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

[Horwath]

Youre aware 5E and 3E are odd ones out in regards to defenses scaling very poorly?

Also kinda rushed last minute we have to do something in 5E playtest.

Proficiency bonus should be applied to all saves or removed from spell DCs.

I use a lot of spellcasters in my campaigns. Baddies are often cultists.

PCs dont fear damage they fear disabling effects like paralyzed.

Unless tge damage is getting over 20d6. I hit them with 40d6 DC 23 meteor swarm at q4th level.
DCs ove 17 were common. CR 2s coikd be used as mooks so an low/east fight could be 10 cultists each with hold person.

RAW you can spam this type of stuff and over load Indomitable and counterspells.

I didnt abusive to tgat extent but often had primary caster baddie, 2 henchmen, 4 cr 2-3 with the rest being mundane mooks and guards.

If DM wanted to you can easily throw lots of this stuff PCs.

Are you gappy with DMs uring multiple low CR dpellcasters vs PCs? Higher CR ones are CR6-12. Mages, archnages, priests and performers gone to mind.

Cone of cold vs PCs level 4 its only CR 6.....

Archmage. CR 12 (lvl 7ish) I'll swap out its level 9 spell for meteor swarm and its level 6 for a hold person lvl 6.

hard CCs are to be used on NPCs, soft CCs are to be used on PCs.

any hard CC that last more than 1 round should not be used on PCs unless it is some plot hook.
In the end it's just bad manners.

people come to play D&D, not to stare at the ceiling for 5 hours.

 

[SlyFlourish]

I haven't read all the posts here and its not as though my opinion on it matters, but I'll offer it.

I'd love to see a more "Basic" D&D. I'd love to see what D&D 5e was going to look like when D&D Next was underway and the game could be truly modular. I think Shadowdark is a great example of a basic D&D but probably not heroic enough for today's D&D audience. But I also think Shadowdark is a better representation of the core of D&D than D&D is right now. I'm sure many disagree but having run a bunch of shadowdark and a bunch of D&D, Shadowdark is now my preferred way to show people this game.

I may be misremembering (@mearls might be able to correct me) but some of the initial 5e design was "what are the absolute things that we'd have to have to be D&D". The six stats. HP, AC, attacks, damage, the seven dice, spells, the core classes and species, monsters, levels. Things like that. The 2014 DMG shows what that modular D&D could have been like with class or background-based proficiency bonuses instead of a skill system. The core subclasses could almost be the default. Ability bumps instead of feats.

I'd love small trade paperback books you can throw in a bag and take to a convention and play instead of six pounds of 1200 pages of rulebooks for $150.

Anyway, that's what I'd love to see. I have Shadowdark. I have Nimble 5e. I have Dolmenwood. So I don't really need it myself. But I think that'd be a pretty cool new direction for D&D.

 

[Reynard]

hard CCs are to be used on NPCs, soft CCs are to be used on PCs.

any hard CC that last more than 1 round should not be used on PCs unless it is some plot hook.
In the end it's just bad manners.

people come to play D&D, not to stare at the ceiling for 5 hours.

Which is what reduces 5E combat to monsters being uninteresting bags of HP.

 

[Bae'zel]

Anyway, that's what I'd love to see. I have Shadowdark. I have Nimble 5e. I have Dolmenwood. So I don't really need it myself. But I think that'd be a pretty cool new direction for D&D.

Yeah I'm in the same boat. Despite its flaws, I'm having fun with 5e right now, but I've got so many other ways to handle fantasy. It would be a crime for me not to run Dolmenwood at some point. It's so... inspiring, exciting and perfect for a DM. No more need for another edition of D&D for me.

...once I get a handle on those rules for skills. Oof that's one part of OSR games that I have trouble with. I wonder if I could replace that somehow with something.

 

[TwoSix]

Yeah I'm in the same boat. Despite its flaws, I'm having fun with 5e right now, but I've got so many other ways to handle fantasy. It would be a crime for me not to run Dolmenwood at some point. It's so... inspiring, exciting and perfect for a DM. No more need for another edition of D&D for me.

...once I get a handle on those rules for skills. Oof that's one part of OSR games that I have trouble with. I wonder if I could replace that somehow with something.

Skills are definitely the one part of Dolmenwood that our table, especially our DM, has trouble with. The impulse to test basic noticing or investigating or basic athletics is very ingrained after decades of D&D.

 

[SlyFlourish]

Which is what reduces 5E combat to monsters being uninteresting bags of HP.

Flavor! Add some pizzazz! Put a top hat and give that bag of hit points a cane and some tap shoes!

 

[Rainbow Scissors]

If 6E keeps the idea of proficiency bonus from 5E, I would prefer something more like the proficiency dice optional rule than flat bonuses. Maybe let me downgrade my proficiency die in exchange for effects. 6E power attack could be "...downgrade your proficiency die to do more damage; for each downgrade step (example: drop 1d6 to 1d4,) you gain a +2 bonus to damage..."

Maybe explore similar ideas for other classes. A rogue could sacrifice dice in exchange for wounding effects.

 

[Reynard]

Flavor! Add some pizzazz! Put a top hat and give that bag of hit points a cane and some tap shoes!

Sure, and lots of folks make great 5E monsters. But WotC seems incapable.

 

[Tigris]

class powers were so much alike in power level that you could intechange them at will.
you could have done it also by rules but it cost you a feat. and you could just hand wave that feat requirement.

oh, your fighter got to 5th level?
will you take fighter attack daily 5 or fireball?
who cares, take cure wounds from cleric 5, like it's going to matter anyway.

only thing you needed to watch does it interact with your class ability at 1st level.
and you could gain that also with a multiclass feat.

this really sounds like you dont understand gamedesign on a non surface level.


This same argument could be made about magic the gatheting "all colours are the same" or League of Legends "all championd are the same" because they follow the same structures. Yes powers read similar, thats called good game design because it makes it easier to understand other classes/ colours /champions. The difference comes in what is there and what is not.


And no you could not just exchange powers at will. You needed to multiclass and take a feat which is a big investment since you can only multiclass into 1 class and feats are powerfull. A lot of class power does come from your selection of attacks.


RSnger got a lot of power from the many multi attack powers. Assassin got dripple crit powers. Barbarian Charge powers. Etc.

 

[Tigris]

A lot if classed were weaker than 5E. The long drawn out combat was indicative of this.

They may be more interesting based on ones preference.

Claiming 4E isnt class based isnt fair though.

The game was designed to have 4-5 round combst because if combat is too short there will be no tactic in it. Just bursting down enemies. (See 5e problem).

This has nothing to do with classes being weak. Level 1 4E is the same power level as level 3 5E. With your logic if you would die during initiative roll, you would have really strong classes because combat is fast.


Sure if you dont enjoy tactic and just want to burst things down 5e short combat is better, but short combat does not mean stronger classes.


Also good players in 4e who optimize a lot still have short combats, if they draw out a lot it means badly optimized players or a bad GMs/adventurers.