D&D General 6E But A + Thread

[dave2008]

I certainly grant that it is much more engaging.

I just don't think that forcing every single magic item into this mold is a viable strategy. The well of inspiration is only so deep, and if you hold things to this standard and they start becoming slop, it's going to be way, way worse than just putting out basic, useful, but not particularly engaging options.

I think the more viable path forward is to have some things that...really are just tools made by societies to solve problems, and then also truly Wondrous Items that are things like this. So, maybe a third, or half, or whatever, of the magic items in any given supplement get this kind of treatment, and the remainder are more workhorse things. Things like your bag of holding, your basic +1 gear, your everburning torches, things of that nature. Stuff where it's understandable that any civilization which knows how to make them, genuinely would try to make a sufficient number to meet need. That first third (half, 60%, whatever), however, bring the cool and quirky, the fun and flirty. Ironically, 13th Age has Mr. Mearls beat to the punch--and they're coming out with a 2nd edition sometime in the near-ish future. If you haven't checked out their item quirk concepts, definitely give them a look. I think you'll find something that might be a useful stepping stone between what Mearls is doing--which I think is a bit extreme to ask of every single item--and the often unfortunately dull form a lot of D&D items take.

Similarly, you might check out the Griffon's Saddlebag. Hussar quite enjoys many of its items, which tend to be quirky but not deep like this is. You might say that they're magic by way of whimsy, whereas Mearls' proposal is magic by way of...I suppose "history". Every item in his style needs an extensive and often complication-inducing history.

Perhaps a mix of all of these things--utility, whimsy, and history--is a more effective approach than any one of them alone.

My preference is to have a few interesting magic items than a mass of boring utility items. That is fine for Eberron, but not what I want in my typical D&D game. So I would rather greatly reduce the number of magic items to make this strategy viable. I think the core game should be designed with this idea: you don't need magic items at all. You can them add them in as a supplement for those who want them.

 

[Reynard]

The resting discussions really need to consider the game portion along with the story portion. Is the game supposed to be a simulation? Then, pushing as far as you can go and risking a rest in a dangerous place has its own risks. Thats a rather old school approach. Then, there is the story or narrative approach where does this make dramatic sense? Having dungeons with final fantasy save spots doesnt feel very dramatic even if it fits the game portion of the RPG.

Ideally, you have a dial so folks can populate a dungeon with untold numbers of encounters, but you can also dial it down to 1-3 set piece encounters that make more narrative sense and cut the game fat so to speak. 5E is designed to do both, just doesnt do one or the other particularly well. Thats kinda the story of 5E though, "we thought of everybody, but nobody in particular."

While Session 0 would go a long way toward defining the balance of simulation vs game, I think actual play dials on the front would be a useful tool in a new edition. Maybe the "high sim" setting has built in rules for rest times and potential difficulties, numbers of encounters and chances, etc...

 

[mamba]

If we are going to have a minimum of 4 encounters a day, that is 160 encounters on that trip.

you can just skip over entire weeks in that case, the guideline is for the actual adventure part

 

[Scribe]

For those playing 5.5 does it really feel like an attrition game anyway? 5.0 didnt to me.

 

[Reynard]

For those playing 5.5 does it really feel like an attrition game anyway? 5.0 didnt to me.

I am running 5.5 now and honsetly it works better using big set pieces, overtuning difficulty and letting the PCs nova or near nova. Those times we have done some crawling, the resource management of abilities was just tedious rather than interesting.

 

[Scribe]

I am running 5.5 now and honsetly it works better using big set pieces, overtuning difficulty and letting the PCs nova or near nova. Those times we have done some crawling, the resource management of abilities was just tedious rather than interesting.

That was my expectation, and prior 'late stage 5e' experience. I dont think attrition really is the modern D&D game.

 

[Reynard]

That was my expectation, and prior 'late stage 5e' experience. I dont think attrition really is the modern D&D game.

Another thing that should probably have explicit dials attached to it. Some folks really like that style of play and I certainly thing D&D should be able to accommodate it.

 

[payn]

That was my expectation, and prior 'late stage 5e' experience. I dont think attrition really is the modern D&D game.

I dont think its been the D&D game for 25+ years now. In the sense of tracking every arrow and drop of water to drink simulation anyways. Its moved more to character ability in spells to cast and special moves to make during a full adventuring day. Complicated by short rest type classes mixed in.

 

[dave2008]

I dont think its been the D&D game for 25+ years now. In the sense of tracking every arrow and drop of water to drink simulation anyways. Its moved more to character ability in spells to cast and special moves to make during a full adventuring day. Complicated by short rest type classes mixed in.

While agree with you, some people seem to still want / like that style of play so I am willing to find a way to accommodate that style of play. Personally, we never played that way back when we played AD&D in the 80s. We just handwaved any resources - you just had what you needed. So I guess we were ahead of our time!

 

[Reynard]

I dont think its been the D&D game for 25+ years now. In the sense of tracking every arrow and drop of water to drink simulation anyways. Its moved more to character ability in spells to cast and special moves to make during a full adventuring day. Complicated by short rest type classes mixed in.

You could still do that style of play in 3.x, though. It wasn't as baked in as TSR era D&D, but a lot of the 5E design elements that disrupt that style of play were implemented yet.