Kobold Avenger
Legend
My comments are only in regards to how Monks have been in core D&D, which in comparison is better than it's been so far.
And now I have to figure how to turn off email notifications about being quoted...
D&D 5E December Package is here, it was about time!!
And now I have to figure how to turn off email notifications about being quoted...
Kobold Avenger
Legend
And somehow the skill dice thing actually reminds me of Alternity...
KidSnide
Adventurer
My initial takeaways:
- Skill Dice: I like the math of skill dice. Instead of the even probabilities generated by a d20, the d20+skill die creates a decreasing likelihood of getting unusually high or low results. For mid-ranged checks, it's effectively just a bonus. But for tasks that are relatively easy for a skilled character it makes success reliable without being guaranteed. Likewise, it makes "demi-god" difficulty checks possible for the most skillful characters, but still extremely unlikely. Better skill math makes me happy.
- Rogues: I like skill stunts as a "rogue-y" alternative to maneuvers. I'm not actually sure there is a real functional difference, but it sure feels more appropriate. Alternatives to Sneak Attack are also a huge plus.
- Fighter Stickiness: I'm not sure fighters are going to be quite a "teflon" as some fear. Even without a Protect maneuver, moving away from a fighter to attack the fighter's ally is going to provoke one hell of an opportunity attack.
- Armor: I like how the armor with a magical origin is mostly focused on the 5000 gp side. Still, I think it's odd that ordinary plate mail is more expensive than dragon scale and at the same level as mithril armor.
- Spell Memorization: I really like the idea of separating spell preparation from spell slots. With a small number of spells prepared, it still matters whether you choose to prepare knock or water breathing. But, at the same time, you can guess wrong on spell preparation and still make use of all your slots.
- Spells: It looks like spell damage is pretty low when you compare it to what fighters and rogues dish out.
-KS
- Skill Dice: I like the math of skill dice. Instead of the even probabilities generated by a d20, the d20+skill die creates a decreasing likelihood of getting unusually high or low results. For mid-ranged checks, it's effectively just a bonus. But for tasks that are relatively easy for a skilled character it makes success reliable without being guaranteed. Likewise, it makes "demi-god" difficulty checks possible for the most skillful characters, but still extremely unlikely. Better skill math makes me happy.
- Rogues: I like skill stunts as a "rogue-y" alternative to maneuvers. I'm not actually sure there is a real functional difference, but it sure feels more appropriate. Alternatives to Sneak Attack are also a huge plus.
- Fighter Stickiness: I'm not sure fighters are going to be quite a "teflon" as some fear. Even without a Protect maneuver, moving away from a fighter to attack the fighter's ally is going to provoke one hell of an opportunity attack.
- Armor: I like how the armor with a magical origin is mostly focused on the 5000 gp side. Still, I think it's odd that ordinary plate mail is more expensive than dragon scale and at the same level as mithril armor.
- Spell Memorization: I really like the idea of separating spell preparation from spell slots. With a small number of spells prepared, it still matters whether you choose to prepare knock or water breathing. But, at the same time, you can guess wrong on spell preparation and still make use of all your slots.
- Spells: It looks like spell damage is pretty low when you compare it to what fighters and rogues dish out.
-KS
This is very interesting -- I've not thought this through, but it seems worth discussing. Thanks.
I've been pretty in favor of 5e until this packet.
Damage is too high, By a mile, and a half. An 11th level fighter using combat surge can do 90 points of damage without any strength or special equipment bonuses. Thats insane, at 20th level its 100 points and he can do it 4 times a day.
The rogue is now apparently a fighter who moves around a little more..... terrible
The cleric should not get martial damage dice, clerics have spells. They dont need to horn in on the fighters schtick on top of that.
And the skill dice idea is pure stupidity thats simply going to slow down skill checks without giving any appreciable bonus most of the time.
All in all IMO this whole packet was a giant step back in the wrong direction when it comes to classes.
Damage is too high, By a mile, and a half. An 11th level fighter using combat surge can do 90 points of damage without any strength or special equipment bonuses. Thats insane, at 20th level its 100 points and he can do it 4 times a day.
The rogue is now apparently a fighter who moves around a little more..... terrible
The cleric should not get martial damage dice, clerics have spells. They dont need to horn in on the fighters schtick on top of that.
And the skill dice idea is pure stupidity thats simply going to slow down skill checks without giving any appreciable bonus most of the time.
All in all IMO this whole packet was a giant step back in the wrong direction when it comes to classes.
Li Shenron
Legend
I wish you were right, but at the moment I just don't see how this could be true for the classes.
What you say might be true for combat rules. The last two iterations have a bunch of combat actions listed. They are not that many, so IMHO even a "softcore gaming group" (not necessarily beginners, but generally those who want a fairly rules-light game) can handle this complexity. However I also noticed that Grapple rules are already getting more complicated than I want. Do we really need to differentiate between grappling and pinning? That all depends what is your favourite level of simulation or tactics. Personally I prefer the previous simpler version, but this is an example of something that is truly a piece of cake to ignore/remove on a individual basis: if I think the two-layer grappling rules are too detailed, I can just default to grappling=pinning, and nothing else in the game needs to change. This is an example of good modularity (even if it's not specifically said in the rules that "grappling" is a module), in fact it's even more simply an example of "modularity" plain and simple.
