D&D 5E [D&D Next] Second Packet - initial impressions

[ForeverSlayer]

Let's discuss the newest playtest packet.

In this thread, we will discuss the newest playtest packet.

I was looking at the Cleric and Wizard and I noticed that they have 10th level spell slots.

Also, why does the Wizard class give you a choice of a +1 to constitution?

 

[ForeverSlayer]

I also want to talk about the Two-Weapon fighting specialty and why the damage is halved for both weapons.

I'm not really sure this is worth taking.

 

[Neonchameleon]

It looks good! Massively better than the old one. Can't say I like it all - but good. Change the XP rules up and

The fighter is a vast improvement. I no longer wonder why play a fighter when there's the warpriest. (Combat Superiority may be a little strong from looking at it - but that's a fault on the right side). On the other hand it does look fairly spamtastic - but at least it's fast.

The rogue's improved. In fact it's turned into two classes by means of the backgrounds - the thug (especially with the spiked chain) does obscene damage, and the thief is the trapsmith we all know and love.

OAs are in - movement only. Good all round.

If chargen is as quick as I think this is looking like a good way to play pre-3E D&D. Probably 2e but it's easy enough to hack back into something more like 1e or even B/X (possibly eventually BECMI) - but with a ruleset I find simpler. The main thing that worries me are what the long term strategy for this game is - I think that supplements will make it worse rather than better.

(And no, it won't replace my 4e - but it appears to do magnificently the parts of pre-4e D&D 4e is bad at).

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Better, yes. Not all there, though -- I'll hit individual quirks in other threads so we can keep discussion focused.

I like Combat Superiority, but it feels like a bunch of feats that you can't choose freely among, and have to spend a die to use even though rolling the die has nothing to do with them -- why have the die, when you can just say "With maneuver X, Y occurs". Interesting, but a bit awkward. If this ends up with a mechanism for better choice, I can get behind it.

Rogue and cleric, both better.

 

[Stormonu]

Hmmm....nothing beyond combat stats for the monsters. That's disappointing. Also, some of their choices are a little weird - especially in what's been left out (no dragons?!?)

Also, I don't like the sound of displacer beast armor and dragon scale. Could we have gotten something a little less fantastical - would it have been so bad to have studded leather and reinforced scale instead?

 

[Ahnehnois]

The alignments look right at least.

Combat superiority looks good. The rogue has per/days and a BS-flavored sneak attack. Not so good.

Apparently they didn't listen to the complaints over dwarven poison immunity.

I continue to think that their basic approach to number scaling, skills, and feats is solid, but that the implementation is really lacking; the classes and races are not up to snuff.

 

[Raith5]

While I still prefer 4th ed, all in all this looks interesting. Fighters and clerics look really interesting with expertise dice and Domains respectively. Monsters still look a bit boring though.

Specializations also look interesting. The Necromancer one looks cool. But why would you take the Dual wielder specialization? Two-Weapon Fighting enables you to attack with each weapon but only do half damage.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

I'm finding it dull. Painfully dull in fact.

 

[Falling Icicle]

I've only had a chance to glance over it so far, but here's a few observations:

The skills are now tied to certain abilities. It says the DM can use other abilities instead, but it's generally assumed that you will usually use the specified ability for that skill.

The pregen Fighter is an archer this time, which was unexpected but cool. I'm not sure I like how Precise Shot works with the fighter's combat superiority, though. We'll see how it works in play.

I'm glad that they put the spells on the character sheets this time.

It seems that the + ability modifier damage bonus has been removed from all spells except for cantrips and orisons. Not at all happy about that change.

Strangely, alot of the spells just have a flat +3 or +4 bonus instead of +magic ability modifier. At first I thought that this was just a convenience on the character sheets, but it's written the exact same way in the general spell rules. I'm hoping that this is a typo, as it would be silly, IMO, for all casters to cast spells with the same strength regardless of their ability scores.

The spells are still written in the same format as before, though the spell descriptions seem a bit more clear. Detect magic in particular is much more clear on what exactly it does and does not do.

Magic Missile no longer scales. It still has crappy damage (1d4+1) and auto-hits. Bleh. I'd much rather roll to hit and be able to crit, and have it deal decent damage, than have it auto-hit, personally.

Ray of frost does damage now and drops the target's speed by 10 ft. Much better than the last version.

Charm Person has been changed a bit. It now goes by the target's maximum hp rather than current hp, so you can no longer beat up someone until you can charm them. If you have less than 25 max hp, you don't get a saving throw at all though. Considering the reduction in hp across the board, that raises a red flag.

Shocking Grasp no longer gives advantage against metal-wearing targets, but prevents the target from taking reactions until its next turn. Cool.

 

[triqui]

I've only read half the package, but I needed to stop and came here to say just one thing.

The fighter is EXCELLENT. Combat superiority is just plainly awesomesauce