D&D General 6E But A + Thread

[dave2008]

I don't see why people are so quick to want to kill off ability scores for just modifiers. Pathfinder 2e revised did that and all of a sudden realized improving scores became harder to track (because a +1 to strength might move you from 14 to 15, but if you only have the mods, it moves you from +2 to +3, equivalent of a two point jump). And they had to kludge together a system to keep Backwards Compatibly .

Scores are like alignment or saving throws: yeah there are probably better ways to do it but getting rid of them entirely removes a key elements of D&D's identity.

I am not sure either. I like ability scores, but I do wish they were more fleshed out.

 

[TiQuinn]

I don't see why people are so quick to want to kill off ability scores for just modifiers. Pathfinder 2e revised did that and all of a sudden realized improving scores became harder to track (because a +1 to strength might move you from 14 to 15, but if you only have the mods, it moves you from +2 to +3, equivalent of a two point jump). And they had to kludge together a system to keep Backwards Compatibly .

Scores are like alignment or saving throws: yeah there are probably better ways to do it but getting rid of them entirely removes a key elements of D&D's identity.

I think on the one hand it makes for a simpler game at character creation and creates less noise on the character sheet. But it’s also much easier for a new game than a new edition of a game that wants to concern itself with backwards compatibility.

My personal hot take is that if you’re doing a new edition, backwards compatibility is a fig leaf anyways, and not really a factor - make the changes and fans can deal.

 

[Aldarc]

I don't see why people are so quick to want to kill off ability scores for just modifiers. Pathfinder 2e revised did that and all of a sudden realized improving scores became harder to track (because a +1 to strength might move you from 14 to 15, but if you only have the mods, it moves you from +2 to +3, equivalent of a two point jump). And they had to kludge together a system to keep Backwards Compatibly .

Scores are like alignment or saving throws: yeah there are probably better ways to do it but getting rid of them entirely removes a key elements of D&D's identity.

Didn't realize backwards compatibility was a concern for this hypothetical 6e?

I'm not against taking ideas from other games and adding them (backgrounds in 5e being a good example). I do think there is a lot of people who just want Shadowdark reprinted wholesale with D&D branding rather than saying "what good ideas could be polished and brought to 6e?"

Are there people talking about Shadowdark? Most of the "Shadow" discussion that I saw the past few pages was Schwalb's Shadow of the Demon Lord/Weird Wizard. I don't necessarily think that those ideas are that radical for D&D since Schwalb created SotDL using the possible system ideas he had for 5e D&D when he was a designer at WotC.

 

[mamba]

I do think there is a lot of people who just want Shadowdark reprinted wholesale with D&D branding rather than saying "what good ideas could be polished and brought to 6e?"

not a single post in this thread came even remotely close to suggesting that, so I am not sure what you are basing this on

 

[dave2008]

Are there people talking about Shadowdark? Most of the "Shadow" discussion that I saw the past few pages was Schwalb's Shadow of the Demon Lord/Weird Wizard. I don't necessarily think that those ideas are that radical for D&D since Schwalb created SotDL using the possible system ideas he had for 5e D&D when he was a designer at WotC.

Yes, people have talked about Shadowdark both inside and outside this thread. However, that was just an example of the philosophy of take X game and make it D&D

 

[dave2008]

not a single post in this thread came even remotely close to suggesting that, so I am not sure what you are basing this on

I disagree, I have definitely seen sentiment like that. I can't be 100% sure it was this thread as I jump around a lot, but I think it has been expressed here. I have specifically seen the idea applied to Shadow of the Weird Wizard / Demon Lord in this very thread. To be clear I believe it is the philosophy of taking X game and making it D&D, not Shadowdark specifically, that I believe @Remathilis is talking about.

 

[Remathilis]

Didn't realize backwards compatibility was a concern for this hypothetical 6e?.

In a broad sense, yes.

Truth be told, I'm tired of new editions vaguely resembling the one before. 2e to 3e was a necessary break, but 3 to 4 to 5 has felt like whiplash. I want 6e to be a much more edited version of 5e which isn't afraid to make the major changes 2024 hinted at before backtracking. 5e has solid bones. 6e should keep them and focus on those changes that 2024 backed off of like spell lists or standardized subclasses.

 

[Remathilis]

I disagree, I have definitely seen sentiment like that. I can't be 100% sure it was this thread as I jump around a lot, but I think it has been expressed here. I have specifically seen the idea applied to Shadow of the Weird Wizard / Demon Lord in this very thread. To be clear I believe it is the philosophy of taking X game and making it D&D, not Shadowdark specifically, that I believe @Remathilis is talking about.

Yes, exactly. (And forgive me for mixing up my Shadow games. Find another words guys!)

 

[mamba]

disagree, I have definitely seen sentiment like that. I can't be 100% sure it was this thread as I jump around a lot, but I think it has been expressed here. I have specifically seen the idea applied to Shadow of the Weird Wizard / Demon Lord in this very thread.

maybe by people who have me blocked…

As to SotWW, I definitely think there are ideas in there that are worth a look, and definitely would take from the class design idea with the three tiers (choose a novice class at first level, expert at 3rd and master at 7th - with the game compressing D&D’s 20 levels into 10). To me that is a much better approach than what 5e currently has, yet familiar enough to easily slot in.

That is not the same as just changing the cover and calling it 6e however. It’s one inspiration among many, and it’s not like D&D hasn’t taken on outside influences and ideas in the past either

 

[CreamCloud0]

I do not know what you mean by this.

this may not be what they intended with the metaphor but i took it to mean 'yes, these spells exist, yes, their existence should definitely be acknowledged and accounted for, but just because they exist that doesn't mean their existence is definitively beneficial or should be gleefully embraced and encouraged'