D&D 6th edition - What do you want to see?

ad_hoc

Adventurer
I think a lot of the problem people have with the ranger is that the game is built around three equal pillars, and those players don’t spend much time in the exploration pillar so the ranger looks weak by comparison.
I think it is more that people don't spend time in overland travel.
 

Zardnaar

Hero
1. Evolution not revolution.

2. Tweaked classes, clean them up slight buffs and nerfs.

3. Tweaked feats, buffs and nerfs

4. Lower the CR on a lot if critters that are to easy.

5. Tweaked spells.

6. 2024 give or take a year.

I think in two or three years I'll be getting sick of 5E.
 

Saelorn

Adventurer
I think a lot of the problem people have with the ranger is that the game is built around three equal pillars, and those players don’t spend much time in the exploration pillar so the ranger looks weak by comparison.
The other pillars are really built around one character taking control of the situation, while everyone else sits back and waits for them to finish. While the fighter is running the obstacle course up to the lever to open the door, the other three players are just sitting back and waiting for them to finish. Combat is the one pillar where everyone is participating at the same time. From a time-management perspective, it's more efficient in terms of letting people play, if you spend more time in combat.

Not to mention, the particular way that the ranger's mastery works is that it lets you breeze through most of the overland survival stuff with a minimum fuss. They're so good at what they do that it takes very little table time for them to do it. You spend more time doing overland stuff if you don't have a ranger to trivialize it.
 

Raith5

Adventurer
Eventually I would like to see a 6e.

I would like to see more opportunities to customize characters from the start. A feat at first level would be a good start.

I also dont like the trade off between ASIs and feats. Basically, more feats - just not pathfinder level of more feats.

I would like to see race matter more a high levels by making some racial features unlock with level or by via feats.

More combat options for martial PCs.

I think monsters could be a bit tougher and have a few more options

I would like to see more work and attention placed on high level play (13th level+).
 

anahata

Villager
I imagine it is still 5 years off, give or take, but WotC is probably doing the groundwork now, and considering how they might want to change their flagship game. I do like 5e, but I want some more granularity in the rules, and I want them really listen to the community.

1. Better book presentation. It's hard to find what you need in the PHB aside from the spells. I love the artwork, that's not the issue, but proper labeling of chapters and information, which PF does better. And any book by Monte Cook.

2. A skill system that is fun. And more defined rules that takes away some of the guesswork.

3. Monsters that are tougher out of the box, with appropriate skills themselves, that don't need houserules to be challenging

4. And please, for God's sake, fix the ranger. At this point I'm advocating kill that sacred cow, break up ALL of a Ranger's abilities and and make it some kind of archetype that can be layered in pieces over any class, so you could even have a thief/ranger or cleric/ranger.

What else would you like to see?
More guidance for the DM. What does Intimidate do in combat? How am I supposed to handle magic items? How does a transmuter wizard's transmutation ability actually work? How can a character craft a normal nonmagical weapon? All those "use your judgement / discretion" sections in the DMG need to go. They don't help anyone, especially new DMs. There are so many holes in the rules that I've found running just the starter module that I've determined 5e to be unuseable. I seriously don't understand how people actually play 5e given how many holes there are in the rules.
 
Last edited:

MockingBird

Explorer
I would like the Advanced Dungeons & Dragons idea. Keep 5e as core and release option books. If there just has to be a new edition, hopefully it will be 100% backwards compatible. I feel like this is where PF2e drop the ball but I understand them wanting their own game.

5e has drawn in a lot of casual players who may not understand the need for new editions. WotC would need to navigate that very carefully in my opinion. Maybe revise the books kinda like 2e did. Throw the hardcore folks an Advanced Players Handbook and an Advanced Dungeon Masters book. Some folks are just gonna want something "new" though. Right now if they came out with a 6e (or even in a few years) I wouldn't bite on it. I've invested heavily into this edition and I'd just stick with it. Honestly this will probably be the last edition I invest in.
 

Nebulous

Adventurer
I would like the Advanced Dungeons & Dragons idea. Keep 5e as core and release option books. If there just has to be a new edition, hopefully it will be 100% backwards compatible. I feel like this is where PF2e drop the ball but I understand them wanting their own game.

5e has drawn in a lot of casual players who may not understand the need for new editions. WotC would need to navigate that very carefully in my opinion. Maybe revise the books kinda like 2e did. Throw the hardcore folks an Advanced Players Handbook and an Advanced Dungeon Masters book. Some folks are just gonna want something "new" though. Right now if they came out with a 6e (or even in a few years) I wouldn't bite on it. I've invested heavily into this edition and I'd just stick with it. Honestly this will probably be the last edition I invest in.
I totally agree with what many of you say about an AD&D 5.5e. but that would really be handled best by a 6e overhaul in the next 5 years. WotC WILL upgrade to 6th edition eventually, and 5e is probably halfway through its lifespan

I wish they'd put out modular option books to change the current rules. I do.
 

Parmandur

Legend
I totally agree with what many of you say about an AD&D 5.5e. but that would really be handled best by a 6e overhaul in the next 5 years. WotC WILL upgrade to 6th edition eventually, and 5e is probably halfway through its lifespan

I wish they'd put out modular option books to change the current rules. I do.
They have every intention to avoid it, and their plan is working so far: no need to be hasty, give it another decade or more.
 

