D&D General 6E But A + Thread

[AnotherGuy]

For goodness' sake, it's a fantasy game. Why are only those who went to magic colleges allowed to be fantastical?

Because homeopathy magic has been relegated by the elites.

Both 4e and 5e added lots of movement for solo monsters. I find your information quite outdated on this.

I was describing movement in combat in general and given your description of a Tasmanian devil like troll the limited mechanics are informing your perception of combat.

No it can’t. The troll was supposed to be a lumbering giant but acted like a chicken with its head cut off tat had also been hasted.

Again design issue informing your perception of combat. Attacks should be seen as opportunity attacks within those 6 seconds (or a given time frame) not a creature's turn, his turn, her turn..
Fighter rushes into reach range (movement in) and makes an attack and avoids the natural retaliation of the troll who swipes back (movement to the side or away), while the troll is distracted the Wizard fires off some magic missiles, the troll spins around as the missiles strike its back and moves towards the Wizard (the wizard has no movement available so is a sitting duck), at this point a cleric intercedes between the Wizard and troll (movement) and the troll claws out at the cleric who is dodging/parring with his shield (he's run out of movement) so he faces the full brunt of the attack by the troll which he manages to parry but has to make a strength check to remain on his feet, he doesn't and is knocked prone. The troll sees its opportunity but the rogue moves in (movement in) and slices at the troll rear thigh, the troll turns to face this new threat, attempting to grapple the halfling rogue who deftly uses the remains of his movement (cunning action) to move away.
You can expect a troll to react to each successful attack on it until its defeated or runs away. It doesn't have to come down to creature A has only 2 attacks a round.

To give you an example movement should be NECESSARY to help with avoiding attacks particularly attacks by creatures larger than you and making dexterity saves to avoid a Fireball (right now we are making Dex saves for area attacks while our PC can remain stationery - how dumb is that???)

I find the idea of 1 turn per PC absolutely immersion breaking. I mean what if we had 8 or 10 PCs?!

Legendary actions and being able to break your movement up between actions on your turn have solved this for our group (some late 4e monsters did similar things too). So again your information seems quite a bit outdated to me.

Again your description of the troll defending itself sounded static.

I have no idea what you’re talking about out here, I thought we were talking about monsters. If your 5e monsters aren’t moving that is a DM issue as far as I am concerned

Hopefully now you've understood what I'm getting at. It's not just movement by monsters but by anyone on the battlefield.
Currently movement by monsters is being punished by opportunity attacks...and even full spellcasters with a dagger in their hand are so martially adept that they get an AoO against the moving beast. Meh.

 

[Zardnaar]

Yep, we currently cap ability scores at 18 in my game. If you want something above 18 you need a magic item to get you there.

Not a bad idea imho.

 

[MichaelSomething]

If we're just wishing for what we want; then let me tell you what I want...

That every person who plays 6E will control their own destiny. An edition of the truly free! An edition of declaring action, not spewing words; ruled by judgement, not committee!

Where the rules change to suit the individual, not the other way around. Where power and rules are back where they belong: in the hands of the people! Where every player is free to think - to play - for themselves!

Screw all these rule lawyers and cowardly survey makers. Screw this 24-hour Internet spew of trivia and influencer junk! Screw D&D pride! Screw the media (with the exception of Enworld)! Screw ALL OF IT!

Dungeons and Dragons is diseased. Rotten to the core. There's no saving it - we need to pull it out by the roots. Wipe the slate clean. BURN IT DOWN!

And from the ashes, a new edition of Dungeons and Dragons will be born. Evolved, but untamed! The weak tables will be purged and the strongest will thrive - free to play as they see fit. In my ideal 6E, PCs will die and kill for what they BELIEVE! Not for gold. not for exp! Not for what they're told is right. Every PC will be free to fight their own wars!

 

[Lanefan]

I wouldn't mind if they were all add-ons - the BECMI boxed sets are still my favorite. So:

1. Novice Box: 0-2
2. Heroes Box: levels 3-10
3. Legends Box: levels 11-20
4. Mythic Box: levels 21-30
5. Immortals Box: levels 31-60

I'd combine some of those to get three completely separate (yet vaguely compatible) games:

1. The primary game (0-10) - it could go open-ended after 10 for those as don't want to go Legendary, but this would be the core game; the other two would be completely optional
2. Legendary levels (11-20 or 11-25) - for those who want to bounce around planes, fight deities, etc. without all that low-level fussing
3. Mythic levels (everything higher) - this would be D&D as a full-on supers game for those who want to be deities.

