not sure why I would be concerned about that. There is a reason why WotC asks us whether we like their changes, and not to come up with our own changesSo, my first thought was jokingly saying "democracy is overrated", but…
Isn't anyone else concerned that a voting based system will possibly be awful?
I think a project like this would need a strong, opinionated leader with game design chops instead of letting the popular vote carry system design. Anything else just feels like populist decision making.
I'd rather have a Teeth class than a Rowg class.My votes for core classes:
PhighterClerriqRowgDawizard
So, like, what exactly do you not want versus what do you want? Because "set on modern design" isn't a useful phrase.I mean while we are at it I would love to cut back the HP inflation that WotC editions have had
and while we are at it maybe we can make a setting that is set on modern designs instead of rehashing ideas form 70's 80's 90's and early 00's
wait while we are at it we should....
On the SJ Games forums, they used to (and may still do; haven't been there in forever) do "vote up a X" threads and they were usually pretty interesting. They were more theorycrafting than anything, but it's likely that a community-created 5e clone would also be more theorycrafting than actual result.So, my first thought was jokingly saying "democracy is overrated", but…
Isn't anyone else concerned that a voting based system will possibly be awful?
I think a project like this would need a strong, opinionated leader with game design chops instead of letting the popular vote carry system design. Anything else just feels like populist decision making.
In this case, the "while were at it" changes help distance the clone more clearly from the original. There is benefit.IME, there are always "while we're at..." changes in a lot of retroclones. These are often retroclones designed by one or maybe to designers. But in a committee? How many "while we're at" changes would there be and where? It really would be pure...
Yeah. As I am starting to familiarize myself with P2 (Pathfinder 2), I am seeing the "bounded accuracy" of 5e differently.Particularly any decision that didn't reflect the launch state of 3rd edition (no typo).
The cool thing about this approach is, variants are welcome.Ok, first vote:
Warlord: archetype or full-class?
I'll post the second vote in 2-3 years!
Joking aside, I'd be down to participate, but I dont think it would produce any results. There's a reason we all have a different bunch of houserules at our own table.
I was trying to be snarky, but those are things I could make a case for... in the case of modern design I mean not having the setting dominated by high level spellcasting NPCs, and having a more wide burth of ancestries/heritagesSo, like, what exactly do you not want versus what do you want? Because "set on modern design" isn't a useful phrase.
I wouldn't consider having high-level NPCs everywhere so much a design aspect of older games as just an unfortunate side effect of Greyhawk and the Realms.I was trying to be snarky, but those are things I could make a case for... in the case of modern design I mean not having the setting dominated by high level spellcasting NPCs, and having a more wide burth of ancestries/heritages
if you think that's bad wait until the "what is a warlock" and "what is a sorcerer" starts... or heaven forbid the relaunch of the 'warlord' threadsI was going to write something snarky, but do not want to rain on others parades. Seems like something that could be done, but need to get the words down. I already seen 3 different uses for the race. I would not want 20 pages of arguing about each thing. Might need sub-groups to finalize things down to 3-4 before open vote.
Would people be happy with 20% of stuff I really like and 20% I do not want?
Or the "how many classes do you actually need?" thread.if you think that's bad wait until the "what is a warlock" and "what is a sorcerer" starts... or heaven forbid the relaunch of the 'warlord' threads
I mean with good subclass and multi classing (maybe duel) you only need Warrior, Skill peep, and magic casterOr the "how many classes do you actually need?" thread.
(I vote "fewer," although I understand why some people want lots.)
You could have more branches.I mean with good subclass and multi classing (maybe duel) you only need Warrior, Skill peep, and magic caster
on the other end it just makes sense to make a knight, a swashbuckler, ect...