Parmandur

Legend
More guidance for the DM. What does Intimidate do in combat? How am I supposed to handle magic items? How does a transmuter wizard's transmutation ability actually work? How can a character craft a normal nonmagical weapon? All those "use your judgement / discretion" sections in the DMG need to go. They don't help anyone, especially new DMs. There are so many holes in the rules that I've found running just the starter module that I've determined 5e to be unuseable. I seriously don't understand how people actually play 5e given how many holes there are in the rules.
I'm not sure how I manage, because I am playing a clearly unplayable game.
 

Parmandur

Legend
I really like the idea of having an Advanced Dungeons and Dragons book as a supplement to 5E. Why not dig out an old title and give it a new purpose?
They almost did use "Advanced Dungeons & Dragons" for the core books in 5E, to contrast with the Basic PDF, but found in marketing studied that it was a terrible idea that confused customers: which probably happened in the 70's & 80''s, too, but TSR was clueless.
 

Parmandur

Legend
Instead of responding with sarcasm, maybe provide advice instead?
Yeah, if you had trouble with Lost Mines of Phandelver and the basic rules, I'm not sure I can help. Maybe watch some live Twitch broadcast or listen to some podcasts? Critical Role is good. The DND channel always has something on.
 

anahata

Villager
Yeah, if you had trouble with Lost Mines of Phandelver and the basic rules, I'm not sure I can help. Maybe watch some live Twitch broadcast or listen to some podcasts? Critical Role is good. The DND channel always has something on.
I'm going to assume good faith here.

It's not that I don't know how to be a DM. It's that my players want to do things--a lot of things--that aren't covered in the rules. See my first comment in this thread. One of the most rudimentary examples: What does Intimidate do in combat? The rules have no answer. How do I run a system that doesn't tell me what to do with basic situations like that?
 

Johnny3D3D

Adventurer
I'm not sure that my strongest desires would be viewed as being recognizably D&D, but I believe that a few could be easily implemented.

The simple changes
~more intuitive book layout and better indexing of content
~softcover options for books

More in-depth changes
~"bounded accuracy" which actually means bounded accuracy (hard to explain, but I've found that 5e's goal of keeping numbers manageable and meaningful doesn't always work -at least not in the context of what I thought those words would mean)
~a playstyle and worldbuilding baseline which has more grit and takes a little more inspiration from older fantasy and sword & sorcery, as opposed to a baseline which assumes everything is infused with magic; a race to save the multiverse as a common idea... I guess maybe that's old fashioned, but (and it's an odd thing to say) D&D sometimes doesn't feel like "fantasy" to me, especially not in the context of things like Game of Thrones, Conan, and etc. I'm not saying those need to be modeled perfectly (and I'm sure others have different influences), but it always seems strange to me that trying to tell stories from the things I've been inspired by (and in some cases inspired D&D) is such a struggle using the D&D game.
~despite my previous comment, one of the things I enjoyed from 4E was the mentality behind encounter design and having more moving parts rather than more static positions. If there's a way to have that style of encounter design mixed with a somewhat more grounded baseline, I would enjoy it. Truth be told, I still don't really understand the mentality behind 5e encounter design.
...I suppose it's a little like 80s fantasy movies: by today's standards, the stories and effects are cheesy, but there's something about the "feel" of those movies which is rarely captured in newer stuff. I think part of that is a combination of fantastic thinking for the storylines governed by needing to use practical effects. I still want cool characters and flashy powers, but sometimes there's a realness to the guy in a rubber suit and practical effects that a digitized scene and greenscreen (despite being better) somehow fails to capture.
~more decision-making points for building a character and for playing the game... I can appreciate the streamlined appeal of a game, but I also feel that a lot of depth was sacrificed. I don't want PF2's feat bananza, but something a little more than what 5e currently offers would be nice.


For the most part, I enjoy 5e. However, I've also noticed that I'm less invested in the brand than I have been previously.
 

Parmandur

Legend
I'm going to assume good faith here.

It's not that I don't know how to be a DM. It's that my players want to do things--a lot of things--that aren't covered in the rules. See my first comment in this thread. One of the most rudimentary examples: What does Intimidate do in combat? The rules have no answer. How do I run a system that doesn't tell me what to do with basic situations like that?
Depends on what's being done, but answer is always "Wing it." Maybe grant Advantage/Disadvantage, maybe the enemies flee, entirely up to the DM. The Transmuter ability is laid out clearly. There is some information on crafting in Xanathar's Guide to Everything, but the rules are suggestions: rulings (by the DM), not rules (dictated by the designers). I assure you that it is quite simple in practice.
 

MockingBird

Explorer
I'm going to assume good faith here.

It's not that I don't know how to be a DM. It's that my players want to do things--a lot of things--that aren't covered in the rules. See my first comment in this thread. One of the most rudimentary examples: What does Intimidate do in combat? The rules have no answer. How do I run a system that doesn't tell me what to do with basic situations like that?

That's what I love about this edition the most, the power the DM has. What would you think intimidate would do in combat? Does one really need an explicit rule for this? I'm not trying to be sarcastic, just trying to open up a constructive dialogue.
 

Advertisement

Top