D&D 5E D&D Next Blog: Beyond Class & Race

[Incenjucar]

If they slow down on the content spewing and deliver a good core, then we will have fewer artificial concepts filling expected content gaps.

That too.
Also with a good core and many good modules printed with it, it would make printing more nonsensical or gap filler books harder.

Unfortunately, if they deliver a core that covers most of the bases, the stuff they release after that will most likely be especially nonsensical. This is an issue of publishing policy, and having a solid base rather than a fractured one actually means they'll resort to silly stuff sooner. The only way to prevent this is if they become more creative, and introduce things that are very distant from core, but historically WotC's philosophy is to print more of what is already popular rather than to invest in new ideas.

Unfortunately, I think we're going to end up with another edition of more silly slight variations on wizards than you can shake a sorcerer at, since so many designers involved are specifically wizard fans.

 

[YRUSirius]

I expect themes to replace prestige classes/paragon paths as the main focus for splat books etc.

Not trying to come down on you, YRUSirius. Personally, I don't care about elegant. I care about play at the tabletop, not how aesthetically and philosophically pleasing the architecture of the rules is. I totally understand the feeling, though. I used to be that way myself. Nowadays, I just want the rules to play fast, play well, prep fast, prep easy, prep well, and do all that for both players and DMs. I've got too many "beautiful" or "elegant" games collecting dust on my shelf or taking up space on my hard drive to need another. I want to play 5e, and play the yotz out of it.

Rules that play fast, play well, prep fast, prep easy, prep well ARE elegant rules in my eyes. That's where I'm coming from.

I find the idea of things like a Wizard(assassin) particularly intriguing, and I think it might reduce the impulse to multiclass as madly as players did in 3.5. I especially like the idea that you could keep some your theme-based abilities rolling right along, even if you multiclass to gain other mechanical advantages. So you start as a Fighter(Slayer), but multiclass into Wizard. Your Slayer stuff could still progress, even as you get more magical mojo.

Keeping only 4 base classes....again, hard to say without knowing how the mechanics will play out. However, I don't think that sounds like the direction they're heading with this. I haven't come away from things with the feeling that they intend themes to do that much heavy lifting. It could definitely be set up that way, but I wouldn't want to them to do it for any other reason than it plays better that way.

Yeah, they don't seem to keep only 4 base classes, just seen the D&D Pax seminar video, where they elaborated that they'd like to see the Paladin for example as a seperate base class, because it has become such an iconic class in the D&D world that people expect to see.



-YRUSirius

 

[Minigiant]

Unfortunately, if they deliver a core that covers most of the bases, the stuff they release after that will most likely be especially nonsensical. This is an issue of publishing policy, and having a solid base rather than a fractured one actually means they'll resort to silly stuff sooner. The only way to prevent this is if they become more creative, and introduce things that are very distant from core, but historically WotC's philosophy is to print more of what is already popular rather than to invest in new ideas.

Unfortunately, I think we're going to end up with another edition of more silly slight variations on wizards than you can shake a sorcerer at, since so many designers involved are specifically wizard fans.

Oh I am sure there will be more variants of spellcaster than dwarves at a free ale giveaway. There are dozens of ways to do magic considering there is no real life equivalent Anything from management systems to skill magic to combination spell systems to fatigue magic to "penalties for slots" magic to "taboos for spell power" to bending to "all magic is items" to "cast from HP" to "tapping lands" magic to "backlash" magic etc.

There are tons of modules they can make considering all the settings that exist. But there would be no need for a book dedicated to make a high damage divine character and another small player race.

 

[TarionzCousin]

Eventually--undoubtedly down the road a way--maybe we will get more character fluff, like "flavor" and monsters as PC's. That way I'll finally be able to legally play Grape Ape*.




*an illiterate barbarian, of course!

 

[steeldragons]

Given a few assumptions...let's see if I am mentally putting this together correctly...

Assumption 1: "Skills" as we once knew them are going to fall under Background...for the sake of this mental exercise, we'll go with something I read around here someplace that a Background will include 4 skills (general non-combat" type stuff.)

Assumption 2: What were once called "Feats" are going to be falling into/under "Class Abilities" or specially chosen with a "Theme". Again, let's assume 3 or 4 each, under Class and Theme.

