• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 5E 5th Edition users poll (keep track of what users want)

steenan

Adventurer
LEVEL
No difference, really. What is important to me is how fast do characters raise in power (I prefer 4e speed to 3e) and how the style of game changes with level (I'd prefer more change than in 3e and 4e - move from adventuring to politics and wars).

POWERS (4e power mechanic)
GOOD. Reduce the redundancy, though; in 4e there is a lot of powers that essentially do the same and just waste paper.

VANCIANT SYSTEM (3.x caster mechanic)
GOOD. But only if the number of prepared spells is small (below 10 even for high level characters), but preparation may be repeated more often than once per day.

CLASS ROLES (defender, controller, striker, leader)
GOOD. But don't limit it to combat roles. Give classes social roles and exploration roles too.

MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY
NOT IMPORTANT. Make magic items rare, strange and not necessary to keep up with monsters.

ABILITIES SCORES (str, con, dex, int, wis, cha)
GOOD. Just define them more clearly than in previous editions.

A LOT OF CLASSES
BAD. Only a handful of classes, representing strong archetypes. Customization through themes and feats.

A LOT OF RACES
BAD. A handful of interesting, well designed races. Don't create a "kitchen sink" world.

ABILITY SCORES FOR RACES (you want a particolar race to be better with some classes and bad with others?)
NO. Races should be mechanically distinct, but it's better done through racial powers and special qualities, not flat bonuses.

FEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES (weapon focus, weapon expertise)
BAD. Feats should let you do interesting things, not give bonuses.

HIT POINTS
GOOD. D&D always used them; too many people would feel offended by a change.
Just please, decide if they represent physical toughness or not getting hit and keep to this choice in the whole game. No edition has been consistent in this respect.

HEALING SURGES (part of 4e heal system)
GOOD. Just change the terminology.

DEFENSES
Doesn't matter for me.

SKILL CHALLENGES (4e)
BAD. I'd accept them if combat worked the same way. But if combat stays tactical, with various maneuvers and positioning, skill challenges must go.

SKILLS HAVE TO BE
IMPORTANT. Unless they are replaced by social and explorational powers or similar mechanics.

NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT
60-65% on average.

ALIGNMENT IS
MECHANICAL. And uses very precise definitions of alignments, as opposed to relying on players' opinions on morality.

SAVE OR DIE (finger of death)
BAD. All combat attacks should interact with HPs. Also, failure should rarely if ever lead to character death - interesting complications are preferred.
I'd like spell effects to become permanent when they defeat someone (for example, domination normally only works for one round, but when it brings someone to 0 HP it becomes permanent until ritually broken).
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Consonant Dude

First Post
LEVEL
1-20 - although honestly, 1-10 is where I do most of my gaming

POWERS (4e power mechanic)

BAD - yucky

VANCIAN SYSTEM
GOOD but with a solid ritual support system

CLASS ROLES r)
BAD - yucky again

MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY
NOT IMPORTANT but flavorful magic items are the way to go

ABILITIES SCORES (str, con, dex, int, wis, cha)
BAD - I wish ability scores and modifiers were rolled up into one thing

A LOT OF CLASSES
A dozen class

A LOT OF RACES
half a dozen races

ABILITY SCORES FOR RACES
YES

FEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES (weapon focus, weapon expertise)
BAD. Really, really bad

HIT POINTS
GOOD

HEALING SURGES (part of 4e heal system)
BAD

DEFENSES
As DAMAGE RESISTANCE, if it runs smoothly in play

SKILL CHALLENGES (4e)
BAD in implementation but a better system could work, I guess

SKILLS HAVE TO BE
Not important

NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT
50% for equal opponents

ALIGNMENT IS (mechanical means there are powers/spells that work on what you write on your sheet, fluff means pure role play)
MECHANICAL

SAVE OR DIE (finger of death)
GOOD
 

Lian87

First Post
LEVEL DRAIN (and other quasi-permanent Bad Things, should they happen to PCs)
Bad

LEVEL ADVANCEMENT RATE
Adjustable for the group's preferences.

