D&D 5E I Hope I Hate 5e

Rechan

Adventurer
What, no recommendation for the Wand, SPell, Breath weapon, Poison style saving throw charts?

Or system shock % rolls?

Or buckets and buckets of random tables to roll (critical hits/fumbles, etc)? Granted, that was more a Rolemaster peeve than a necessarily D&D one.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

delericho

Legend
Oh, thought of another one: I hope that 5e has only one core elf race that waffles between the forest hippie archetype and the mysterious arcane archetype.

Yes, please. I really disliked the 4e elf/eladrin split.

(Perhaps ironically, since the announcement of 5e I've read two explanations of it that are many times better than the PHB one. Even so, the eladrin should most certainly have been more than just "extra-elfy elves".)

And has a passive chance to notice secret doors, forcing the DM to remember to roll every time one is passed.

Per the 1st Ed DMG, elves got a chance to spot secret doors without actively searching but only if the player asked. That is, the DM didn't need to remember to roll every time; it was up to the player to do so.
 


Matt James

Game Developer
Per the 1st Ed DMG, elves got a chance to spot secret doors without actively searching but only if the player asked. That is, the DM didn't need to remember to roll every time; it was up to the player to do so.

Gimme some XP if you had an Elf character in your party that would ask every single frickin' room. We got to a point where we (as players) banned Elves from the game :lol:
 

delericho

Legend
Gimme some XP if you had an Elf character in your party that would ask every single frickin' room. We got to a point where we (as players) banned Elves from the game :lol:

Nope. We never played 1st Ed, and 2nd Ed didn't have that fun little rule - the DM was expected to remember. It was a bit of a surprise to find it when I finally read the 1st Ed DMG last year. :)
 


Reynard

Legend
Supporter
So what should we call the 4E equivalent of the Knights and Knaves Alehouse, where speaking well of any other edition earns one scorn, derision and nerdlitist snorts?
 


Tequila Sunrise

Adventurer
Thought of another: I hope WotC doesn't miraculously gets Tony DiTerlizzi to illustrate for D&D again, because then I'd have to buy 5e just for the artwork.

Wait, that was kind of lame. Okay how's this: I hope there's zero errata.

In my case, a hybrid of 1E tone and subsystems, Paizo preferences for monster choices, OSR playstyle advice and 3.5 magic, combat, monster design and system mastery will fill this niche quite nicely. :)
What don't you like about Paizo's monster choices? I've never seen one of their monster books.

Here's a revolutionary thought: what if Armour Class was based on what kind of armour your character be wearing?
My issue with pre-4e AC is that while attacks and saves are mostly level-based, AC for some reason is mostly "realism" based. I put that word is quotes because there's no real rhyme or reason that say, a stone golem's AC is a particular value. It's based purely on the writer's idea of what's realistic, and every writer has different ideas on realism.

Now if level were also factored out of attacks and NADs/saves, it'd be more consistent -- system-wise, at least.

PCs shouldn't need magic items. The game should be about the heroic characters, not he who has the best toys wins.
I agree, but D&D has never been that way. And I hope 5e maintains our traditional reliance on magical items, because otherwise 5e will have made a big improvement and my decision won't be so easy.

What game system are you playing that doesn't have skills?
I'm referring specifically to ranks and proficiencies. I like 4e's "You're either good at it, or you're not" skill system.

(I believe there are several early D&D systems without skills, though.)

I don't follow. What's inconsistent about planes being arranged in a circle? I mean besides the fact that magic doesn't really exist.
It's not the circle; the circle is the veneer. It creates an illusion of planar symmetry that looks great, but breaks down once you start thinking about it.

For example, the elemental planes aren't opposites of each other. Earth opposing air makes a certain amount of sense, but fire and water? One's a chemical reaction, the other's a state of matter. Wtf? And the para- and quasi-planes; don't get me started!

For examples from the outer planes, take a look at the exemplars. Demons are a random assortment of bizarre mongrel creatures, which makes sense for the exemplars of a chaotic plane. Now take a look at the archons; they're prettier but no less bizarre and varied. What are they doing as the exemplars of LG? And what about those eladrins, the CG exemplars: every one of them can be described as a super elf who can turn into a ball of light. Wth?

Yes, please. I really disliked the 4e elf/eladrin split.

(Perhaps ironically, since the announcement of 5e I've read two explanations of it that are many times better than the PHB one. Even so, the eladrin should most certainly have been more than just "extra-elfy elves".)
Weird, I don't think of eladrin as 'extra elfy.' (If anything, I think the tree hugger archetype is more elfy.) What are the better explanations?


With that level of bitterness, I hope you hate it too, good buddy. :)

Bitter? Nah, I just know what kind of system I don't want to DM anymore.
 
Last edited:

Matt James

Game Developer
Nope. We never played 1st Ed, and 2nd Ed didn't have that fun little rule - the DM was expected to remember. It was a bit of a surprise to find it when I finally read the 1st Ed DMG last year. :)

It's mention has brought up a flood of memories of this and other little things similar. Either way, I like that an elf is able to find secret doors, but I think it should be represented in a fixed way (bonus to Perception checks, etc...)
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top