Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Shiroiken" data-source="post: 9837718" data-attributes="member: 6775477">I worked on my own edition of D&D during the D&D Next Playtest. I didn't have enough faith that they'd make a worthwhile game, and really liked some things from the playtest. I think the primary thing I would do is move back towards "Swingy" combat, rather than "slog" combat (where there's massive HP bloat). Another big thing I want to see change is using BECMI's ability score modifiers, rather than the +/-1 per 2 ability modifier introducted in 3E. Probably means getting rid of ASI, but you can add direct modifiers without modifying the ability score itself. For example, something that normally gave +1 to strength might give +1 to strength checks and saving throws, but not attacks or DCs. Obviously there's a lot of detail to work out for this.I'd probably like a 6 or 7. I like the fact that 5E doesn't try to have a rule for everything, allowing the DM to make rulings as needed. 3E tried to codify everything, and it made the game crawl when the DM had to look up a rule.Uncapped levels, with limited benefits beyond 10th, similar to AD&D. Archetypes are always going to exist, but I'm assuming you're referring to subclasses from 5E. I think they're a great addition, allowing two characters of the same class without having lots of overlap.Spells are going to be revised in a new edition, regardless. Very few spells need to go away, but many need adjustment.HP bloat has been a problem since 3E, and has just gotten worse with every edition. Having Con add HP using the +/-1 per 2 ability scores was a terrible idea. 4E was better since it capped the benefit to once, rather than every level, but it still massively bloated HP.I personally love negative effects, even ones that are "unfun" like paralyze. However, I agree that most negative effects should have limited impact on the duration of the character, and should have ways to be negated. Old school energy drain worked for a time when you had different level characters in a group by default, but losing levels in a game like 3E became a death spiral (lower level characters would just die more often, causing more level loss). I think petrification and death are the only two "permanent" effects I'm a fan of, and both of which can be negated with powerful magic.It really depends on what kind of game you want. I'm personally okay with 5E's bounded accuracy making saving throws largely passable by everyone. The only change I'd consider is allowing half proficiency for "untrained" saves. Well, and completely rewrite the common usage so that every ability score was useful for a saving throw. This would make having a low ability score a significant penalty for about 1/6th the saves.I'm personally a fan of the old percentage magic resistance, where some creatures were potentially immune to spells (making martials matter a lot more). Personally, I'd like a "shake it off" ability that allows a Legendary creature to spend some number of legendary actions to remove debuffs, but it can't happen at the end of the turn it's created (allowing at least 1 turn where the debuff is in effect).I think the concept of spell damage needs a massive overhaul, but not for the same reason. First, I think that scaling cantrips need to go away. Using a spell slot should be a limited resource that does impressive damage. If you reduce HP bloat, then you don't need to upgrade the damage dealt. If you don't really reduce the bloat, then yeah spells need to add multiple dice for upcasting. Dice based on caster level just leads to the linear fighter/quadratic wizard problem.This already happens. They changed Stealth to become Invisibility during the One D&D Playtest without any input from the players. They do the survey to get an overall feel of how people think about things, but sometimes they've already made up their minds.</blockquote>

Verification