D&D 5E (2024) CoDzilla? Yeah Na Its CoDGFaW.

[CreamCloud0]

With 12 Disciplines, each with at least 6 Deeds to pick from (bare minimum 4 "basic" and two "advanced"), you're talking a bare minimum of 12 pages, and those would be small Deeds IMO, six to a page is squeezing tight. That would technically fall short of your goal (9+12=21, not 25), but I feel reasonably confident that this would meet the need.

As for the fiddly nature, even just having skill points at all is pretty fiddly already. 6e, at least IMO, has a very low but nonzero chance of having more fine-grained skills than 5e or 4e did, but it's not going to be all the way back to 3e/PF1e skill points. More like degrees of scaling. 4e had three states (untrained +0/some actions locked, trained +5/all uses unlocked, focused +8/no further unlocks), and 5e has about three and a half (non-proficiency, the rare "half" proficiency, proficiency, expertise). I could see codifying a fourth stage, call it Mastery, which only some classes get. But that's neither here nor there.

when i say 'skill points' it's not in reference to the skill system, they're more point buy points for the various martial abilities.

 

[Lanefan]

However, having played in more than one horrendously badly-balanced game (primarily 5e, but also 3.x/PF1e), the average player very, very much cares about not being overshadowed, nor being the one overshadowing others. Because, guess what? THE RULES AND MATH AFFECT THE SOCIAL. Who'd'a thunk it? It's almost like rules actually DO matter and actually DO affect player behavior and actually DO make a very major difference in how players choose to behave, how they treat each other, how they view questionable actions, etc., etc.

The average hardcore player, maybe, who has a good grasp of game mechanics.

The average average player probably doesn't really notice game-mechanical overshadowing unless it's really extreme, because they just don't know the game mechanics well enough. What those players will notice much more quickly, however, is if-when they're being overshadowed socially by someone louder or more assertive at the table; and game design can't do a whole lot about that.

 

[saviirkad]

The average player plays with average players, on average. So at the average table, over-shadowing mechanically is unlikely.

On average.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

The average player plays with average players, on average. So at the average table, over-shadowing mechanically is unlikely.

On average.

If the system is well-built, yes.

This assumption is rarely borne out.

 

[Zardnaar]

If the system is well-built, yes.

This assumption is rarely borne out.

Youre extrapolating to much/hyperbole.

Even your favorite editions a hot mess lol. 70 odd pages of errata and if you reread the 4E phb its very very limited.

5.5 phb is best one ever in terms of content available. Also the biggest one ever tbf.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Youre extrapolating to much/hyperbole.

Even your favorite editions a hot mess lol. 70 odd pages of errata and if you reread the 4E phb its very very limited.

5.5 phb is best one ever in terms of content available. Also the biggest one ever tbf.

If 4e is a "hot mess", then what hyperbole do you need to resort to to even speak of 3e?

 

[W'rkncacnter]

If 4e is a "hot mess", then what hyperbole do you need to resort to to even speak of 3e?

"It's sort of like reading an eldritch tome except you have to probe the thing for the horror, and once you do it slithers out of the book into your skin and hijacks your brain like some kind of rules obsessed husk.

Take off your skin."

 

[saviirkad]

If the system is well-built, yes.

This assumption is rarely borne out.

Regardless if it is well-built or simply adequately built, it holds out. You get an average game where the players do not build with a mind toward overshadowing, and do not notice when it has happened by outlier incidence.

Being overshadowed is a subjective feeling. It only happens when it is felt to be the case, whether or not there are objective numbers to uphold it. That's not to belittle when it happens, that does matter and should be something a table works to resolve.

When it takes an extreme to be noticeable, it's an outlier experience at the average table. On average, what would be noticeable to us won't be for them. In the system as it is designed now, this is true. I'm not claiming the system is well-built, just adequately to this extent.

 

[Zardnaar]

If 4e is a "hot mess", then what hyperbole do you need to resort to to even speak of 3e?

3.5 was more complete at launch. Its big problems were mostly theoretical at higher levels.

Im also not that into 3.5 as its to complicated to run. Kinda like 4E.

Both are borked in different ways. Out of print in 4 and 5 years.

 

[TerraDave]

Theres no expectation of encounters per day or how strong they are.

There is guidelines for low/medium/high encounters.

3.0 dropped the ball there and 3.5 4E, 5.0 went with that assumption.

CR is a vestige but the new guidelines actually kind of work, especially with 2024 monsters.

And as long you contain game breaking emanations.