ABILITY SCORE GENERATION (and various other character attributes)
Arraypoint buy as default, rolling as option. Fixed Hp.

CYCLICAL INITIATIVE (combat turns go in cycles)
Good

EASE OF BATTLEFIELD SPELLCASTING (easy as in 3e-4e, or hard as in 1e-2e)
Easy as 3e-4e.

level adjustement rate and ability score generation will be probably on group preferences, i wrote down other questions, in a week i think i will add some of them to the "official" poll.
I don't know anything about how hard is to cast a spell in 1e and 2e, can you pm me an explaination? Thx.
 

tuxgeo

Adventurer
Hi guys, i'm running a poll of what "we" want from D&D 5e/Next on the official wizard forum: . . .

I'll give it a shot:

LEVEL
1-20 as Pre-Epic; then advancement should really tail off drastically: maybe take 200 years to go from Level 20 to Level 21; 1000 years to go from Level 29 to Level 30. ("Drastically.")

POWERS (4e power mechanic)
Whatever works. I can handle those kinds of abstractions.

VANCIANT SYSTEM (3.x caster mechanic)

[ "Vancian" -- no "t" ]
Will be included. Monte said so. Don't bother listing it in the poll.
Honestly, it's iconic to D&D. Must be included. (Doesn't have to be the only mechanic, by any means.)

CLASS ROLES (defender, controller, striker, leader)
Better to be rather flexible, there. Even 4E has Slayers, which are Striker Fighters.

MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY (you want magic items to be almost necessary? a big part of the game?)
IMPORTANT that magic items not be necessary to create Heroism, thanks.

ABILITIES SCORES (str, con, dex, int, wis, cha)
GOOD. Necessary. Not D&D without them.

A LOT OF CLASSES
GOOD, but each should be something clearly distinct. I want the Sorcerer to be different from the Wizard in feel and flavor, but each should have its own classic style.

A LOT OF RACES
Maybe. What's "a lot" of races? I think 98 races would be too many; but where's the cutoff line?

ABILITY SCORES FOR RACES (you want a particolar race to be better with some classes and bad with others?)
Ability Scores for characters only! (PCs, NPCs)
Now, if you meant Ability Score Adjustments -- why not? It's traditional.

FEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES (weapon focus, weapon expertise)
Love them. Never get good chances to take enough.
However, the mathematics should be improved to the point that the weapon and implement expertise feats are not needed. They're a fix, anyway; they can go away.
Further: if there are Skills, how are PCs going to select improvement in their aptitudes? Skill Focus, or its equivalent, is going to be needed for PCs to try to specialize. (For this, it doesn't have to be a "Feat," necessarily; but there is going to have to be some mechanic for that.)

HIT POINTS
Necessary. Classic. Not D&D without.

HEALING SURGES (part of 4e heal system)
Yeah. Call 'em something else, though. Activity surges? I don't know.

DEFENSES
AS AC. (Not as saves.)

SKILL CHALLENGES (4e)
GOOD. Need to be lots better; but they're a brilliant idea.

SKILLS HAVE TO BE
Nothing. Skills don't even have to be. However, there has to be some mechanic for resolving non-combat activities. If Skills are one of the choices, that's fine.

NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT
50% AS NOW. Yeah, but it isn't. The Optimizers keep trying to make it 60%, 65%, 70%, 75% -- as much as they can get away with. The opportunities to do that should be lessened.

ALIGNMENT IS (mechanical means there are powers/spells that work on what you write on your sheet, fluff means pure role play)
Alignment is General, not specific; and it isn't based on what you write or type or print on your character sheet! It's what you plan on having your character do during play; and if it doesn't turn out that way, then your alignment is the way the character actually tends to behave. NOT what you may have put on the sheet.
It's OK to have spells that interact with alignment; but rituals would be better. Few things should have such overwhelming alignments that their alignment can be detected short of a ritual for it.

SAVE OR DIE (finger of death)
Can I have a second opinion on that?
 

FitzTheRuke

Legend
I think we've seen that ENworld's posters are a wide net.

