D&D 5E How creative should 5e let you be?

[am181d]

I have to agree with the folks who say that 4e is harder to house rule than previous editions. You can still tinker with individual feats or powers, but making entirely new classes is a pain, because every class is supposed to support a full set of powers. It's like if in 3e, every class had it's own unique spell list.

Ultimately, I think most gamers who homebrew have a Platonic ideal of what the game should be that no edition will ever match. What matters is how easy it is to nudge the game in your preferred direction. In this analogy, 4e is a heavy boulder, while 3e was an imperfect, but passable wheel.

 

[MichaelSomething]

I have to agree with the folks who say that 4e is harder to house rule than previous editions. You can still tinker with individual feats or powers, but making entirely new classes is a pain, because every class is supposed to support a full set of powers. It's like if in 3e, every class had it's own unique spell list.

If you're making a class for publication, making all of those powers would be a pain. If you're just making a class for your own group, you'll really only need to make 17 powers, the maximum the character can have (assuming you make your own paragon path and epic destiny). When you replace a power, simply readjust a power you already have to fit with your level.

 

[Mattachine]

I have to agree with the folks who say that 4e is harder to house rule than previous editions. You can still tinker with individual feats or powers, but making entirely new classes is a pain, because every class is supposed to support a full set of powers. It's like if in 3e, every class had it's own unique spell list.

Unless you make a class like the Essentials-style fighter. In which case only a few powers, or none, are needed.

 

[Steely_Dan]

If you're just making a class for your own group, you'll really only need to make 17 powers

But that seems arbitrary to me (and I do not want all classes to have "Powers").

Why not 2 Encounter Powers at 1st Level?

...very odd, to me, is the 4th Ed "algorithm".

 

[Sunseeker]

I've stayed out of this topic mostly to see the direction it went, but I don't want to see people get hung up thinking only about creating houserule content or character customization.

I'm particularly interested in how you think a general sense of play should be organized. There are ways to be incredibly creative with even the most mundane sets of powers, though they often lead to a slower game(since creativity often takes more time to think up, execute, and RP). And one of my concerns is that with a desire to "fast play", there's going to be a serious push towards "roll the dice and pass the turn", making the game more like a session of Monopoly than D&D.

In my general opinion, D&D should inspire creative solutions to non-combat situations. Not just in terms of RP, but in different ways to winning loyalty or finding information. "Roll a d20, add diplomacy" I think is pretty boring. Even having to come up with questions can be tedious, especially if you've only got one "face guy" in your party.

Through Themes and Backgrounds, I hope for a pretty high level of functional character generation. People should be able to reasonably develop the character they have in their head without being severely punished for being "cool" because all the "good" things are boring math feats/themes/backgrounds. I would love to see the return of templates, in particular, I'd love to see vanity templates that essentially allow you to change your character's physical appearance but not significantly alter your play. ie: the half-fiend visuals with none/very little of the crunch. I'd go as far as to say I'd like to see rules for basic race creation in the DMG1/MM1.

On the whole, I want to see players encouraged to develop characters and play them in a style that is unique. Regardless of edition, I can table hop and pretty much see Elf Wizards, Dwarf Fighters, and Human Paladin's all played the same way by pretty much everyone. 5e shouldn't put a huge point on having to be a Theater Major, but it should certainly press people to develop an idea of who they want to play before they pick out what they want to play.

If the in-book rules are diverse and solid, then I'm not too concerned with how difficult it is to create new content. I'm more concerned about how difficult it is to be creative with the given content.

 

[Ratskinner]

I think the premise of the OP is flawed.

5e will not "let me" be creative, nor should it try. I will be as creative as I am/wanna be and "let" 5e be the framework in which structure that creativity...or not if I don't like it/I can't do things in a way that is creative and enjoyable for my table....<snaippage>

I agree that the premise is flawed as you'd suggest. However, I would add that by playing an RPG, we have agreed with the other players to play a game that has rules (even if minimalist.) Different rule sets can make creativity easier or harder, or even make different types of creativity and changes harder or easier. Not so much for the sake of the creativity itself, but through the necessity of the newly created/modified elements interacting with the rest of the rules system.

For example, the "4e does(n't) support creativity" argument. I'm sure that, when it comes to general plotlines, mysteries, and setting politics; 4e supports creativity almost exactly as well as previous editions. D&D rules really don't directly address those things at all (except in a few third-tier splatbooks here and there.)

