Any news out of PAX East?

[kevtar]

Campaign settings as modules that can alter core rules.

I like the sound of that. I hope there are more setting offered. Everything from Athas to Krynn.

Grids and minis optional in the core.

That's good. I've found that after playing "theater of the mind" for years and then moving to minis, I prefer minis, but it's good an option remains for everyone.

Will not let the wizard overpower martial classes.

Lol, ok. Fingers crossed. Just don't nerf wizards either

Perception will be an ability check.
Focus on non-combat roles and abilities returning.
Giving more power back to the DM.

Sounds good.

Unusual classes may be better as option for core classes.

I don't know what this means, but it doesn't feel good, lol. Core classes should be at least as good as other "unusual" classes.

Bringing back step-by-step adventure creation instructions.

Good

Focus on shorter games.

This is what I like the most so far, if it plays out like this:

Things are streamlined, but fulfilling. You can have a quick game and still feel immersed in play. However, if you want to extend things, it should be able to translate to an in-depth experience that doesn't drag or feel stretched. At this point in my life, I would LOVE to be able to sit down for 5,6 or 8 hours and just play, play, play... but I can't. I have to take my gaming when I can, and that means that it might be an hour here, and two hours there. I'm hoping 5e will accommodate that without limiting the options for people who prefer (and can arrange) longer sessions.

 

[BryonD]

The following is an honest question that I ask completely without irony: Have you played much 4th Edition?

If you are saying 4E doesn't handle short adventures, I'll simply defer to your assessment.

I'll still stand by my opinion based on the remaining "decades".
If worth further conversation, please start a thread so we don't muddy the "news" thread.

 

[techno]

Originally Posted by techno:
Unusual classes may be better as option for core classes.

I believe this meant that certain "unusual classes," such as avenger or assassin, might be better as options for one of the standard classes than as a completely separate class.

 

[Thraug]

Originally Posted by techno:
Unusual classes may be better as option for core classes.

I believe this meant that certain "unusual classes," such as avenger or assassin, might be better as options for one of the standard classes than as a completely separate class.

At DDXP they expounded on this a bit. They stated "rarer" classes such as Assassin, Ardent, etc could be themes or prestige class options.

 

[gyor]

Actually it was just the avenger as theme that was mentioned as a for example at DDXP. Indictations are that the assassin with be a core class, hence being refered to as rare class and not a theme.

 

[Dungeonosophy]

Perception will be an ability check.

Does this mean:

A) The various Spot/Listen checks will be a Wisdom ability check, OR
B) Perception will be an Ability Score, renaming Wisdom?

 

[Szatany]

Does this mean:

A) The various Spot/Listen checks will be a Wisdom ablity check, OR
B) Perception will be an Ablity Score, renaming Wisdom?

99% chance that A) is the correct answer.

 

[MortalPlague]

Campaign settings as modules that can alter core rules.
Grids and minis optional in the core.
Will not let the wizard overpower martial classes.
About 20% done and on 4th iteration of DND Next.
Perception will be an ability check.
Focus on non-combat roles and abilities returning.
Giving more power back to the DM.
Unusual classes may be better as option for core classes.
Bringing back step-by-step adventure creation instructions.
Focus on shorter games.
Skill challenges not in core.

I like all of these.

No info on public playtest date.

I like this less.

 

[AeroDm]

Does this mean:

A) The various Spot/Listen checks will be a Wisdom ability check, OR
B) Perception will be an Ability Score, renaming Wisdom?

I can't imagine they'd rename any of the abilities. If they are willing to reskin abilities, then they might as well be more aggressive and really decide if all six are actually necessary. I think they'd find the answer to be no and that would rock WAY too many boats.

 

[Tovec]

Personally the "focus on shorter games" worries me. Does it mean that they will be working more intently on shorter games or does it mean that shorter games will get the line share of attention?

What do they mean by shorter games in the first place, do they mean short sessions or short campaigns? Both worry me. Emphasis on short campaigns is really not the direction I would like them to go if only because a simple set of sessions or adventures has been fairly easy to string together, but making a fully envisioned campaign is something that has eluded me after years of DMing. Next, if they mean short sessions this bothers me too, as most of our games are around 6-8 hours long, not 1-3 as seem to be discussed more and more by WotC lately.


As for everything else techno compiled (please somebody XP him for me) I find it to be VERY subjective. I think most of those things, the ones we haven't heard yet, are going to depend largely on the system as a whole at the time of release. A lot of them are relative or none too descriptive. Such as "Will not let the wizard overpower martial classes." and "About 20% done and on 4th iteration of DND Next." Doesn't really tell us anything about anything.


That's all i have to say about that.
--Forrest Gump