Here's mine:

LEVEL (as in, range of levels in the game)
1-20 in initial release and Epic Handbook some other time

POWERS (4e power mechanic)
Okay... though not as they were implemented. Need to be heavily edited for clarity and re-imagined in layout & style... a forget it. I'll go with "Bad"

POWER SOURCES (like martial, divine, arcane etc.)
Good as fluff, unnecessary otherwise.

VANCIAN SYSTEM (3.x caster mechanic) (also 0e-1e-2e)
Okay to good if rejiggered. Bad as it was.

CLASS ROLES (defender, controller, striker, leader)
Unnecessary. Fine as descriptor "You've put all your resources into damage - that makes you a Striker!" Bad if pounded into class with no room to build your own as something else. (With a few class exceptions - I don't need to be able to make an Assassin Defender, IYKWIM)

MAGIC ITEMS (you want magic items to be almost necessary? a big part of the game?)
Big part of the game in that they should do amazing cool things. I want them much much rarer than they've been lately and NOT tied directly to advancement

ABILITIES SCORES (str, con, dex, int, wis, cha)
Great

A LOT OF CLASSES
Not in excess of 16. Make builds or subclasses for any new ideas.

A LOT OF RACES
Sure, why not? Keep 'em from getting too weird (not the same as unusual)

ABILITY SCORES FOR RACES (you want a particolar race to be better with some classes and bad with others?)
Yes

ABILITY SCORES FOR CLASSES (e.g. a Cleric receives +2 wisdom)
Yes

FEATS IN GENERAL
Good, but much more interesting, full of training back-story and NO math patches.

HIT POINTS
Good

HEALING SURGES (part of 4e heal system)
Something like it, maybe.

DEFENSES
AC

SKILL CHALLENGES (4e)
Something like it, but not what we got.

SKILLS HAVE TO BE
I'm fine with what we've heard for DDNext

NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT
i60%

ALIGNMENT IS (mechanical means there are powers/spells that work on what you write on your sheet, fluff means pure role play)
Fluff

SAVE OR DIE (finger of death)
Bad

LEVEL DRAIN (and other quasi-permanent Bad Things, should they happen to PCs)
Bad

LEVEL ADVANCEMENT RATE
Adjustable

ABILITY SCORE GENERATION (and various other character attributes)
Array. Point-Buy option, rolling, option. HP fixed as default, roll as option

CYCLICAL INITIATIVE (combat turns go in cycles)
Good, I guess. I can't remember how else you'd do it.

EASE OF BATTLEFIELD SPELLCASTING (easy as in 3e-4e, or hard as in 1e-2e)
I wouldn't mind SOME chance of failure, but not to the extent of "take damage - can't cast" and not as avoidable as "pump up your concentration"
 

drothgery

First Post
LEVEL
1-20 (Epic is fine in an expansion for people that want it, but 99% of campaigns don't last long enough to hit Epic)
POWERS (4e power mechanic)
GOOD (provided not everyone has to use it)
VANCIAN SYSTEM (3.x caster mechanic)
BAD (but it's traditional, so I'm okay with a wizard and a cleric that uses it, as long as there's a reasonable other option that doesn't)
CLASS ROLES (defender, controller, striker, leader)
GOOD - I want there to be a plausible substitute for a cleric, and I'd like to know right away not through trial and error, thanks
MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY (you want magic items to be almost necessary? a big part of the game?)
IMPORTANT - Outside of Dark Sun, low magic item games don't feel like D&D.
ABILITIES SCORES (str, con, dex, int, wis, cha)
GOOD
A LOT OF CLASSES
GOOD - I think classes should do one thing and do it well; wasn't a fan of the Essentials-style 'builds' that dumped multiple combat roles into the same class or even wildly different combat styles (i.e. Hexblade vs PHB1 warlock)
A LOT OF RACES
BAD - there's room for more races than you get out of the box in most editions of AD&D/WotC D&D, but not a lot more
ABILITY SCORES FOR RACES (you want a particolar race to be better with some classes and bad with others?)
YES
FEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES (weapon focus, weapon expertise)
BAD - feats like that are more required than a choice. But fiddly conditional +X bonuses are worse.
HIT POINTS
GOOD - I've never seen an alternate damage mechanic I've really liked.
HEALING SURGES (part of 4e heal system)
GOOD - good concept, bad name, some bugs in implementation
DEFENSES
AS AC
SKILL CHALLENGES (4e)
BAD - which is a shame, because I liked the idea in concept, but the implementation just hasn't worked out
SKILLS HAVE TO BE
IMPORTANT
NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT
MORE LIKE 75% - 50% usually ends up feeling a lot worse than it really is.
ALIGNMENT IS (mechanical means there are powers/spells that work on what you write on your sheet, fluff means pure role play)
FLUFF
SAVE OR DIE (finger of death)
BAD
 

