D&D General 6E But A + Thread

[Parmandur]

Is inspiration still in 5.24E?

Yes,now called heroic inspiration, tweaked a bit but not much different. Human's thing as a Species is getting Heroic Inspiration after every Long Rest to start, plus a Feat and a bonus Skill.

 

[Reynard]

Good definition and fits with my understanding.

I can't speak for others, but I never said D&D is inherently unfit for metacurrency. It is just something I don't want in D&D. I am fine with that been more important in other game systems.

I was responding to @Ruin Explorer

 

[dave2008]

• A more consistent artstyle with less focus on certain non-gaming/RL aspects, maybe even only one artist.

For something as big as D&D that is next to impossible unless you make it much smaller. The corebooks are 1,152 pages with about a 1/1 art to page ratio. I don't know how quickly these artist works (+ revision process), but your likely looking at 2+ years of work.

 

[dave2008]

I was responding to @Ruin Explorer

OK, you quoted me so I assumed you were talking about me!

 

[Cergorach]

For something as big as D&D that is next to impossible unless you make it much smaller. The corebooks are 1,152 pages with about a 1/1 art to page ratio. I don't know how quickly these artist works (+ revision process), but your likely looking at 2+ years of work.

So they start in 7 years, right on time for the next edition...

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think the best definition of metacurency is a pretty simple one: it is a resource that the PLAYER uses (not the character) to change or influence the outcome of mechanical results (usually dice rolls) and potentially narrative elements. So a monk's ki or a sorcerer's metamagic points are not metacurrency because they are explicitly used by the character in the fiction. Bennies from Savage Worlds are, because they are used by the player for various purposes (usually helping soak damage or increasing a die roll). Fate Points also do those things but also have a more direct narrative result based on the particulars of that game. Metacurrencies vary in complexity, applicability and availability, but they all share the common theme of empowering the player to argue with the dice and/or GM with a concrete mechanical system for doing so.

I understand that some folks don't want that in D&D for whatever reason, but I reject the notion that D&D is somehow inherently unfit for the use of metacurrency (especially since the current version has been embracing metacurrency for over a decade).

How has 5e embraced metacurrency for over a decade? BIFTs have not exactly taken the game by storm from what I can see.

 

[MichaelSomething]

7) If the game has three pillars, support all three pillars. Currently 5E flatly does not. It supports combat, and vaguely acknowledges the other two exist, but barely lifts a finger towards them. Rethink everything in the game around this. People who like this specific kind of game will have more fun if combat, exploration and social really are things with some actual rules. All classes should have abilities for all three. All classes, no exceptions, no reliable on subclasses, etc.

But exploration and social stuff shouldn't require rule systems! The DM and players are suppose to improv and negotiate their way through it! And having class abilities for it will just encourage people to look at their character sheets to solve problems. They're suppose to use their imaginations instead!

 

[ECMO3]

I like 5E and I like the 2014 version better than the 2024 version TBH. I don't think 2024 fixed anything and actually made the system worse

For 6E, here are things I would like to see:

1. Less complexity. Especially for non-casters and non-magical combat.

2. Less focus on PC balance. I want fewer silly mechanics in there to balance things, focus on the fiction and let the power disparity develop naturally. There will be weak choices and strong choices, that is ok, embrace it instead of trying to fix it. Maybe point it out in the PHB so noobs know which choices are strong and which are weak.

3. More access to spells. I would like to see wider spell access to all characters and less barriers. In particular we need to eliminate "fenced" spells that it is very hard to get off list (ex Armor of Agathys, Dissonant Whispers, Divine Smite). These need to be more accessible to a wider array of PCs in an easier fashion. Also, it is a magical world so any character can use any scroll with no chance of failure.

4. More open multiclassing: I would also like to see fewer barriers to multiclassing, similar to Baldur's Gate; make it wide open with no restrictions. Players who can figure out how to exploit multiclass combos should be rewarded for that.

