D&D General 6E But A + Thread

[Scribe]

No? I mean, yes, OK, but there's also puzzles, social challenges, environmental hazards, exploration hazards, and the like. You do those in-game, not during downtime.

Yeah it can be that way, but if those give XP, then it only makes sense that killing stuff would also give XP.

 

[Faolyn]

I am satisfied with them, but if I am making my wish list we just get rid of the distinctions between Race and Class and go back to Races being classes like in Basic.

So you can be a Human Fighter or a Human Wizard or an Elf that does some of both.

I'd only want that if the classes were like Human Fighter, Human Wizard, Elf Skirmisher, Elf Woodmage... There's no reason why all elves have to be the same if all humans don't have to be. If that means the core book has like 50 classes in it, that's fine. A game like this would either not give each class a ton of abilities or do something like what Cypher system has been doing--lots of abilities by only their name, and the list of abilities with their actual descriptions later on in their own chapter.

As in, At 1st Level, the Elf Skirmisher gets their choice of two of Archery (pg 60), Twin Daggers (pg 63), and Spearman (pg 70). They also get Woodland Scouting (pg 67). At 3rd level, they get...

 

[Micah Sweet]

D&D has always been very bad at giving XP for non-combat challenges. I even just checked 5.24, where it says you get the same amount of XP for non-combat challenges as you would for combat, but the entirely of the rules to do it is "judge the difficulty for yourself based on the XP budget."

But anyway, I don't need to get XP rewards from other stuff; I do milestone/story progression.

I have no issue with people preferring milestone leveling. I just don't agree with the reasoning that you do it because you don't want xp for killing things, because that issue can be IMO pretty easily bypassed.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yeah it can be that way, but if those give XP, then it only makes sense that killing stuff would also give XP.

Or if you prefer "overcoming combat challenges".

 

[Micah Sweet]

I'd only want that if the classes were like Human Fighter, Human Wizard, Elf Skirmisher, Elf Woodmage... There's no reason why all elves have to be the same if all humans don't have to be. If that means the core book has like 50 classes in it, that's fine. A game like this would either not give each class a ton of abilities or do something like what Cypher system has been doing--lots of abilities by only their name, and the list of abilities with their actual descriptions later on in their own chapter.

As in, At 1st Level, the Elf Skirmisher gets their choice of two of Archery (pg 60), Twin Daggers (pg 63), and Spearman (pg 70). They also get Woodland Scouting (pg 67). At 3rd level, they get...

That's exactly the kind of race as class I favor.

 

[Remathilis]

Thinking back on rolling stats in 6E. I think for me to actually buck the trend of array and/or point buy id need some substantial system changes. A few I can think of;

• Remove initiative and AC increases from Dex
• Remove bonuses to hit and damage from stats and place them into class and/or level progression
• Remove perception from Wis

To facilitate varying stats from rolling id also stop SAD design (which the above changes would help with) and move into MAD. Give each class more options to rely on a different spread. For example; Wizard might penetrate defenses casting spells with a high str, know more spells with high Wis, but could keep more going at once with higher Con. Each stat would have its own pros and cons associated with doing things within the class (but not increasing effectiveness which has shifted to leveling chassis instead).

Saves for each stat works fine, but a reexamination and balancing of the spells is due. There shouldnt be any safe dump stats, nor should spells focus and exploit any above the others.

Just spitballing here.

One of the things I was most disappointed about in 5.24 was the move back to Ability score bonus per day class features. Imho, class needs to be decoupled from ability scores so as to not encourage "race to 20" in your primary score.

I think Basic did this best; outside of xp bonus for higher score (13-15 +5%, 16+ +10%) no class got a boost based on their primary score. Fighters got a +1 to +3 to hit and damage, but so did everyone else. Wizards and clerics spells were not affected by Int/Wis (not number known, spell level, slots or saving throws) and thieves got no bonus to skills for high Dex. The net effect was that it actually wasn't bad to have A 13 Int wizard or a even 12 Dex Thief. All you were out was slightly faster XP gain.

Ideally, I'd like to see D&D return to something like that where the gap between a 13 Intelligence wizard and an 18 Intelligence wizard is miniscule. Anything that helps break the "must have a 20 ASAP" is good in my book

 

[Aldarc]

I'd say keep the damage-dealing cantrips, even letting them scale with level, but anything higher that directly deals damage can either be removed or limited to use with magic items. So you can keep wall of fire, but not fireball.

The cantrips are because it works well in a lot fantasy fiction for casters to be able to do at least minor amounts of damage ("Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?"), and because going pew pew is fun. Plus, not everyone wants to be relegated to mere support; some people just want to see the targets burn.

I think it's fine if there is a "pew pew" caster, but the Wizard is way too greedy. If I could, I would probably make the Sorcerer into an Elementalist. If you want a "pew pew" caster, then you pick the Elementalist/Sorcerer. If you want be the clever mage with clever use of utility spells, counterspells, etc. then you pick a Wizard. But a lot of the Wizard would be stripped out, including fireball. "I get most of the spells" is not an archetype.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think it's fine if there is a "pew pew" caster, but the Wizard is way too greedy. If I could, I would probably make the Sorcerer into an Elementalist. If you want a "pew pew" caster, then you pick the Elementalist/Sorcerer. If you want be the clever mage with clever use of utility spells, counterspells, etc. then you pick a Wizard. But a lot of the Wizard would be stripped out, including fireball. "I get most of the spells" is not an archetype.

I could get behind attack cantrips if they were limited to a specific caster class.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

The classic method works much better when you don't decide what class you're playing before you make the PC. That often what I do. I find it more exciting and more realistic personally.

While that may be true, for me that is simply not feasible. The instant I think about character creation, I am already selecting class or race options in my mind. There literally isn't any moment where I am thinking "you know, a character would be cool" without having a concept I want to explore.

 

[payn]

One of the things I was most disappointed about in 5.24 was the move back to Ability score bonus per day class features. Imho, class needs to be decoupled from ability scores so as to not encourage "race to 20" in your primary score.

I think Basic did this best; outside of xp bonus for higher score (13-15 +5%, 16+ +10%) no class got a boost based on their primary score. Fighters got a +1 to +3 to hit and damage, but so did everyone else. Wizards and clerics spells were not affected by Int/Wis (not number known, spell level, slots or saving throws) and thieves got no bonus to skills for high Dex. The net effect was that it actually wasn't bad to have A 13 Int wizard or a even 12 Dex Thief. All you were out was slightly faster XP gain.

Ideally, I'd like to see D&D return to something like that where the gap between a 13 Intelligence wizard and an 18 Intelligence wizard is miniscule. Anything that helps break the "must have a 20 ASAP" is good in my book

Yeap, thats sort of what im after. Different stats give different outcomes. You can be a wizard with any stat allocation, you just might function differently. Definitely get away from primary/secondary pump and dump routine. It makes ASI choices more interesting too since you might discover you want a little more X instead of Y for your PC. Now, you pretty much know where they are going from 1-20.