Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Helper Classes
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="NotAYakk" data-source="post: 8287633" data-attributes="member: 72555"><p>They did really cool things with 13th age. I'd be interested in a 5e style reworking of 13th age.</p><p></p><p>5e to me is a deconstruction of 4e. If you really got 4e, you can see its elements torn apart and put together into 5e. The presentation is extremely different, and a greater acceptance of symmetry breaking is also there. A bunch of rough spots where ground down as well.</p><p></p><p>While 4e took the 3e lesson that +X magic items change the game and then assumed you'd have them and built it into progression, 5e accepted they changed the game, explicitly stated it does not assume you have them, then ensured that their scale (up to +3) was small enough that they wouldn't make the game go quite as gonzo. 5e left itself a 3 point wiggle room in accuracy and ensured it didn't break with that much wiggle room. If 5e magic items went up to +6 that really doesn't work.</p><p></p><p>4e had each class have separate minigames. Most strikers had positional minigames to protect themselves and go after vulnerable foes. Defenders had a positional minigame to bog down the enemy. Controllers had a battlefield reshaping minigame. Leaders had to watch everyone's HP, usually keep adjacent to defenders (but not too exposed), and often reposition allies.</p><p></p><p>13th age moved more of those minigames into mechanics instead of being tactical positioning.</p><p></p><p>5e didn't go as far as 13th age mechanics wise, but kept some distinct minigames. Resource differences are another aspect of difference, where there was intended to be a strategic minigame that different classes played (in my experience, this has failed in most groups).</p><p></p><p>The Rogue is almost entirely at-will.</p><p>Warlocks, Monks and Fighters are almost entirely at will and short rest.</p><p>Barbarian, Rangers, Paladins are a mixture of strong at-will combat abilities and daily spells, with a dash of short rest.</p><p>The "support" casters have daily spells and short rest support abliities: Cleric (Channel), Druid (Wildshape), Bard (Inspiration)</p><p>The arcane casters, Wizard and Sorcerer, are almost entirely daily spells (and sorcery points).</p><p></p><p>Supporting multiclassing while having 13th age style minigames would be tricky. Either they'd step on each other (you can only do 1 action, and that action scales with your class level, so you suck) or interact strangely (you can stack everyones minigame together into a machine of chaos).</p><p></p><p>What 5e did surprisingly well is its power per action scaling. The extra attacks, damage bonus riders, cantrip scaling, spell levels scaling -- all of them work using different mechanics. It makes a great difference in feel.</p><p></p><p>4e used [W] and spell dice, which now that I look at it looks too similar. 13th age did a worse job than 4e in my opinion, with ad-hoc systems to "get the math right" having to be retrofitted because the dice rolling got stupid.</p><p></p><p>5e could probably do it a bit better, but the way they managed to get weapon attacks (usually scale in number of attacks, add attribute to damage) feel different than cantrips (scale in dice, no attribute added), which are more similar to spells (scale with slot level with dice) is well done. It is a difference in feel more than mechanics, but that does really matter.</p><p></p><p>Even the paladin's level 11 boost -- adding 1d8 radiant damage -- makes the paladin feel more magical in damage dealing than the fighters +1 attack.</p><p></p><p>The Rogue's damage boost, the at-will 1d6 and only one attack, feels different than the paladin smite, despite both being buckets of dice added to damage all the time, because one is at-will, the other burns that daily power slot. Very different decision matrix.</p><p></p><p>---</p><p></p><p>Rotating around, applying 13th age lessions 5e. What minigames could we have?</p><p></p><p><strong>Arcane Caster</strong>:</p><p>What if the most efficient way of acting was to take 2 turns to cast a spell? You'd attempt to protect yourself between the two turns. Disruption could result usually in being forced to let it go early (as a reaction) less efficiently, or in rare cases (a critical) losing it entirely.</p><p></p><p><strong>Support Caster</strong>:</p><p>Stealing a page from 13th age, you'd be split between your action and your support action. Your support action can be strong and use daily or short rest resources, and maybe boosts your action on later turns.