But now let's move to classes... Take any of the classes and see how much stuff they get. To "play it well" (don't read "powergaming", just playing your class without largely ignoring some of its features), you are encouraged to understand quite an array of different mechanics and to keep in mind what you can do when it's your turn. The problem is you can't take one of those mechanics away from the game in a modular way, because you would be straight gimping that class since the mechanics rarely affect all classes equally. You can't play without skills, because the Rogue's power largely depend on them, while other classes are less affected. You can't play without combat expertise, because the fighter will be reduced to a minimum, cleric and rogue will be halved, but wizards won't be affected. If you take away one mechanic in order to simplify gameplay, you may be seriously compromising class balance, so this will prompt you to remove something else.
Finally, I think there is a huge misunderstanding on what "flexibility" really is in this game. WotC boards (therefore I guess also the feedback and the polls...) are full of positive comments on the Cleric's Channeling mechanics on the ground that it makes the Cleric more flexible. If you think about it a bit longer, you'll realize that it's the opposite: if the powers associated to channeling were just spells, you'll be MORE flexible (assuming you add the number of daily uses of the 2 mechanics together), because you would be able to choose to spend all your slots on spells, all your slots on channeling powers, or any combination; right now, having 2 silos means LESS flexible and MORE complex, because you have 2 different lists of powers to keep before your eye during the game, so when it's your turn you'll spend MORE time because you have 2 decisions to make (do I cast a spell or do I use channeling? which spell/power do I use?) instead of just 1. Not to mention the redundancy of the concept, since both things represent "channeling the powers of your gods into a magical effect".
Frostmarrow
First Post
I find rolling 1d20 with skill checks pretty redundant. Why not just roll the skill die plus bonus? If we just roll skill die plus bonus it becomes very easy to introduce extended checks where you add to your previous score from round to round. It works with concerted efforts too.
The only thing that happens is that DC become much lower, but that is hardly a drawback. Anything can have a threshold to overcome. A door can have 10 points that must be accumulated in order to open. A locksmith with 1d6+4 (dex) would typically require two rounds of lockpicking to open. The Gates of Mordor can have 100 points requiring the continious efforts of a couple of cave trolls to open.
To make things interesting skill checks should come with a backlash that befalls the characters at the end of every round until resolved.
The only thing that happens is that DC become much lower, but that is hardly a drawback. Anything can have a threshold to overcome. A door can have 10 points that must be accumulated in order to open. A locksmith with 1d6+4 (dex) would typically require two rounds of lockpicking to open. The Gates of Mordor can have 100 points requiring the continious efforts of a couple of cave trolls to open.
To make things interesting skill checks should come with a backlash that befalls the characters at the end of every round until resolved.
FireLance
Legend
That would require the fighter to roll close to the maximum on his martial damage dice and weapon damage, though - which is not likely unless he has some ability to maximize his damage (like the monk).
That said, a party of five 20th level PCs (fighter, rogue, monk, cleric, wizard) should have no problem taking down Asmodeus (level 20, AC 17, 250 hp) in just two or maybe three rounds.
Last edited:
Walker N. Waistz
First Post
I guess I am just wondering what you expect the designers to do between surveys? Sit on their hands and wait before they write more stuff. The idea that it is just marketing is cynical and makes little sense on examination.Didn't think my comments about D&D Next would get much agreement
In a vaguely responsive type manner...
I just feel that being a month ahead seems to be counter productive to me. If you release a play packet that doesn't include the feedback from the last packet and then go change a whole bunch of stuff to then later have to go back and include two month old input you are sort of running around back and forth and round and round. Although it might seem that you are getting 'ahead' by not sitting on yer bottom, I suggest that to properly filter and digest feedback would be time better spent if indeed this is going to be a true reflection of the input given.
R
RevTurkey
Guest
I expect them to read our comments and feedback...then respond with changes afterward rather than forging ahead making changes before they have had time to examine what we are finding and thinking.
Thinking about design is important. Rather than just blindly stumbling along producing content, they might place some value in having a cup of coffee and examining what they are doing and what people are saying they should do a bit more. This is still being productive...it just means that we don't get regular play-test packet releases and that the game would probably take longer to be released.
Take a look at the bloat of content for 4th Edition...a little more time sat thinking might have worked wonders in keeping the system from collapsing under the weight of it's own content. There is often a beauty in simplistic design
Thinking about design is important. Rather than just blindly stumbling along producing content, they might place some value in having a cup of coffee and examining what they are doing and what people are saying they should do a bit more. This is still being productive...it just means that we don't get regular play-test packet releases and that the game would probably take longer to be released.
Take a look at the bloat of content for 4th Edition...a little more time sat thinking might have worked wonders in keeping the system from collapsing under the weight of it's own content. There is often a beauty in simplistic design
