D&D 5E D&D Next Q&A: 12/06/13

[Tovec]

New Rule of Three, not seeing a thread about it already so, here's the link:

http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/dndqa/20131205

Thoughts?

 

[TerraDave]

Thoughts?

I like
Makes sense
Will have to see

 

[Dausuul]

1. Approve of this decision. Get rid of "caster level." In my experience, its main effect is to cripple fighter/mages for no good reason.

2. Do not approve of this decision. The distinction between "Wisdom saving throw" and "Wisdom check" is excessively fiddly and sure to cause confusion at the table.

3. Shrug. We'll see how it looks.

 

[Gadget]

1. I think he was referring to caster level specifically in regard to cantrips, Is it referred to in another part of the system? I know that with the automatic scaling taken out, I can't think of where else it comes up.

2. I'm forced to agree with his explanation, as much as I am for stream lining the system. His example of making a cleric good at resisting mind influencing effects but not necessarily good at perception is quite right. Though in my mind that is more a problem with how wisdom as taken on more and more of a perception role over recent years.

3. Interesting, but not terribly surprising.

 

[Dausuul]

2. I'm forced to agree with his explanation, as much as I am for stream lining the system. His example of making a cleric good at resisting mind influencing effects but not necessarily good at perception is quite right. Though in my mind that is more a problem with how wisdom as taken on more and more of a perception role over recent years.

How many situations are there where you want a class to be good at using a given ability score defensively, but not for skills or offense? As far as I can see, this is the only situation where there's a strong case for it, and only because willpower and perception have been jammed together into one stat. That's a problem with Wisdom, not with a unified check/save mechanic.

 

[TerraDave]

Saving throws and attack roles are too handy as concepts to just let go.

In past editions of the game, they are referenced so many times. How else do you refer to a +2 save vs poison, a +1 to hit with swords, etc.

 

[Dausuul]

Saving throws and attack roles are too handy as concepts to just let go.

In past editions of the game, they are referenced so many times. How else do you refer to a +2 save vs poison, a +1 to hit with swords, etc.

This isn't a past edition. This is 5th Edition. If we must have saving throws, why not go back to Fortitude, Reflex, and Will? If it's going to be a distinct mechanic, it should have a distinct name. And the number of Int, Cha, and Str saves in the playtest is miniscule.

 

[am181d]

This isn't a past edition. This is 5th Edition. If we must have saving throws, why not go back to Fortitude, Reflex, and Will? If it's going to be a distinct mechanic, it should have a distinct name. And the number of Int, Cha, and Str saves in the playtest is miniscule.

Ugh. Getting rid of saving throws (as distinct categories from ability scores) was a huge improvement, I think. The issue now is that ability scores do a bunch of different things. They are right that Clerics with great will power should not also automatically be good at spotting things, but that's not an issue with skills vs. saves. That's an issue with Wisdom being both perception and will power.

The fix for that (which will never happen) is to replace Wisdom with Observation and Charisma with Personality.

As is, you still have the same problem when Clerics are very good at both will power related saves and perception related saves.

 

[Dausuul]

Getting rid of saving throws (as distinct categories from ability scores) was a huge improvement, I think.

I absolutely agree. Getting rid of the distinct saving throw mechanic and merging it all into ability checks was an excellent move, eliminating three mostly-redundant mechanics. But if they split saving throws back out, it defeats the point. We end up with three more mechanics than previously (six ability checks and three saves has become six ability checks and six saves), and confusingly named ones into the bargain.

I would prefer to get rid of saves and just use ability checks, as in the early playtests. But if the design team has determined that we have to have a distinct "saving throw" mechanic, they should use the 3E saving throws to keep it clear which is what.

 

[Falling Icicle]

I'm very glad to hear this.

I don't really agree with his reasoning here, but it's not a big deal to me either way.

I kind of miss the maneuver system they were using a while back. I think it makes sense to have maneuvers that different classes have access to, in much the same way spells work. But we'll just have to see how this turns out.