</p><p></p><p>Like, Warpriest getting:</p><p><strong>Piety in Battle</strong></p><p>After making an attack as part of the attack action, you can cast a cleric spell as a bonus action. This spell must have a casting time of 1 action or 1 bonus action. Choose one benefit:</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">One creature you hit this turn that is within 5' of you suffers disadvantage on the save from this spell.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The first weapon attack you make on your next turn deals +1d4 radiant damage per level of the slot used to cast the spell if you hit with it.</li> </ul><p></p><p><strong>Skirmisher</strong></p><p>An abstract tactical game.</p><p></p><p>Like:</p><p></p><p><strong>Hunter's Mark</strong></p><p>As a bonus action you can mark a creature as hunted. Whenever you attack a hunted creature on your turn, if it is your first attack on the creature, you gain advantage on the attack and you deal an extra 1d6 damage.</p><p></p><p>When a creature you have hunted hits you or forces you to make a save, as a reaction you can sacrifice the mark to apply a -1d6 penalty to the attack roll, +1d6 bonus to your saving throw, and reduce any damage you take by 1d6 (after all resistances, saves and vulnerabilities apply).</p><p></p><p><strong>Extra Attack</strong></p><p>At 5th level when you take the attack action, you can either attack one creature twice or up to three creatures once. If you choose to attack multiple creatures, they do not provide each other cover from your attacks, and any creature you attack cannot make an opportunity attack on you afterwards.</p><p></p><p>So I set up a minigame here. Spreading your Hunter's Mark around to multiple foes, consuming it to protect yourself, and getting a significant boost if you can get multiple creatures marked.</p><p></p><p>On a single foe, the sacrifice-HM-for-defence is stronger, and on multiple foes the ability to put HM on many of them is stronger.</p><p></p><p><strong>Champion</strong></p><p>A combination of the Defender and Melee Striker of 4e, or the Brute and Solider monster roles.</p><p></p><p>These would have features that make them <strong>sticky</strong>, that let them shape the battlefield with their presence, and make it very efficient for them to be hit and take damage. So self healing, penalize enemies movement when near them, and significant melee threat.</p><p></p><p>A Melee Skirmisher would dash in, jump on the Dragon's back, deal a blow, then either jump off or use its position to avoid the Dragon's claws. A Champion would jump on the dragon's back and stay there, hindering the dragon's ability to fly.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="NotAYakk, post: 8287633, member: 72555"] They did really cool things with 13th age. I'd be interested in a 5e style reworking of 13th age. 5e to me is a deconstruction of 4e. If you really got 4e, you can see its elements torn apart and put together into 5e. The presentation is extremely different, and a greater acceptance of symmetry breaking is also there. A bunch of rough spots where ground down as well. While 4e took the 3e lesson that +X magic items change the game and then assumed you'd have them and built it into progression, 5e accepted they changed the game, explicitly stated it does not assume you have them, then ensured that their scale (up to +3) was small enough that they wouldn't make the game go quite as gonzo. 5e left itself a 3 point wiggle room in accuracy and ensured it didn't break with that much wiggle room. If 5e magic items went up to +6 that really doesn't work. 4e had each class have separate minigames. Most strikers had positional minigames to protect themselves and go after vulnerable foes. Defenders had a positional minigame to bog down the enemy. Controllers had a battlefield reshaping minigame. Leaders had to watch everyone's HP, usually keep adjacent to defenders (but not too exposed), and often reposition allies. 13th age moved more of those minigames into mechanics instead of being tactical positioning. 