D&D 5E (2024) How I would do 6E.

[Zardnaar]

So this is a how I would do 6E thread. An actual 6E not a revision of 5.5. That might be a 5.75 thread.

I woukd use the 5E engine. Perhaps with a stretched bounded accuracy going to +6 to +11. Why reinvent the wheel? Everything else would be up for consideration.

Basically I woukdld survey for certain things. Hard decisions need to be made and some have to be done early. Eg game engine and complexity level.

Question 1. Complexity level.
This is self explanatory. B/X is a 1 or 2, 3.5 and 4E are an 8 or 9. Clearly explain the difference and pros and cons of both.

Question 2. Should D&D be a 10 level game (at launch). Magic would top out at 5th level spells. CR 20 would be the new toughest monsters. Otherwise 20 levels.

3. Archetypes. Should they stay or go? Partly related to 1.

4. Some spell effects would be revised or go away. Simulacrum and wish get revised. True polymorphism, shadechange go away.

5. Hit point and damage totals. Point out that 5.5 characters might deal lots of damage but monsters have bloated HP.

6. Poll for nasty effects using energy drain as an example. I wouldnt bring back old school energy drain but using exhaustion levels instead could be used.

7. Saving throw revision. Poll on if players like the current set up or want better scaling saves. Also point out monsters get them as well. Use pre 3E and 4E as examples. 3E and 5E are the odd ones out here.

8. Potential overhaul of defenses vs magic. Expanded use of greater magic resistance and landing severe debuffs might require debuffing opponents first.

9. Overhall damage dealing spells. Potentially go back to 3.5 suto scaling damage dealing spells. Or upcasting +2d6 vs 1d6 damage. This will overlap with 5. If players vote for less hp spell damage may be reduced as well. Basically look at buffing damage and nerfing save or sucks with 8 and 9.

10. Be clear designers can veto a survey. But mostly if its an impossible or contradictory results.

So basically looking at some big mechanical changes that 5E added. However they may be popular enough you really want to poll about getting rid of them.

Could potentially end up with a simple or complex version of D&D. At first glance it nay look like 5E eg skills but fears, classes, spells, races may all be revised or even cut.

 

[sevenbastard]

Q1 complexity should be a base 5, but there should be charachter options that bring that up or down.

Q2 20 levels is fine, but levels after 12 should be moderate growth with limited HP and such. Low 1 to 4, mid 5 to 8, high 9 to 12, epic 13+

Honestly I have less mechanical issues with 5e and my complaints is everyone has magic, darkvission, and probaly a animal head. I want a more grounded 6e, but I think that ship has sailed as player taste is now more Anime and less classic Sword and Sorcery.

 

[mamba]

Q1: 1 or 2 points lower than whatever 5e is

Q2: 10 levels, that already drops it by a point

Q4: Wish gets dropped, not revised, otherwise cutting off the top 10 levels and limiting spells to at most spell level 5 fails at the start

 

[HatWearingFool]

I’d say for sure cut ability scores out. Just have the modifier.

Basicallly all of my suggestions would be, do it like Nimble. Or at least start there. I could see adding back in classic D&D spells.

Get rid of the idea of short and long rests. Figure out something like Drawsteel mechanics that motivate players to push on with needing the DM to come up with a clock. Also borrow from Drawsteel and Daggerheart regarding building up to your big attacks rather than nova all the time.

Steal 1 type of action from Nimble, pathfinder, etc rather than have different types.

Steal the solo boss solution from Nimble so you don’t need legendary kludges.

Get rid of roll to hit.

Cut out hit point bloat.

 

[Greg K]

Get rid of roll to hit.

My own preference would be to get rid of the damage roll, keep the to hit roll, and have a base damage modified by degree of success hitting.

 

[Rainbow Scissors]

My personal preference would be for a 6 in complexity. I think 5 would be best, but aim for a 6 during design, and it ends up at 5 once things get trimmed for the final product.

Make the "bounded accuracy" range smaller instead of bigger.