 

[Lanefan]

They can, many players just don't want to because they want to put a lot of emphasis on Constitution.

That is a choice IMO and one that has ramifications. Personally, this is why Constitution is usually my 4th highest ability and sometimes my 5th highest ability, because I don't want to suck at ranged when I am playing a strength-based melee combatant.

Depends whether as a melee type you want to focus on offense or defense. For offense you want Strength and Dexterity; for defense you want both Dex and Con. Int-Wis-Cha are nice-to-have extras but not entirely necessary; and dumping Wisdom makes the character fun to play.

And yes, Dexterity is way overpowered as a stat.

 

[Lanefan]

Became I'm Good at Sword. I'm so Good at Sword that i can kill someone from the other side of a room with it without getting close

Sure, if you throw your sword at your target.

And now you've disarmed yourself. Works for me.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

That is not what I said. So it seems we’re stacking misunderstanding on misunderstanding.

It happens. I’m getting in a plane so will need to drop shortly.

Then I sincerely apologize for misunderstanding you.

What did you mean by references to old school play, in the context of what I had said previously? That is, prior to the misunderstanding, the conversation was:

depends on how far you break the rules, but having to adjust encounters even with standard rules is not unheard of, and DCs are not all that hard to adjust either

So we're back to "the rules suck, so I just ignore them and do whatever seems right without any actual rules". Just bloody wonderful. Amazing that people think this is work worthy of paying for.

I mean that is how the game started so a lot of us old-timers have that attitude.

Because, as I was given to understand, you were agreeing to the claim that the rules sucked, by saying that "a lot of [you] old-timers have that attitude." Were you not intending to agree with that?

=====
Separately from the above, I missed this message so I'm replying now.

That is not fair, CTHD goes far outside what anyone can do (that is why they use wires). So if you want to play zero to hero, and some people do, you need to start right at or just above 0 don’t you.

This is what novice levels are for. They allow the "zero" stage to be given real mechanical weight and meaning, and even better, if paired with robust incremental advancement rules, they allow such players to stretch out the lower levels to whatever length they desire, rather than forcing everyone else to play less game.

However, I would also make magic extremely limited at this levels too. Maybe start as rituals only, then a few cantrips per short rest, and the a first level spell.

Good luck. The wizard fans will never permit it. Believe me. I've seen their rabid hate of anything that even slightly weakens their position or raises up anyone else's position. And if you try to spring it on them later, you'll just get the same kind of smear campaign that The Edition That Must Not Be Named got--but emboldened because they know it worked once, so it should work again.

The if you want to play superhero mages and materials start at level 5 or 10 or whatever works.

All this does is functionally force everyone to play through low levels they hate.

Novice levels actually solve the problem in a much more elegant way, while granting fans who like the long, slow, glacial grind to "maybe kind of sort of slightly heroic-ish if you squint" not just support but substantial support.

It is possible to please groups that have opposing desires as long as you can find a way to meet both goals on different playing fields. That's what novice levels and incremental advancements achieve. They separate the two fields, thus allowing each to work.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Because martial arts schools exist.

They do? Where are they? Why do they get no representation?

Because as far as I can tell, no such thing has been represented in D&D--not even 4e--outside of the 3.5e Book of Nine Swords content. That's the one and only place such things have ever been presented. What have I missed?

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Sure, if you throw your sword at your target.

And now you've disarmed yourself. Works for me.

Without throwing it.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

5th Edition is I feel the good enough edition (out of all the editions) where tinkerers can finally make D&D what they want it to be.

I don't need a 5.5e or 6e unless they radically change the game for the better. Changing exhaustion and adding in weapon qualities is not worthy of me spending money for new books.
Many of us already had that in our games...

I don't really understand what that has to do with what I said.

This sounds, to me, like a demand that any new edition actually be well-tested, rigorous, and serious about delivering systems that genuinely and fairly reliably work. Which is something I absolutely want to see.

It doesn't seem to have anything to do with explaining the "old school fan" mentality that bad rules are actually good, because by being bad rules, they encourage players to ditch them and do something else instead.