D&D General [+] For (hypothetical) 6e: Which arcane caster class should be the "simple" one?

[Tigris]

Can you give a brief example of what you mean by simple game (engine?) and a (simple but complexifiable?) caster class?

Here an example: D&D General - [+] For (hypothetical) 6e: Which arcane caster class should be the "simple" one?

 

[Lanefan]

I think this is where we differ. I can see why you would consider my goal unattainable if you consider few decision points during character building and leveling up to be a requirement of simplicity, since what I’m describing would necessarily require many building and leveling decisions.

Few - or better yet, no - decision points during char-gen is a fairly hard-line requirement for simplicity IMO.

Decision points can, to some extent, arise at higher levels* as (in theory) by that point the player has become familiar enough with the character and-or the game as a whole to usefully make those decisions; and depending on the decisions made, maybe some avenues can lead to higher complexity from there.

* - at least 5th+, maybe even 10th+, unless character advancement is slowed down such that the first few levels don't fly by in a blur.

 

[Zardnaar]

Few - or better yet, no - decision points during char-gen is a fairly hard-line requirement for simplicity IMO.

Decision points can, to some extent, arise at higher levels* as (in theory) by that point the player has become familiar enough with the character and-or the game as a whole to usefully make those decisions; and depending on the decisions made, maybe some avenues can lead to higher complexity from there.

* - at least 5th+, maybe even 10th+, unless character advancement is slowed down such that the first few levels don't fly by in a blur.

Few to none would be my requirement. A weapon style is fine a list of fears/spells/powers not so much.

 

[Remathilis]

Few - or better yet, no - decision points during char-gen is a fairly hard-line requirement for simplicity IMO.

I love making no choices about my character. I don't even think picking a name should be a choice. /S

 

[Zardnaar]

I love making no choices about my character. I don't even think picking a name should be a choice. /S

No one's forcing you to pick the class on this scenario.

I wouldn't go there myself unless I was designing a new edition and the large majority wanted a simple game.

 

[Remathilis]

No one's forcing you to pick the class on this scenario.

I wouldn't go there myself unless I was designing a new edition and the large majority wanted a simple game.

If people want a game that simple, start selling Hero Quest again.

 

[Zardnaar]

If people want a game that simple, start selling Hero Quest again.

They have.

B/X line has 7 player options. I would gove thst a 2/10 maybe 3/10. Clones with ascending AC are about the simplist D&D has gone.

Good ol ENworld can't even comprehend people wanting simpler lol (my personal tastes are around a 6 by D&D standards).

I don't see them going to B/X levels or making a simple caster as ENworld defines it. Wouldn't be surprised if 6E goes lower complexity.

 

[DEFCON 1]

To be honest... in my opinion every single class in even currently 5E can be made "simple" by the DM just condensing available options. While the rules allow for a player to prepare 5, 10, 20 spells... no one is actually required to do this. Any DM who wants to make a simple caster need just select a handful of spells that are easy to understand, a few of which can be cast with higher level slots, and give them to the player to say "Here are your spells." Then the player just plays their caster using the self-same half-dozen spells or whatever throughout the course of the game. No need for pages of rules, pages of spell blocks, pages of options to spend minutes on end trying to decide what to use. They have a couple cantrips and a couple spells and just uses them over and over and over again. If that's really what a player needs... the game can accommodate them. The player, DM and the others at the table just need to all be good with that.

Now is that player getting everything out of this class they possibly could? Of course not. But there's zero things wrong or unbalanced if a character just chooses to cast the same four or five spells day after day after day, because the game is set up to exactly do that. Any character could cast nothing but Magic Missile, Shield, Expeditious Retreat, and Fireball right now if they wanted to. The only reason they don't is because gamers tend to just have this anathema to self-restraining their options. They don't feel comfortable holding themselves back... they would rather the game be built to do it for them. If this 6E game designed a class that said "You only have these five spells to cast"... people would be fine with playing it that way because those were the "rules" given to them. But tell them they could have upwards of 20 different spells prepared every in-game day but that they personally would have to hold themselves back and make the personal choice to only prepare five of them total because it would be "easier" for them to understand and play... suddenly most players would get a little bent out of shape about it.

Do I think a potential 6E could have a "simple caster" built and designed to do exactly what I suggested above? Sure. And of the options in the poll, I voted Sorcerer to be it (for the same reasons most others gave.) But do I think it would ever actually happen? To me, I'd say very unlikely.

 

[Hussar]

Huh. I went with Warlock, but, so many folks went with Sorcerer. How is a Sorcerer a "simple" caster? Good grief, even a fairly low level sorc has a dozen options in any given round.

A simple caster has 3 spells. One for offense, one for defense and one for utility. The effects can be modified as needed based on level but, you never, ever have more than three choices at any given time.

To me, that's what a simple character looks like.

 

[Blue]

But today many of these old folk are dead (and until 6e releases even more of them will be) and most people playing 5e know modern games like magic the gathering or Mobas, so they have the ability do understand that different classes can be mechanically different even if they have the same progression.

I agree with most of what you wrote, but please tone down the shots at "old folks". Not everyone who is older is hidebound in what they like or dislike. I've been playing since Moldvay Red Box Basic, am no where near dead and even if 6e is another ten years away it's still well well under average lifespan. Also, I played M:tG many years before WotC every bought TSR and acquired D&D, it's far from a "modern game".