad hoc.

Those are all good ideas, can you give some examples? Specifically creative reactions and forced movement. I do think paying attention to damage type is a good idea too. More depth without complication is the idea!

Some players miss all the fiddly character creation bits of Pathfinder. I don't share that sentiment, but to address the two players who like the fiddly stuff, I've introduced some homebrew racial feats for their goblin and lizardfolk PCs, respectively, as well as homebrew magic items, and some story/narrative stuff that has scratched that itch for them.

Good ideas. I like some fiddly bits in creation & leveling, but not as much as PF. I also don't like all the fiddly interaction with the large list of traits, etc.

 

[Quickleaf]

Those are all good ideas, can you give some examples? Specifically creative reactions and forced movement. I do think paying attention to damage type is a good idea too. More depth without complication is the idea!

Thanks. Yeah, sure can.

For creative reactions, I often use the "click rule" for traps allowing PCs to react right when the trap is triggered.

Another example was when the party was ascending a plateau using switchbacking exposed stone trails & rickety wooden walkways up to an aarakocra monastery, some 500+ feet up. At the time, no one in the party had feather fall. I realized that falling the full distance for a failed check would be un-fun. So I drew up a list of "falling reactions" tailored to the scenario.

Spoiler

• Drop prone at last minute (#1): Realizing you’re not going to make the jump/climb, drop prone at the last minute, clutching the walkway’s edge for dear life. You take no falling damage, but you drop anything in your hands and have psyched yourself out, suffering disadvantage on any Athletics or Acrobatics checks for the rest of the ascent.
• Fall into ruined cliff structure (#2-5): Fall 2d4 x 10 feet and roll 1d6 on Ruined Cliff Structures table.
• Grab an aarakocra (#3-5): Make a Strength (Athletics) check contested by the aarakocra’s +2 Dexterity (Acrobatics); on a success, you stop your fall by grappling it, on a failure you and the aarakocra fall 2d4 x 10 feet.
• Grab a vine (#1-3): Make a DC 12 Dexterity save. On a success you grab a vine and take no damage! However, roll on d6 on Vines of Chult table to determine what you grab. On a failure, you fall 3d4 x 10 feet.
• Land on lower walkway (#1-5): Fall 30 feet, make a DC 12 Constitution save or crash through the walkway and fall an extra 2d4 x 10 feet to another walkway below, losing one item at random which falls to the ground.
• Scream for help (#3-5): Yell out for a kindly aarakocra to save you!

I've also seen a creative use of absorb elements (reaction) to suck carrion crawler venom spewing into an underground stream into the wizard/rogue's rapier – this was also an example of creative upcasting.

For impromptu forced movement, I often take creative liberties with natural 20's or 1's on attacks and saves, as well as with how players narrate their kills. Usually, this involves monsters being forcibly moved or knocked off edges when they're at low hit points. I had a pirate NPC who was knocked prone end up clinging to the sail's boom, which another PC used to their advantage by twisting the steering wheel, causing the boom to swing out over the ocean as part of an Intimidation check to capitulate the pirates' surrender.

 

[Xenonnonex]

Wizards obviously could've included more class options, of those at least they had intended to include, all that playtesting of the Ravnican classes that didn't make it into the GGtR as an example. That a great many didn't make it is a massive disappointment.

But this argument of not enough options in 5e seems remarkably nonsensical.

 

[Zardnaar]

2E with some of the bells and whistles.

I'm working on my own baby, it uses the 5E engine but uses microfeats, and parts of 2E and OSR stuff.

I've only got around 50 pages of material and isn't fit to be published and needs revised.

A heavily houserules and revised 3.5 could also do it if they added some OSR elements.

Tweaking 5E is another plan. Rather than rewrite everything just lower the CR and make new critters.

Some older stuff needs to come back IMHO. Maybe 1E type DR vs magic weapons, conceptually 2E magic resistance or maybe the D&DM version.

 

[Shiroiken]

I'm going to dissent, and believe that you can't have simplicity with codified depth and tactics. The more you add, the more complicated you make the game by default. It's a sliding scale, with 5E closer to simple (especially basic) and PF2 closer to tactical. You could have a game that runs between them (or one may exist), but it would be hard pressed to market against those titans. I think that PF2 has taken a good direction, moving away from 5E simplicity, because that allows them to fill that niche for players who want that.

 

[dave2008]

I'm going to dissent, and believe that you can't have simplicity with codified depth and tactics. The more you add, the more complicated you make the game by default. It's a sliding scale, with 5E closer to simple (especially basic) and PF2 closer to tactical. You could have a game that runs between them (or one may exist), but it would be hard pressed to market against those titans. I think that PF2 has taken a good direction, moving away from 5E simplicity, because that allows them to fill that niche for players who want that.

I tend to agree, but the question is where is that middle ground of enough simplicity and enough depth? If you used the 5e core game, but the micro feats and tactical class featurs and/or feats I think that would do it for me. There is a little more complexity in the build / level up, but actual play is basically as simple.

 

[Xenonnonex]

I'm going to dissent, and believe that you can't have simplicity with codified depth and tactics. The more you add, the more complicated you make the game by default. It's a sliding scale, with 5E closer to simple (especially basic) and PF2 closer to tactical. You could have a game that runs between them (or one may exist), but it would be hard pressed to market against those titans. I think that PF2 has taken a good direction, moving away from 5E simplicity, because that allows them to fill that niche for players who want that.

But this doesn't prevent people from hacking together their own modified rule set to play with.

People seem to do that for the fun of it, not because they just want to market it.

 

[Zardnaar]

I tend to agree, but the question is where is that middle ground of enough simplicity and enough depth? If you used the 5e core game, but the micro feats and tactical class featurs and/or feats I think that would do it for me. There is a little more complexity in the build / level up, but actual play is basically as simple.

5E or 4E core would work. Rewrite the classes and monsters to taste. Replace 5E ASI system or grant a micro asi every two levels.

PF2 has an interesting character generation at least until you hit the class section maybe ancestry.

 

[dave2008]

Wizards obviously could've included more class options, of those at least they had intended to include, all that playtesting of the Ravnican classes that didn't make it into the GGtR as an example. That a great many didn't make it is a massive disappointment.

But this argument of not enough options in 5e seems remarkably nonsensical.

Well there is definitely a portion of the RPG community that disagrees. I would like more granularity. I initially like the idea of a feat = a +2 ASI, but I have since come to think that it is a design shackle. Just have smaller feats that come in more frequently could add quite a bit of simple depth. Then given all martial characters a superiority dice mechanic (at least in subclass each) with tactical options might do it. Maybe allow HD to be used of other thing besides healing (empowered attacks?).