How would you do 5th edition D&D?

[scruffygrognard]

6. Tone down the Wahoo! elements. Speaking of which, Pathfinder folks, if you're listening, "More Wahoo! than 3.5!" isn't the direction I think you should be going.

I had high hopes for Pathfinder being the next, great version of D&D for me and my group... which were dashed when I looked at the Beta rules.

Pathfinder should have cleaned up 3.5 and make for streamlined, faster paced game... PERIOD. That isn't what I've been seeing.

For 5th edition, I'd love to see the game start off simply, and build off of that (highly flexible) base:

1] Core races (dwarf, elf, gnome, half-elf, half-orc, halfling and human) that are true to their past D&D roots.
2] Core classes (cleric, druid, fighter, ranger, paladin, wizard, monk and rogue) that have been staples of D&D for a while. These classes act as templates that can be built off of (see #3).
3] A feat-tree system (like Saga's talent trees) that allows for more class flexibility and allows you to emulate iconic types without the need for new classes (swashbucklers, assassins, barbarians, bards, necromancers, etc+). Optimally, this feat system should also be able to replace multiclassing/prestige classes (here is one place that I feel that 4th edition did things correctly).
4] A simplified skill system that allows for diversity without requiring a person to be an accountant.
5] Bring back utility spells and Vancian magic. Limit buffing spells (the number that 1 creature can have cast upon them) and simplify the rules for stacking effects.
6] Monsters need not follow the same rules as PCs (another bit that 4th edition got right).
7] Fix DR so that characters don't need to carry around 6 different weapons in order to be effective.

 

[Lurks-no-More]

Let's see...

I'd poll the player base to get a good feel of their mood. Also, listen to feedback received over the course of 4e's run.

I'd focus on fixing the broken things that have emerged over that run; some of it will only have showed up two or three supplements from now, so I can't say what those would be.

One thing I am perfectly certain I would not do, is to try to turn the clock back to appeal to people who have stuck with previous editions. Cutting popular, established core races like tieflings or dragonborn for second- and third-PHB oddities like half-orcs and gnomes? No way. Or getting rid of the powers system for hoary, thirty-plus year old chunk of legacy design like pseudo-Vancean magic? Absolutely not.

 

[scruffygrognard]

One thing I am perfectly certain I would not do, is to try to turn the clock back to appeal to people who have stuck with previous editions. Cutting popular, established core races like tieflings or dragonborn for second- and third-PHB oddities like half-orcs and gnomes? No way. Or getting rid of the powers system for hoary, thirty-plus year old chunk of legacy design like pseudo-Vancean magic? Absolutely not.

I am thankful that you're not the guy in charge of the D&D brand then!

Seriously though, I'm not saying that tieflings or dragonborn should be kicked out of the game... I'm just saying that they shouldn't be a core race. There is NO reason why they couldn't show up in a planar supplement or book on lizard/dragon-kind BUT see no reason why they should supplant races that have been a part of D&D for 30-odd years.

As for getting rid of Vancian magic, I can respect that. On the flipside, there needs to be a better system than the Power System of 4th edition for handling how class abilities work. Powers (and how they work) are one of the chief reason that NO ONE I know wants to play 4th edition (before you scoff, I know a lot of geeks who feel this way). MY group also wants to play a version of D&D that includes utility spells.

There are certain D&D-isms that I'm not willing to part with and I know that I'm not alone.

 

[justanobody]

Cutting popular, established core races like tieflings or dragonborn for second- and third-PHB oddities like half-orcs and gnomes? No way..

Yeah, god forbid getting rid of races people like to throw in the new shiny shiny is really silly isn't it.

BTW, that is exactly what WotC did removing half-orcs and gnomes and adding Eladrin, Tieflings, Dragonborn.

They did thrown away popular established races for 4th rate races.

If of course you think what 4th did to races was wrong, and I have your idea backwards, then disregard this post.

 

[JeffB]

Take 4E, and apply Raven Crowking's points 3, 5, and 6- and that would be good enough for my tastes..

yeah I'm easy.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

that is exactly what WotC did removing half-orcs and gnomes

for nine months. and they were in the bloody MM.

 

[Silvercat Moonpaw]

There are certain D&D-isms that I'm not willing to part with and I know that I'm not alone.

This is why I think the D&D name needs to go out the window. The game has too many different people with too many different tastes to ever cater to all or possibly even a large majority of them.

 

[justanobody]

This is why I think the D&D name needs to go out the window. The game has too many different people with too many different tastes to ever cater to all or possibly even a large majority of them.

I think I agree with this and D&D's time has come and gone since its downfall from LW and everything since.

Let it rest in piece like its creator with what dignity it has left.

So my first post here will likely not be continued as I think D&D has passed and there should not be a 5th edition.

 

[Lurks-no-More]

Yeah, god forbid getting rid of races people like to throw in the new shiny shiny is really silly isn't it.

Tieflings aren't "new shiny shiny"; they've been very popular ever since they appeared in Planescape, over ten years ago.

They did thrown away popular established races for 4th rate races.

Gnomes and half-orcs, popular? Since when? In my experience, and judging by what I've seen on the 'net about other people's games, those two were the least popular, least often played races.

As for them being established, half-orcs were nowhere to be seen in 2e core, and although gnomes have been around since 1e AD&D (although not in BECMI), they've always been a second-string race at best.

If of course you think what 4th did to races was wrong, and I have your idea backwards, then disregard this post.

I think 4e did a very good thing in finally putting in some core races that aren't straight from LotR - and I'm saying this as a major fan of Tolkien's work!

You, and other people who want to get rid of tieflings and dragonborn must understand that when fifth edition comes around, people have been playing those races for years. There are thousands of D&D gamers, for whom those two races are part of what defines D&D. Throwing them out would be totally silly by then. (Unless, of course, tieflings and/or dragonborn end up as little-played filler races, like half-orcs and gnomes... )

 

[justanobody]

You, and other people who want to get rid of tieflings and dragonborn must understand that when fifth edition comes around, people have been playing those races for years.

And IF somehow I was making 5th edition, I wouldn't give a rats' ass anymore about those people than WotC cared about the people that the changes in 4th would turn them away.

I would just remove the chaff from the wheat and keep the wheat and discard the chaff.

I wouldn't make a game for people that didn't like the game to begin with and needed everything changed.

Pampering to people that didn't like D&D to begin with to cause as much change as was done to 4th is the whole problem.

They didn't play D&D before, they don't play it now. So what? I don't care about them. I would not make/change a game to win some popularity contest. I would make the game work better to solve the problems it had/has.

That would mean discarding a lot from 4th, and any player who clings to the new garbage like healing surges, tieflings and dragonborn as core races, etc; would be included in that discard.

There is the OGL for people that want to take some edition of D&D and make their own perfect edition, so let the do so. My 5th won't cater to people wanting to play D&D to be cool, but those wanting to play D&D because they like D&D.

If you don't like D&D, then your opinion wouldn't matter to me. I wouldn't change the game for you and discard decades worth of valued customers for some new unknowns that really are more risk than they are worth to pamper.

If I want to pamper someone, I will have kids. But I think Huggies is probably the better product.