Steely_Dan
First Post
Ah, yes, and they mentioned a possible separate Priest class (more castery cleric), did they not?
April 3rd, Rule of 3
- Thread starter gyor
- Start date
Ah, yes, and they mentioned a possible separate Priest class (more castery cleric), did they not?
ArmoredSaint
First Post
My reaction is completely the opposite of that of Mr. TwinBahamut. I absolutely love what I'm hearing here.
I love that they're focusing on the core classes and races of the game. I love that they're racheting up the lethality of the game. I love everything I've heard about 5E so far. It's like they know exactly what I want. I have genuine hope that they'll finally recapture that old classic atmosphere of the original game that I feel has been somewhat lacking in recent editions.
My excitement for this upcoming edition continues to grow. I'm elated at this point.
Good stuff! More, please!
I love that they're focusing on the core classes and races of the game. I love that they're racheting up the lethality of the game. I love everything I've heard about 5E so far. It's like they know exactly what I want. I have genuine hope that they'll finally recapture that old classic atmosphere of the original game that I feel has been somewhat lacking in recent editions.
My excitement for this upcoming edition continues to grow. I'm elated at this point.
Good stuff! More, please!
mach1.9pants
Hero
"In the next iteration of the game, though, we’re looking at shifting the focus more to the adventure, as opposed to individual encounters, and that will likely mean that we want to increase the sense of danger, which I think improves the experience during the exploration portions of the game."
This really makes me happy.
This really makes me happy.
MINI-RANT
Mainly posting this because so many people who post on here seem to have a their own definition of what a modular design actually entails:
Modular design - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Those of us who regularly use modular design patterns understand the importance of a tight and simple CORE. You design the CORE around the most basic components that are required to achieve the job at the most minimal level while paying very close attention to the interfaces that allow extensible modules to be integrated on top of the CORE. The CORE should function the same regardless of the modules added on, they are the baseline mechanic that all modules will use at some level. Any add on module can be swapped out for a different module as a drop in replacement and meeting, form fit and function requirements, and should not break the CORE. You modify what the CORE can achieve by adding on modules, but the you don't actually change the CORE.
This CORE that WoTC is talking about is not the core books --it is the basic framework that the core books will use. So many people seem to be assuming that the features they are saying they will support are all going in the CORE. This is most likely NOT the case, and I can understand your fear if that optional stuff was in the CORE, but it is not a robust modular design if all that junk was stuffed into the CORE. The CORE should be as simple as possible, with an elegant and robust interface for adding modules. That is all.
Using the 4/4 in the CORE seems like a solid baseline to me. Saying that 4/4 is all that is going to be in the core books, no, no that is just a plain terrible idea. The CORE will be present in the books, but so will various add on modules to extend the game in a great number of directions to support a particular style of play, including other classes ...oh my!
Things like healing surges or whatever non-magical healing they are talking about should not be in the CORE, although I do believe those modules should be in the core rule books. Understand that the CORE and the core rule books are not synonymous. That seems to be the big disconnect here. The CORE will be contained in those books, but those books should contain all the necessary add on modules to extend the type of play to something that feels like BECMI, 3.5e, 4e, Pathfinder-esque, or some type of hybrid.
/MINI-RANT
Okay... mini-rant complete. Thank you for your time!
Mainly posting this because so many people who post on here seem to have a their own definition of what a modular design actually entails:
Modular design - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Those of us who regularly use modular design patterns understand the importance of a tight and simple CORE. You design the CORE around the most basic components that are required to achieve the job at the most minimal level while paying very close attention to the interfaces that allow extensible modules to be integrated on top of the CORE. The CORE should function the same regardless of the modules added on, they are the baseline mechanic that all modules will use at some level. Any add on module can be swapped out for a different module as a drop in replacement and meeting, form fit and function requirements, and should not break the CORE. You modify what the CORE can achieve by adding on modules, but the you don't actually change the CORE.
This CORE that WoTC is talking about is not the core books --it is the basic framework that the core books will use. So many people seem to be assuming that the features they are saying they will support are all going in the CORE. This is most likely NOT the case, and I can understand your fear if that optional stuff was in the CORE, but it is not a robust modular design if all that junk was stuffed into the CORE. The CORE should be as simple as possible, with an elegant and robust interface for adding modules. That is all.