LEVEL
1-36, or add on for unlimited advancement - (most of my play is at 8th level + and fully 25% of it was over 20 (1st) or Epic (3rd)

POWERS (4e power mechanic)
GOOD (As long as it isn't exclusively the only mechanic)

VANCIAN SYSTEM (3.x caster mechanic)
GOOD (as above, as long as it isn't the only spellcasting mechanic)

CLASS ROLES (defender, controller, striker, leader)
BAD

MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY (you want magic items to be almost necessary? a big part of the game?)
IMPORTANT - butnot necessary for math


ABILITIES SCORES (str, con, dex, int, wis, cha)
GOOD

A LOT OF CLASSES
GOOD
A LOT OF RACES
GOOD
The more the merrier for the above.

ABILITY SCORES FOR RACES (you want a particolar race to be better with some classes and bad with others?)
YES

FEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES (weapon focus, weapon expertise)
BAD

HIT POINTS
GOOD


HEALING SURGES (part of 4e heal system)
GOOD

DEFENSES
AS AC


SKILL CHALLENGES (4e)
BAD

SKILLS HAVE TO BE
NOT IMPORTANT

NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT
50% AS NOW

ALIGNMENT IS (mechanical means there are powers/spells that work on what you write on your sheet, fluff means pure role play)
MECHANICAL

SAVE OR DIE (finger of death)
BAD


And the game can be easily modified for single player play.
 
Last edited:

S

Sunseeker

Guest
Hmmm...here's some quick thoughts:
LEVEL
1-30. This depends on the power scaling and how people want to run their games. I prefer 1-30 because simply, I use level as a "plot progression" and would prefer to throw more levels in between plot progression points.

POWERS (4e power mechanic)
GOOD, in fact I would go as far as to say VERY good. I'm a rp guy, numbers aren't my best friend and having to copy down the text of an ability is tedious. Powers went a long way to easing a lot of my troubles.

VANCIANT SYSTEM (3.x caster mechanic)
Honestly not familiar with the system...never was good with casters.

CLASS ROLES (defender, controller, striker, leader)
GOOD, within reason. I think roles are useful as long as most classes retain the ability to take on one of at least two roles. Though, I don't care much for "leader", it's that weird "support" class that so many RPGs have tried and I feel it could be better served by being divided up into the other roles.

MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY (you want magic items to be almost necessary? a big part of the game?)
Kinda 50/50 on this, magic items are fun, but I feel 4e made them too easy to come by. Your +1-5 weapons I don't really consider "magical", more of an extension of "masterwork", but overall I think a character with 3 or more magical items should be a rarity.

ABILITIES SCORES (str, con, dex, int, wis, cha)
GOOD, I don't think D&D would be the same without them.

A LOT OF CLASSES
GOOD, provided as above these classes retain variety. I'd be happy with 10 classes if each of them held 3-4 roles or playstyles to them. Having two fighters come on to the scene and fight in two totally different manners is great. There's no need to call one a "warrior" and the other a "fighter".

A LOT OF RACES
GOOD, VERY VERY VERY VERY GOOD! Though I think there should be more emphasis on your physical appearace being a vanity choice. IMO, beast races should also be options with any benefits being limited to you getting to look the way you want.