Expand the game to 30 levels.

Add back in the narrative elements that 2014 backgrounds had. I like that 2024 used backgrounds as a way to give me more feats because 5th edition does not give me enough choice points, but backgrounds were not the right place to address that issue.

 

[ECMO3]

I am ok with eliminating bounded accuracy, but only if difficulty, AC etc does not scale.

In another words if you get rid of BA, accept that high level players always hit, they should always succeed on skill checks (if they have proficiency). Usually the only exception would be a very low roll like a natural 1 or an unusual circumstance. That is pretty much how 1E was at high level, with the exception of a very few monsters (Willow Wisp).

What I am dead set against is the 3E model where players at 10th level have a +15 to hit and monsters have a 30AC. If you want the to hit to scale that is fine, but your Red Dragon should still be AC 19.

 

[Minigiant]

I’d say for sure cut ability scores out. Just have the modifier

Actually I'd do the opposite.

Ability score isn't useless. It's just massively under used.

For example, I'd make all those classes and races that have unarmored AC us their Score. Monks would use Wis Score, Barbarians Con Score.

I'd rejigger Spell, Effect, and Manever DCs to score. This makes calculations easier and allows for quick rulings by DMs (bonuses would have to increase to match higher DCs).

Makes odd scores matter beyond feats.

 

[Reynard]

Question 1. Complexity level.
This is self explanatory. B/X is a 1 or 2, 3.5 and 4E are an 8 or 9. Clearly explain the difference and pros and cons of both.

Aim for 6, accept a 7 if it means more can be done.

Question 2. Should D&D be a 10 level game (at launch). Magic would top out at 5th level spells. CR 20 would be the new toughest monsters. Otherwise 20 levels.

Regardless of the level range, spell levels should match the character levels.

3. Archetypes. Should they stay or go? Partly related to 1.

What do you mean? Archetypes aren't a thing in 5E.

4. Some spell effects would be revised or go away. Simulacrum and wish get revised. True polymorphism, shadechange go away.

The whole magic system needs a revision. High powered spells don't need to go but they should be treasted differented than tactical spells.

5. Hit point and damage totals. Point out that 5.5 characters might deal lots of damage but monsters have bloated HP.

Damage thresholds and wounds.

6. Poll for nasty effects using energy drain as an example. I wouldnt bring back old school energy drain but using exhaustion levels instead could be used.

I like condition tracks for this sort of thing.

7. Saving throw revision. Poll on if players like the current set up or want better scaling saves. Also point out monsters get them as well. Use pre 3E and 4E as examples. 3E and 5E are the odd ones out here.

I prefer old school saves, where the specific character gets better at saves, and fighters etc are actually the best at resisting magic.

8. Potential overhaul of defenses vs magic. Expanded use of greater magic resistance and landing severe debuffs might require debuffing opponents first.

Resistances in general should be ablative -- meaning you can overcome them with enough force.

9. Overhall damage dealing spells. Potentially go back to 3.5 suto scaling damage dealing spells. Or upcasting +2d6 vs 1d6 damage. This will overlap with 5. If players vote for less hp spell damage may be reduced as well. Basically look at buffing damage and nerfing save or sucks with 8 and 9.

Tactical magic should be similarly powered as hitting things with swords and bows.

10. Be clear designers can veto a survey. But mostly if its an impossible or contradictory results.

The designer should always have final say, regardless of surveys or playtest feedback.

So basically looking at some big mechanical changes that 5E added. However they may be popular enough you really want to poll about getting rid of them.

Could potentially end up with a simple or complex version of D&D. At first glance it nay look like 5E eg skills but fears, classes, spells, races may all be revised or even cut.

I don't think your changes go nearly fare enough to make for a new edition.

 

[ECMO3]

If I was actually doing a new edition my first preference would be to completely get rid of non-casters. Every class should have spells as part of the basic class design instead of having to scrounge through feats, subclasses and races or worse making some silly rules so non-casters can be more effective in play without spells.