Using the 4/4 in the CORE seems like a solid baseline to me. Saying that 4/4 is all that is going to be in the core books, no, no that is just a plain terrible idea. The CORE will be present in the books, but so will various add on modules to extend the game in a great number of directions to support a particular style of play, including other classes ...oh my!
Things like healing surges or whatever non-magical healing they are talking about should not be in the CORE, although I do believe those modules should be in the core rule books. Understand that the CORE and the core rule books are not synonymous. That seems to be the big disconnect here. The CORE will be contained in those books, but those books should contain all the necessary add on modules to extend the type of play to something that feels like BECMI, 3.5e, 4e, Pathfinder-esque, or some type of hybrid.
/MINI-RANT
Okay... mini-rant complete. Thank you for your time!
Last edited:
![:]](http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/devious.png "Devious :]")
mach1.9pants
Hero
Well the weird thing is it was always going to be in. Pretty much EVERYTHING is going to be in if they are really trying to 'unite the editions'Self-healing and non-magical healing are in? Awesome.
It's going to be fun to see who will be all dog in a manger about this piece of news.
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
Also Assassins!
Can't XP ya, but I'm in perfect agreement. I don't think starting with the core four is quite the disaster some other posters seem to think it might be.
Depends on how they work it. For me, surges aren't great because they weaken they split HP into two halves that only ever partially meet. It's the whole "I'm down to 2 hp, I'm almost dead!....but only in combat. Once we're out of combat, I'm down 4 surges, which sucks, but I've got at least 2 more where that came from. Guess my mortal wound was really more of a bad sprain?"
That disjunction musses too much with my suspension of disbelief for me to think of it as Fun Times.
OTOH, though, you can just translate surges into raw HP pretty easily, and then you get that slow decrease of health gameplay aspect right back.
Dasuul said:
Can't XP ya, but I'm in perfect agreement. I don't think starting with the core four is quite the disaster some other posters seem to think it might be.
FireLance said:
Depends on how they work it. For me, surges aren't great because they weaken they split HP into two halves that only ever partially meet. It's the whole "I'm down to 2 hp, I'm almost dead!....but only in combat. Once we're out of combat, I'm down 4 surges, which sucks, but I've got at least 2 more where that came from. Guess my mortal wound was really more of a bad sprain?"
That disjunction musses too much with my suspension of disbelief for me to think of it as Fun Times.
OTOH, though, you can just translate surges into raw HP pretty easily, and then you get that slow decrease of health gameplay aspect right back.
FireLance
Legend
I'm pretty sure that they won't be in the core, although they might be in the core books as an optional module. However, I'm fairly sure that even the suggestion that non-magical healing and self-healing will exist as an option in 5e, and could be used by DMs and players who want them, will be enough to send some posters into frothing heights of rage. Now, all I need is some popcorn.
EDIT: Just to add, I see "I'm down to 2 hp, I'm almost dead!" as "I'm really tired, I won't be able to dodge the next solid hit, and it will kill me" and "I'm down 4 surges, which sucks, but I've got at least 2 more where that came from" as "I'm really pushing myself, now. I've got a bit more in me, but not much more". The more usual criticism of non-magical healing is the idea that you could be dying from a presumably serious injury and then be back on your feet again after a short rest, but even that can be narrated as "I nearly died! And even though I've been bandaged up, it still hurts like the baatezu. But I can't stop now. They're all depending on me. I've got got keep going." I know it doesn't work for all people, but it certainly does work for some. (And these will be ones who will use it in 5e, anyway.)
Last edited:
Crazy Jerome
First Post
You think that's bad? Wait until someone realizes that their 5th level "commoner tier" guy won't be able to do some of the things that someone else's 1st level "heroic tier" guy can do in another campaign. I think that is underlying a certain amount of the pushback we see already.
Mattachine
Adventurer
Wowzers.
Considering some of the negative commentary by Mearls and Monte about 4e, I am surprised to find that so many things from 4e might be part of 5e.
Considering some of the negative commentary by Mearls and Monte about 4e, I am surprised to find that so many things from 4e might be part of 5e.
Similar Threads