ABILITY SCORES FOR RACES (you want a particolar race to be better with some classes and bad with others?)
YES, ability scores should come in a standardized modular fashion. Let players pick their bonuses, and if their character is a typical or a-typical member of a race. The rules should not be deciding that all dwarves are warriors, it's limiting to players and DMs, especially those who like to create their own worlds and stories.
IE: every race gets say a single +2 to one stat, and may have an additional +2 to any stat(even the same one) at a cost of a -2 to one other stat.

FEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES (weapon focus, weapon expertise)
GOOD to a degree.

HIT POINTS
GOOD, tracking health in other manners is just...hard.

HEALING SURGES (part of 4e heal system)
GOOD, but should be more limited. Healing surges should be a player-use-only ability, and healing in general should not be dependent upon how many you do or do not have.

DEFENSES
AS AC: good, provided your AC can benefit from more than a single score.
AS DAMAGE RESISTANCE: good within reason.

SKILL CHALLENGES (4e)
GOOD: every adventure should have more solutions than "KILL THEM ALL!"

SKILLS HAVE TO BE
IMPORTANT within reason. I don't like the laundry list of skills in 3.x, it's just too much to track for many people.

NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT
50% AS NOW, I think 50% is a good medium, both for players and enemies. Allow players to have hit-boosting feats, skills, and so on, but these come at the expense of other things.

ALIGNMENT IS (mechanical means there are powers/spells that work on what you write on your sheet, fluff means pure role play)
MECHANICAL & FLUFF: I should never see such blashpemy in a campaign as a "warlock paladin". Pardon me while I go puke. Alignment is important, but should be flexible. Alignment in 4e was pointless. Alignment in 3.x was far too strict. Let the player play how they want to and work with them to determine how that affects their character.
REMEMBER: Lawful good is not lawful stupid.

SAVE OR DIE (finger of death)
GOOD within reason. Save or die should be rare, and only encountered at incredibly high power levels.
 

I'd vote, except it requires me to go to the WotC forums, and it's scary over there. I might get mugged by someone from the CharOp board.

LEVEL
1-20

POWERS (4e power mechanic)
GOOD as one option among several

VANCIANT SYSTEM (3.x caster mechanic)
GOOD but should have a few alternate options

CLASS ROLES (defender, controller, striker, leader)
BAD -- unnecessary to define

MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY (you want magic items to be almost necessary? a big part of the game?)
NOT IMPORTANT. Magic items should be in the game, but not assumed for a particular level, and certainly not mandatory in large quantities.

ABILITIES SCORES (str, con, dex, int, wis, cha)
GOOD ... but in a different order. Say Str, Int, Wis, Con, Dex, Cha.

A LOT OF CLASSES
GOOD ... at least 10 to start.

A LOT OF RACES
BAD ... only need human, elf, dwarf, halfling, and the half-human twins; gnomes optional

ABILITY SCORES FOR RACES (you want a particolar race to be better with some classes and bad with others?)
YES ... it's iconic

FEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES (weapon focus, weapon expertise)
GOOD ... but only if "always on", and otherwise mechanically balanced.

HIT POINTS
GOOD

HEALING SURGES (part of 4e heal system)
BAD unless optional

DEFENSES
AS AC

SKILL CHALLENGES (4e)
BAD .... yuck.

SKILLS HAVE TO BE
IMPORTANT

NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT
50% AS NOW

ALIGNMENT IS (mechanical means there are powers/spells that work on what you write on your sheet, fluff means pure role play)
FLUFF

SAVE OR DIE (finger of death)
GOOD
 

MECHANICAL & FLUFF: I should never see such blashpemy in a campaign as a "warlock paladin". Pardon me while I go puke.

One of the more intriguing characters I had an idea for (but never played) required a bit of refluffing but was a Paladin Warlock as multiclass.


The character was a Tiefling, and was a paladin by choice, because he wanted to do the ultimate right thing, but had to struggle against his demonic heritage. Warlock multiclass (in fluff) was not something he sought out, but that the player did - the represented stronger ties to the demonic side of him. And he would use them in the thick of the fight, then pray for forgiveness for having used them.

Thought that would be an interesting character to play.

Part of the reason while I like alignment restrictions on classes or theme against multiclassing - it should be flexible - a great backstory or character I'll let in.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top