[+] Here's my ideal future 5E supplement

[Parmandur]

Mearls mentioned in a Twitch panel recently that they were originally going to be using the monker "Advanded Dungeons & Dragons" for the core three books, as opposed to the "Basic Dungeons & Dragons" of the free PDF and Starter Set. But, it didn't test well, so they dropped the Advanced.

The PHB and the MM already are "AD&D" as far as WotC or the market are concerned.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

This thread has really derailed. Understand that people have theor past grievances, but can we put them asode for this thread and get back on to the orginal topic?

Something i would really like to see is an alternate spell list a la shadow of the demon lord.

For those unaware, the system consists of schools of around 11 spells. Cantrips up to level 5 spells. When you level up you can choose a new spell in the school or from a different school at the ground level and work your way up. The core book has about 30 schools, and expansions add more.

From a gm perspective, this is brilliant. If you want to have a water mage enemy, choose the water school. Necromancy? Necromancer school. Artificer? Technomancy school. Etc.

From a player perspective its grest as well, because you could have a party of wizards and they would still be completely dofferent. You could have a curse and battle wizard, an air and time wizard, and a chaos and dvination wizard and they all would play extremely differently.

The thing is, extracting magic frkm existing d&d classes and replacing them with school choices is a masssive amount of work, and would need someome with the clout of wotc to test and distribute.

I know that's not going to happen, but sometimes a dream is nice eh?

Covering the same amount of spells schools as SotDL is probably asking to much, but I think that having the 8 schools we have for now a little more ''complete'' would be interesting. As of now, some schools dont even have spell for each level on the wizard list, let alone on the list of restricted casters. I tried recently to create a necromancy/illusion Shadow Sorcerer and the lack of thematic spells is showing.

One thing I dont understand with the spell design of 5e is that many caster classes are presented as highly specialized and thematic, but the spell list dont allow to create those concepts. Sorcerer's small number of known spells is almost a blessing when you try to create something as simple as ''I want a storm sorcerer that uses storm/thunder spells'', because there's so few of them that you almost need to step on your concept to take spells that make little sense.

I guess what I'm saying is that I miss the 4e where every caster had its own spell list.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Mearls mentioned in a Twitch panel recently that they were originally going to be using the monker "Advanded Dungeons & Dragons" for the core three books, as opposed to the "Basic Dungeons & Dragons" of the free PDF and Starter Set. But, it didn't test well, so they dropped the Advanced.
.

I'm surprised it didn't test well....

The PHB and the MM already are "AD&D"

and DMG, of course.

Considering AD&D originated the Core 3, that's fair to think of it that way. But, really, compared to 3.x/PF/4e, AD&D/5e, is not that 'advanced,' at all, so more options, however tripple-dog-trans-ulta-hyper-quantum optional they need to be to placate the purists, would be nice...

...so would the odd flying car...

 

[CubicsRube]

Covering the same amount of spells schools as SotDL is probably asking to much, but I think that having the 8 schools we have for now a little more ''complete'' would be interesting. As of now, some schools dont even have spell for each level on the wizard list, let alone on the list of restricted casters. I tried recently to create a necromancy/illusion Shadow Sorcerer and the lack of thematic spells is showing.

One thing I dont understand with the spell design of 5e is that many caster classes are presented as highly specialized and thematic, but the spell list dont allow to create those concepts. Sorcerer's small number of known spells is almost a blessing when you try to create something as simple as ''I want a storm sorcerer that uses storm/thunder spells'', because there's so few of them that you almost need to step on your concept to take spells that make little sense.

I guess what I'm saying is that I miss the 4e where every caster had its own spell list.

I have tried making spell lists in 5e by the existing spells and saw exactly the same thing.

Id love to be aboe to create classes which just had access along spell lines instead of class based spell lists.

Have an illusionist class that has all illusion spells, a necromancer with all necromancy spells...

Except you're right. The school types are mostly fluff. They really arent balanced around each other at all

 

[CubicsRube]

One other note i love about the sotdl system is its mdoularity.

If you want to create new magic, its easy! Think up 5 tiers of spells and create your own school.

If i want to make a "cat magic" school i can think up a few cantrips and spells. Such as hypnotizong everyone with cuteness, and vicious flurries of strikes when theyre unawares.

Actually...that could make a really good school...

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

One other note i love about the sotdl system is its mdoularity.

If you want to create new magic, its easy! Think up 5 tiers of spells and create your own school.

If i want to make a "cat magic" school i can think up a few cantrips and spells. Such as hypnotizong everyone with cuteness, and vicious flurries of strikes when theyre unawares.

Actually...that could make a really good school...

A thing I would have loved for 5e is to keep the idea of Keywords as descriptor. Then when a class would have a fluff reason to gain access to thematic, just have a lvl X feature that gives access to spells with said ''tag'' of level Y to Z.

Ex:
Fiend Warlock
At level 1, you gain dominion over devilish powers. You gain access to any spells with the ''Fiendish (or whatever'' Meta-Tag/Keyword when choosing new spells for a level you can cast as part of your Pact Magic feature.

Storm Sorcerer
At level 1, you power over wind and tempest awakens. When you get to choose a spell to add to your spell list, you can choose a spell of the same level that has the ''Storm'' Meta-Tag/Keyword.

Illusion Savant
When you choose the school of Illusion at level 2, you are able to maximize the preparation of you favored spells. When preparing your spells for the day, you can add 1/2 Proficiency (minimum 1) spells with the ''Illusion'' Meta-Tag/Keyword that dont count for the maximum spells you can prepare for the day.

 

[Parmandur]

I'm surprised it didn't test well....

and DMG, of course.

Considering AD&D originated the Core 3, that's fair to think of it that way. But, really, compared to 3.x/PF/4e, AD&D/5e, is not that 'advanced,' at all, so more options, however tripple-dog-trans-ulta-hyper-quantum optional they need to be to placate the purists, would be nice...

...so would the odd flying car...

Well, less that it didn't test "well," so much as sent the wrong message, like PHB2 or MM3 as names.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Well, less that it didn't test "well," so much as sent the wrong message, like PHB2 or MM3 as names.

That makes more sense. 'Advanced' and XX3 and such say 'intimidating' to new players, no matter what the actual content, while 'Proper Noun's Guide to _________ ' just says 'blah, blah, stuff if you're interested...'

 

[Umbran]

You need to read up on the concept of "plus" threads if you think I want an echo chamber, or if you don't see the very valid reasons why the site supports such threads.

With respect, it isn't like this is a commonly used convention here. Nor did you spend a lick of time in your OP explaining the convention.

I took a moment with Google - even if they thought to search on "[+] thread" or "plus thread" or "plus forum thread" or "plus discussion thread" the top results are not things that have any relation to what you are trying to do here. So your suggestion that they, "go read up on it," without any sourcing, isn't helpful. Being all brusque about people not playing by rules you didn't even state isn't exactly constructive.

As for the site "supporting" it - Morrus has told me that EN World moderation is not going to actively enforce this convention.

But, everyone, please, how about you take it that the OP has politely requested that you not directly contradict the main premise given. Consider it a thread where the OP would like you to post in the style of improv - "Yes, and..." rather than, "No, but...".

Okay? Is that clear to everyone? If not, take it to a discussion with a moderator before engaging with the thread further, okay? Thanks, all!

 

[ccs]

I too dream of nice things....
At least until the damned alarm clock rings.