Assumption 3: Race will have a set of "innate/genetic" special abilities and then a list of (let's say 10?) special abilities to be chosen and increase in number and effectiveness as the PC gains levels. AND/OR, for the more "simplified" game style module, a pre-set "package" of Special Abilities that we all know and love that can simply be taken...that do not increase with level.

Assumption 4: all of the terms for class powers, skills, feats, racial abilities, etc...would have actual game mechanics backing them up in some fashion. For now, just assume they will work they way you think.

So...to see if I'm getting this kinda correct in my brain...and I'm sorta liking how it's going. If 5e can get somewhat close to this we might be in good shape. It is bordering on "too much/complicated to keep track of/first making characters", but just bordering, I think.

Abe...rolls abilities...decides he wants to be a fighter...
CLASS .......................RACE
FIGHTER ........................Human
-10 hp (class auto, .........Humans are the baseline
has no Con bonus) .........for the rest of the races.
-Class Abilities (Chosen....They receive no special
by Abe): ........................abilities other than "Human
--Weapon Mastery .........Versatility" allowing them
--Fighting Style: .............to add an additional Skill
Two-Handed Weapons ...or Feat to their chosen
--Toughness ..................Background or Theme.

Background....................Theme
Town Guard: ..................Berserker:
gives Endurance, ............-Power Attack: +1 EOL to damage, 1/day/level
Alertness, .......................-Rage: 1/day/level for #rounds = Ftr. level
Intimidate, ......................-Temp HP: 1/day can increase their HP
Sense Motive .................. by half for duration = level, without needing
Bluff* .............................. to Rage.
* Selected by Abe for his extra Human Skill

Bob...rolls abilities...decides he wants to be a fighter...
CLASS ..........................RACE
FIGHTER ........................DWARF
-13 hp (class auto, .........Innate: Darkvision
+ Con bonus) .................+2 to Con
-Class Abilities (Chosen....Language: Dwarf
by Bob): ........................Chosen: "Dwarf Pac"
--Weapon Mastery .........-- Stonecunning
--Fighting Style: .............--+1 damage to goblins
"Sword&Board"...............--+2 AC against ogres, giants & trolls
(chooses hand axe
as his single-handed weapon)
--Athletic

Background....................Theme
Noble: ...........................Knight:
gives Diplomacy ............-Mounted Combat
Sense Motive, ...............-Combat Reflexes
Knowledge: etiquette, ...-Weapon Specialization (axe)
+100 sp to PC's
starting money
--SD

 

[Ratskinner]

I expect themes to replace prestige classes/paragon paths as the main focus for splat books etc.

Dunno about replace, but I would expect them to feature prominently. Come to think of it, I don't think we've heard anything about if PP or PrCs are even going to make it into 5e. Maybe with all these themes and backgrounds, they will be "unnecissaried" away, or maybe show up only in a module.

Rules that play fast, play well, prep fast, prep easy, prep well ARE elegant rules in my eyes. That's where I'm coming from.

Well, alright then. Let's hope they listen to us.

 

[Yora]

Are Themes tied to class or will they be able to be applied to different clases?

I think a hunter or scout theme would work well for barbarians, ranger, and rogues. It's much more interesting to have them as a separate aspect of the character then just a class specific specialization.

 

[Minigiant]

[MENTION=92511]steeldragons[/MENTION] that is something like I see it working.

[MENTION=6670763]Yora[/MENTION] I hope themes and backgrounds are not tied to class. A wizard could pick Sharpshooter and have all their spells get double range.


If I were to design the list of core backgrounds, I'd start from the Background variant in UA . Then pick out the standout stereotypical backgrounds of characters. 3E's NPC classes (sans adept) make a nice group of categories for backgrounds. Breaking the backgrounds into 5 backgrounds of the lower, middle, upper, under, and military classes.

Lower/Commoner Backgrounds:
Commoner
Farmer
Hermit
Nomad
Performer
Savage

Underground Backgrounds
Assassin
Burglar
Thief
Thug

Expert Backgrounds
Athlete
Craftsman
Linguist
Merchant
Occultist
Scholar

Upper Class/Aristocratic Backgrounds
Courtier
Noble
Priest
Servant


Warrior Backgrounds
Border Guard
Knight
Sailor
Scout
Soldier
Town Guard

 

[tecnowraith]

I have been wandering about this since themes was first mention is this: are you only be allowed to choose one theme and one background? Also, will the hoosing feats be only done through class a theme, will we be able choose feats normally like in 3.5/4e?