TwinBahamut
First Post
First off, I want to say that the following comes from the perspective of someone who has grown estranged from 4E and doesn't like Pathfinder. I started with 3E and grew dissatisfied with its many flaws, but neither of its replacements really suited me. I loved a lot of both the core ideas of 3E and many of the ideas implemented in its later books like the Tome of Battle, and the 5E announcement is giving me some hope that I might be able to play an improved version of that someday. So, to take advantage of this newfound spirit of inclusiveness, reconciliation, and player feedback WotC is promoting, I may as well offer my two cents.
To state it crudely, I hope 5E doesn't have a Fighter class. Or rather, I hope it doesn't repeat the mistakes of some older editions and try to create a single class that is somehow supposed to embody all the concepts of "a skilled warrior who fights without the aid of magic". All that does is create a generic, flavorless chimera of a class that inhibits the development of more interesting class concepts. I like seeing all kinds of different warrior variants. Heavily armored knights, archers, swordmasters who forego the use of armor, lightly armored cavaliers, etc. I hope 5E's rules leave room for all of these kinds of concepts and let different character types shine.
I also hope that 5E continues some of the good ideas from the Tome of Battle and 4E by letting such non-magical characters still perform impressive feats and use advanced combat techniques. Of course, the exact implementation could certainly be improved upon. For all kinds of reasons I'm not a fan of the extensive class-specific power lists that defined 4E. If nothing else, a broader separation between class features and powers would be nice, and creating class-independent fighting powers similar to 3E's arcane and divine spell lists could be really interesting.
I'd also like to see a broader range of magical warrior concepts be available in the game. This is one area where 4E's strict Power Source system failed, and even 3E was only partially successful. Similarly, it would be nice to see a variety of "not magical, but still supernatural" character concepts like the 3E Monk was or what the 4E Ki Power Source could have been (I'll admit it, WotC's announcement that the Monk was Psionic and the Ki Power Source was scrapped was the moment I realized 4E was drifting away from what I wanted it to be).
One final thing I would like to see is a good and simple set of rules for mounts and mounted combat that lets mounts serve an important role in the game. Older editions seem to have always marginalized such rules based on the idea that mounts don't belong in a dungeon, but if 5E really wants to let people play the way they want to play, it needs to move past that kind of thinking. 3E's Ride Skill system added a ton of extra die rolls and complexity for very little effect, and 4E's wasn't that much better. Some system where mounted characters had unique advantages and disadvantages (and maybe a dedicated Cavalier class) without significant complexity would be ideal.
Anyone else have some thoughts on the subject? Subjects? I think I rambled on a bit there...
To state it crudely, I hope 5E doesn't have a Fighter class. Or rather, I hope it doesn't repeat the mistakes of some older editions and try to create a single class that is somehow supposed to embody all the concepts of "a skilled warrior who fights without the aid of magic". All that does is create a generic, flavorless chimera of a class that inhibits the development of more interesting class concepts. I like seeing all kinds of different warrior variants. Heavily armored knights, archers, swordmasters who forego the use of armor, lightly armored cavaliers, etc. I hope 5E's rules leave room for all of these kinds of concepts and let different character types shine.
I also hope that 5E continues some of the good ideas from the Tome of Battle and 4E by letting such non-magical characters still perform impressive feats and use advanced combat techniques. Of course, the exact implementation could certainly be improved upon. For all kinds of reasons I'm not a fan of the extensive class-specific power lists that defined 4E. If nothing else, a broader separation between class features and powers would be nice, and creating class-independent fighting powers similar to 3E's arcane and divine spell lists could be really interesting.
I'd also like to see a broader range of magical warrior concepts be available in the game. This is one area where 4E's strict Power Source system failed, and even 3E was only partially successful. Similarly, it would be nice to see a variety of "not magical, but still supernatural" character concepts like the 3E Monk was or what the 4E Ki Power Source could have been (I'll admit it, WotC's announcement that the Monk was Psionic and the Ki Power Source was scrapped was the moment I realized 4E was drifting away from what I wanted it to be).
One final thing I would like to see is a good and simple set of rules for mounts and mounted combat that lets mounts serve an important role in the game. Older editions seem to have always marginalized such rules based on the idea that mounts don't belong in a dungeon, but if 5E really wants to let people play the way they want to play, it needs to move past that kind of thinking. 3E's Ride Skill system added a ton of extra die rolls and complexity for very little effect, and 4E's wasn't that much better. Some system where mounted characters had unique advantages and disadvantages (and maybe a dedicated Cavalier class) without significant complexity would be ideal.
Anyone else have some thoughts on the subject? Subjects? I think I rambled on a bit there...
