D&D 5E D&D Next Design Goals (Article)

[Bedrockgames]

And I sure as hell don't want to have to re-write 5E to institute 4E balance if it is not already present. Where does that leave us?

I think most likely neither of us will get entirely what we want. We will have to see. But it is a good thing we aren't on the same design team.

 

[P1NBACK]

It's not the activities that vary, its the amounts of various activities and the total amount of all activity added up that vary. It varies from adventure to adventure and from table to table, and you can't balance it across that spectrum using adventure as the standard of measurement. One adventure is going to have one fight, and another will have five, and those adventures won't be balanced against each other. It may, as Bedrockgames puts it, balance out in the long run, but as far as I'm concerned that isn't good enough.

4E at its worst was more balanced than any other edition of D&D or pretty much any tabletop RPG. On top of that, no other game has ever come close to the complexity of 4E with as many moving parts as it had and achieved anywhere near 4E's level of balance. 4E not only provided balance, it provided it the hard way.

thecasualoblivion, still waiting for you explain to me how the Moldvay 1981 Basic set was "unbalanced"? I'd love to hear your thoughts on how 4E is more balanced.

 

[Incenjucar]

4E-style rigid class design is not required for a balanced game. It just makes things a heck of a lot easier to work with, nor is balance some sort of bogeyman that will make all fighters have daily powers.

5E is its own system. That doesn't mean it has to be an unbalanced system.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

thecasualoblivion, still waiting for you explain to me how the Moldvay 1981 Basic set was "unbalanced"? I'd love to hear your thoughts on how 4E is more balanced.

It had a thief class that really wasn't good at combat, and Vancian casting to make the 5 minute workday possible. Moldvay 1981 I believe didn't have BECMI's weapon mastery system, so caster dominance came into play past name level, an no I don't consider followers to make up for that. I could go on.

 

[Andor]

My issue with rituals is it seems a bit artificial...a convenient holding cell for spells that are powerful or of a certain flavor. But also, i want my wizard to have access to those as part of his regular spell repetoir. Just up the casting times. You already have divine magic and arcane, so i dont really see the need for rituals.

But if you merely up the casting time you make it so they also consume one of those spell slots you may not have very many of.

Personally I find it to be a smooth progression of magical effect vs effort.

Minor magics (the at-wills) are quick and easy but not very powerful.

Regular spells are more powerful and complex and required extensive prep time but can be keyed for quick access in combat. (Akin to 'hanging' spells in the Amber novels.)

Ritual spells are too big, too complex and powerful to be 'hung' for quick casting short of enchanting the effect into an item. They require lengthy casting times, but on the upside, because they are not hung, they do not interfere with those limited slots.

 

[I'm A Banana]

It's not the activities that vary, its the amounts of various activities and the total amount of all activity added up that vary. It varies from adventure to adventure and from table to table, and you can't balance it across that spectrum using adventure as the standard of measurement. One adventure is going to have one fight, and another will have five, and those adventures won't be balanced against each other.

Yes, the lengths and ratios vary. But that doesn't matter when you're balancing by the adventure, because you can balance it accross that spectrum, using the exact same metrics they use to balance encounters.

One fight or five or fifty, it doesn't matter. If that one fight is as tough as five, and each of those five fights is 1/5th of that one fight, then they're balanced with each other.

It is directly comprable to what 4e does quite well with solos, elites, and minions. Just over a different timescale with more variety in activities (thus making it easier to balance extreme effects).

It may, as Bedrockgames puts it, balance out in the long run, but as far as I'm concerned that isn't good enough.

If you can't be convinced by rational discussion, then you can't be convinced, and there's nothing for it. You seem like a thoughtful person, though, so I don't understand why you wouldn't be open-minded about this.

 

[Bedrockgames]

But if you merely up the casting time you make it so they also consume one of those spell slots you may not have very many of.
lots.

Part of being a wizard is managing spells. And if you take an interesting non combat that is one less slot for fireball or lightning bolt, but that has never bothered me (i like making that trade).

 

[thecasualoblivion]

Yes, the lengths and ratios vary. But that doesn't matter when you're balancing by the adventure, because you can balance it accross that spectrum, using the exact same metrics they use to balance encounters.

One fight or five or fifty, it doesn't matter. If that one fight is as tough as five, and each of those five fights is 1/5th of that one fight, then they're balanced with each other.

It is directly comprable to what 4e does quite well with solos, elites, and minions. Just over a different timescale with more variety in activities (thus making it easier to balance extreme effects).



If you can't be convinced by rational discussion, then you can't be convinced, and there's nothing for it. You seem like a thoughtful person, though, so I don't understand why you wouldn't be open-minded about this.

I can't be convinced because trying to balance over a longer period of time isn't anything new. I've seen it at the table, over years and years of play, and I've concluded that it is not what I consider balance. Your reasoned argument does nothing to dispel my experience.

 

[Incenjucar]

Unless the game is entirely on rails, you can't predict how many encounters per day a party will actually have. It's something of the same issue as with daily powers, but from a different direction.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Unless the game is entirely on rails, you can't predict how many encounters per day a party will actually have. It's something of the same issue as with daily powers, but from a different direction.

Yes, you average it out over the long run. But you are also not using encounters alone as the measure (you can balance with non combat situations in mind as well). Also if you drop the daily and encounter powers for the classes (and go back to normal vancian casting for spellcasters) it becomes less of a concern since fighters and rogues are not running out of dailies. I really dont think it is a big deal. It wint be as rigidly balanced as 4E but i think that is a good thing.