On the other hand, 4e had a very detailed combat system. Much more detailed than previous editions. That system definitely promoted a certain style or feel of combat. It was designed to do so. Because of the weight of those rules, bending that feel away from its designated style was very hard. So, if you didn't like that feel, it was stifling. (Even within that, though, the combat rules made it easier to include more diverse terrain, obstacles, and tactics in your game reliably.) You can make similar notes about AEDU characters.

So were 4e combat and characters more or less creative than those from other editions?....Yes. The answer is not inherent in the rules, but in the interaction of the players and the rules. If you and your group appreciated the feel and direction of 4e's rules, then it probably enhanced your creativity by illuminating options and ideas that had never occurred to you before or that you had dismissed as not worth the effort necessary. If you and your group wanted to go in different directions in those areas, then 4e can feel like a straitjacket.

You can make similar arguments about 3.x and character development. Having all those options for characters: feats, class abilities, multiclassing, prestige classes, etc. lead to a lot of detail and choice. It came at a cost of speed, and clarity. That too can hamper creativity when the busy DM decides that he won't get enough out of the Sor3/Ftr4/Prc6 NPC to make the encounter worth statting up. I only know, because I was there.

So, now it seems obvious that rules-lite is the way to go. To some extent that's true. I would argue that both 3 and 4 e's were bigger than they needed to be, just in different ways. However, I've experimented with many different indie systems. IME, there is a limit of how "lite" a game like D&D can go (does anyone else remember TWERPS?). Not only does the DM (or sometimes player) sometimes find themselves doing extra work to finesse the system in a way they prefer, but some groups see a lack of differentiation in characters (much like some complain that "everybody's a wizard" in 4e.) Sometimes things that work fine for a convention or emergency one-shot don't hold up well for the long haul.

My hope for 5e is that the base game is as simple as still works for D&D campaign-style play. For those that find their creativity and fun enhanced by having additional rules for detailed combat, complicated characters, etc.; I hope that there are modules to help take them in each of those directions.

 

[Incenjucar]

The way to provide players with more creativity is to hand over the math, the calculations, the assumptions, and use of DDI, along with lots of recommendations and examples. We need the code if we're going to program freely.

The more they hide, the harder it is to homebrew. The less we can modify the tools, the more difficult it is to use homebrew.

 

[BobTheNob]

In my PERSONAL OPINION, I would argue that while 4e is a lot of fun, there's not a lot of creativity.

Totally agree.

4e taught me to "say yes".

Really? I actually had the opposite effect. I was in the "Say Yes" mode before 4e, the more I played 4e, the more I found that becoming "Say No". I guess we had a different experience.

As to the topic at hand, I am a huge advocate for creative play. To me, thats the big drawcard of tabletop play, and if a system doesnt do that your better off playing Dragon Age on the PC.

This is where I want 5e to do something a little different. No just "less mechanics", leaving it to DM fiat, but more mechanics to support creative play. My big love in this way goes to FATE and the players ability to creative narrative, it not only allows creative play...it has a mechanic for creative play. Very cool.

We will see what they can come up with.

 

[Mengu]

5e will let you be creative, but I believe it will have an intentional limit. This became apparent to me, listening to the PAX seminar online. They were very careful with their choice of words, dancing around some of the questions. I believe the limit will be "the D&D universe". So if you're playing in Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, etc, you're good. If you are trying for something that pushes the boundary a little bit like Dark Sun, or Eberron, you need some house rules (that they will even publish for you). But if you push further, you'll need to basically make your own house rules, or sub systems. So no, you will not be able to play in a universe like Harry Potter that has it's own mechanics for how the universe works, with a D&D rule set out of the box.

The D&D universe will still work like the D&D universe, and only like the D&D universe. That is its limitation. If you want to go beyond that, you're expected to either be comfortable with a hacksaw, or simply pick a different game system.

I believe this was the perceived problem with 4e, it didn't "feel" like D&D. The AEDU system was just too different for people, so it felt like another game, another universe, not D&D. They don't want to make that same choice again. That is why they went back to 1e, 2e, 3e, to try and determine what it is that "feels" like D&D. And that is why 5e will have the exact same limitations on how the universe works, as those previous editions. I do not expect anything new on that front for encouraging (or discouraging) creativity.

 

[Steely_Dan]

since creativity often takes more time to think up, execute, and RP

I have found the exact opposite in every edition.