5. Fewer weapons and fewer armor choices: There should be about 20 weapons and 3 armor choices (light, medium, heavy) and everything should be rolled into that. For example "sword" should include Longswords, Shorstwords, Scimitars and Rapiers, "Pole Arm" should include Glaives, Halberds, Pikes, Lances and Quarterstaffs.

6. One bonus for saving throws: There should only be one number for a saving throw, just like an attack roll. Have a DC and roll it. For your modifier you can combine all 6 of your bonuses and penalties into one modifier and then add a proficiency bonus. No picking and choosing between 6 different saves.

7. Less art and more substance in the art that is there: The art that is in the rulebooks should directly contribute to content, not be random drawings of "Mexican Orcs" and there should be a lot less of it. WOTC can sell artbooks with cover-to-cover art, but rulebooks should be primarily about the rules.

 

[Zardnaar]

For my own self, and I know many will find so much to criticize about this:

4e was a great structure presented badly. 5e actively tried to avoid anything that smelled like 4e, to the point of repeatedly reinventing the wheel, sometimes completely unnecessarily (e.g., 4e crits are just flat simpler and easier than 5e crits.) So, bring back more of the engine of 4e, but disguise it. D&D: Mojave, as I've previously phrased it.

Vancian casting needs to be reworked. The old 4e ritual system was a good try, but probably needs to be tweaked further. Perhaps Wizards get bonus "utility" slots or something? I dunno. Something to signpost this better. But variable-encounters-per-day vs fixed-powerful-resources-per-day still isn't working, and something has to be done. The kludge of Legendary Resistance and the like is a very simple proof that Vancian casting is simply too powerful as it is.

Monster design has already drifted in a 4e-like direction with 5.5e, and I expect it to drift further.

Some real thought needs to go into non-combat stuff. Not necessarily "mechanics" per se, but...something. Because as it stands, as far as rules go, anything that isn't combat practically doesn't exist unless the GM does all of the heavy lifting, and that's not tenable as a long-term design element.

Terrain needs to be made more important, and ideally, forced movement as well. That's one of the great things about 4e, and 5e pretty much totally erased it, which encourages really really really dull combat environments.

Simplicity vs complexity needs to be distributed better amongst the class archetypes.

Entirely opposed to what several posters have said, I think 6e needs several more classes. Up to 12 more than 5e has. Replacing those with "talent trees" is absolutely not going to achieve the results folks would like to see, and will instead just make things harder to understand and even more build-focused than they want to see, especially because balancing talent tree type things is significantly harder than balancing separate (sub)classes that can't easily mix.

Finally...for God's sake, give us well-made Novice Levels and incremental advancement rules. This is genuinely the single greatest step that could be taken toward making a D&D that is actually a "generic" system that serves everyone's interests. I am not joking, it is legit actually something that serves nearly everyone. It serves the hardcore simulationists, because such usage helps take the edge off the awkwardness of discrete levels, and makes characters feel more like they "build up to" their increases in power. It helps the old-school/high-difficulty fans, who want to spool things out and start extremely minimalist. And it helps the gamists of all stripes, because it means 1st level can be actually competent, rather than a training-wheels session, and they can elect to choose what advancement rate best suits them. Literally everyone wins, except the designers needing to do the work to make it happen, I guess.

I think they need to pick a direction. Simple or complex.

Complex is talent trees or Something like warlock.

Simplest more Shadowdark.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

You point them to the rule book that demonstrates that magic items are an expected component of the game design?

Did it actually say that in those books?

Because I was given to understand that it never actually said that. It implied it; one could easily infer it; but it was never, ever, actually said.

And not actually saying it is a huge oversight. Not saying things is precisely what causes huge issues.

I mean, 5.0 explicitly tells people to use bare minimum 5 encounters a day, and typically ranging between 5 and 8...and that particular pattern got so routinely ignored, it was one of the biggest factors behind various design changes in 5.5e.

Things left to implication that are actually important to the intended experience get left out. Often to the detriment of the experience, with folks not knowing why.