5e didn't go as far as 13th age mechanics wise, but kept some distinct minigames. Resource differences are another aspect of difference, where there was intended to be a strategic minigame that different classes played (in my experience, this has failed in most groups). The Rogue is almost entirely at-will. Warlocks, Monks and Fighters are almost entirely at will and short rest. Barbarian, Rangers, Paladins are a mixture of strong at-will combat abilities and daily spells, with a dash of short rest. The "support" casters have daily spells and short rest support abliities: Cleric (Channel), Druid (Wildshape), Bard (Inspiration) The arcane casters, Wizard and Sorcerer, are almost entirely daily spells (and sorcery points). Supporting multiclassing while having 13th age style minigames would be tricky. Either they'd step on each other (you can only do 1 action, and that action scales with your class level, so you suck) or interact strangely (you can stack everyones minigame together into a machine of chaos). What 5e did surprisingly well is its power per action scaling. The extra attacks, damage bonus riders, cantrip scaling, spell levels scaling -- all of them work using different mechanics. It makes a great difference in feel. 4e used [W] and spell dice, which now that I look at it looks too similar. 13th age did a worse job than 4e in my opinion, with ad-hoc systems to "get the math right" having to be retrofitted because the dice rolling got stupid. 5e could probably do it a bit better, but the way they managed to get weapon attacks (usually scale in number of attacks, add attribute to damage) feel different than cantrips (scale in dice, no attribute added), which are more similar to spells (scale with slot level with dice) is well done. It is a difference in feel more than mechanics, but that does really matter. Even the paladin's level 11 boost -- adding 1d8 radiant damage -- makes the paladin feel more magical in damage dealing than the fighters +1 attack. The Rogue's damage boost, the at-will 1d6 and only one attack, feels different than the paladin smite, despite both being buckets of dice added to damage all the time, because one is at-will, the other burns that daily power slot. Very different decision matrix. --- Rotating around, applying 13th age lessions 5e. What minigames could we have? [b]Arcane Caster[/b]: What if the most efficient way of acting was to take 2 turns to cast a spell? You'd attempt to protect yourself between the two turns. Disruption could result usually in being forced to let it go early (as a reaction) less efficiently, or in rare cases (a critical) losing it entirely. [b]Support Caster[/b]: Stealing a page from 13th age, you'd be split between your action and your support action. Your support action can be strong and use daily or short rest resources, and maybe boosts your action on later turns. Like, Warpriest getting: [b]Piety in Battle[/b] After making an attack as part of the attack action, you can cast a cleric spell as a bonus action. This spell must have a casting time of 1 action or 1 bonus action. Choose one benefit: [LIST] [*]One creature you hit this turn that is within 5' of you suffers disadvantage on the save from this spell. [*]The first weapon attack you make on your next turn deals +1d4 radiant damage per level of the slot used to cast the spell if you hit with it. [/LIST] [b]Skirmisher[/b] An abstract tactical game. Like: [b]Hunter's Mark[/b] As a bonus action you can mark a creature as hunted. Whenever you attack a hunted creature on your turn, if it is your first attack on the creature, you gain advantage on the attack and you deal an extra 1d6 damage. When a creature you have hunted hits you or forces you to make a save, as a reaction you can sacrifice the mark to apply a -1d6 penalty to the attack roll, +1d6 bonus to your saving throw, and reduce any damage you take by 1d6 (after all resistances, saves and vulnerabilities apply). [b]Extra Attack[/b] At 5th level when you take the attack action, you can either attack one creature twice or up to three creatures once. If you choose to attack multiple creatures, they do not provide each other cover from your attacks, and any creature you attack cannot make an opportunity attack on you afterwards. So I set up a minigame here. Spreading your Hunter's Mark around to multiple foes, consuming it to protect yourself, and getting a significant boost if you can get multiple creatures marked. On a single foe, the sacrifice-HM-for-defence is stronger, and on multiple foes the ability to put HM on many of them is stronger. [b]Champion[/b] A combination of the Defender and Melee Striker of 4e, or the Brute and Solider monster roles. These would have features that make them [b]sticky[/b], that let them shape the battlefield with their presence, and make it very efficient for them to be hit and take damage. So self healing, penalize enemies movement when near them, and significant melee threat. A Melee Skirmisher would dash in, jump on the Dragon's back, deal a blow, then either jump off or use its position to avoid the Dragon's claws. A Champion would jump on the dragon's back and stay there, hindering the dragon's ability to fly. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Helper Classes
Top