D&D 5E D&D Lingua Franca, or 5e really, REALLY needs to create it's own new "space"

[Estlor]

Which opens an area of confusion because we already have "Ability Scores." Which (naturally) would have no relation to these other abilities.

For the past two editions, D&D has desperately been trying to get away from the idea of using all sorts of verbiage and resolutions that all do the same thing. It causes a lot of unnecessary confusion. Look at Psionics in 3e for a concrete example of that. They had to waste book space explaining to us that Magic = Psionics in terms of interaction with each other. 4e didn't need to do that because everything was a "Power" which naturally implied equality.

To the person who suggested having a list of martial exploits all martial classes could choose freely from - I agree 100%. One of the biggest gripes I have with 4e is how they have hundreds of powers, dozens of which are mechanically identical and aren't given enough fluff to feel differently. Much better to build the role-oriented nature of the PC into the class and have a shared power list with class-specific kickers.

F'rinstance, why not have a fireball that looks like this:

Fireball (Arcane Attack 5)
Daily * Arcane, Fire, Implement
Standard Action
Area burst 3 within 20
Target: Each creature in burst
Attack: Primary ability score vs Reflex
Hit: 3d6 + Primary ability modifier damage
Bard: Target changes to each enemy in burst.
Sorcerer: Targets hit also take ongoing 5 fire damage (save ends).
Wizard: Targets hit are also dazed until the end of their next turn.
Miss: Half damage.

 

[Janaxstrus]

Which opens an area of confusion because we already have "Ability Scores." Which (naturally) would have no relation to these other abilities.

For the past two editions, D&D has desperately been trying to get away from the idea of using all sorts of verbiage and resolutions that all do the same thing. It causes a lot of unnecessary confusion. Look at Psionics in 3e for a concrete example of that. They had to waste book space explaining to us that Magic = Psionics in terms of interaction with each other. 4e didn't need to do that because everything was a "Power" which naturally implied equality.

To the person who suggested having a list of martial exploits all martial classes could choose freely from - I agree 100%. One of the biggest gripes I have with 4e is how they have hundreds of powers, dozens of which are mechanically identical and aren't given enough fluff to feel differently. Much better to build the role-oriented nature of the PC into the class and have a shared power list with class-specific kickers.

F'rinstance, why not have a fireball that looks like this:

Fireball (Arcane Attack 5)
Daily * Arcane, Fire, Implement
Standard Action
Area burst 3 within 20
Target: Each creature in burst
Attack: Primary ability score vs Reflex
Hit: 3d6 + Primary ability modifier damage
Bard: Target changes to each enemy in burst.
Sorcerer: Targets hit also take ongoing 5 fire damage (save ends).
Wizard: Targets hit are also dazed until the end of their next turn.
Miss: Half damage.

Implements are terrible too

 

[Kynn]

Implements are terrible too

Why are implements terrible?

 

[Sunseeker]

Implements are terrible too

Are you suggesting I shouldn't be able to cast Fireball with my +1 Potato?

 

[Estlor]

Implements are terrible too

I working off the 4e model which assumes you make attack rolls for spells, making implements necessary (otherwise you'll wiff with every spell much past mid-heroic).

If we're using the auto-hit but chance to save model of earlier editions, yeah, implements disappear (unless you want to allow them but have them impose penalties to the saves).

However, I don't see how an implement is a bad idea for D&D. Literature and movies are full of wizards that cast spells through/with staffs and wands.

 

[Janaxstrus]

Why are implements terrible?

I just don't care for them. I find them a needless addition to D&D after 35 years of not needing them

 

[Kynn]

I just don't care for them. I find them a needless addition to D&D after 35 years of not needing them

Oh.

 

[tresson]

I just don't care for them. I find them a needless addition to D&D after 35 years of not needing them

So it's bad because it's new then?

 

[nedjer]

Implement is not so great, as it's non-descriptive and excluding. There's a long road between Armour Class, to hit or abilities and implements or martial manoeuvrings - a road littered with gamers lost to tabletop RPGS.

 

[Janaxstrus]

So it's bad because it's new then?

It's bad, in my opinion, because it was change for the sake of change. I like good changes, not changes just to be different.

Skills were new, and I loved those from the start (they werea pretty big change from NWP)
Feats? New, loved them.

Implements? Don't see the need and don't care for them.