D&D (2024) I think we are on the cusp of a sea change.

[Mordhau]

If they were ambitious, they would add elements to make the game modular, since people want to adapt it for every style of rpg anyway. The "DMs workshop" section of the dmg could be expanded into a full book that provides optional rules for each pillar of play and also advice on slimming the game down into something more rules lite and deadly. They could also provide optional rules for adapting the game to different genres.

In the past I think they've been wary of that for reaons of preserving a sense of brand identity and shared experiences of play.

I don't know if they still feel that way.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

If they were ambitious, they would add elements to make the game modular, since people want to adapt it for every style of rpg anyway. The "DMs workshop" section of the dmg could be expanded into a full book that provides optional rules for each pillar of play and also advice on slimming the game down into something more rules lite and deadly. They could also provide optional rules for adapting the game to different genres.

Sadly, I don't think the D&D team has this kind of ambition anymore. They tried some ambitious things in the early Next playtest, not a single one of which made it to the final product (oh, Playtest Sorcerer, how I grieve thy loss).

 

[CleverNickName]

(oh, Playtest Sorcerer, how I grieve thy loss).

I know at least one DM who still uses that playtest version of the Sorcerer class.

 

[Yaarel]

Ask 5 different people on this forum and you will probably get 5 different answers, many of them conflicting.

Personally? A few spells could use tweaking and clarification. There's a bit of wording here and there, like half orcs living in slums that should probably go. I think the MM should go back to the percentage qualifier and clarify that the entries don't necessarily represent the entire population (it's there but buried now). I think dex is overpowered in this edition, but honestly I'm not sure how to fix it. I assume there will be some variation of flexible racial builds ala Tasha's, I hope they keep a default just for flavor.

No game is perfect but I'm not sure how much they can change without really pissing people off and causing a backlash.

To my surprise, splitting up the abilities to eight, by adding Perception and Athletics as separate abilities, works really well to make each of the eight balanced and discrete.

Then it is easy for old school to assign the same score to both Strength and Athletics, and to both Wisdom and Perception.

 

[Mordhau]

To my surprise, splitting up the abilities to eight, by adding Perception and Athletics as separate abilities, works really well to make each of the eight balanced and discrete.

Then it is easy for old school to assign the same score to both Strength and Athletics, and to both Wisdom and Perception.

Why Athletics as a seperate ability score?

My gut feeling would probably incline to something like

Might (STr/Con)
Coordination (Ranged Attacks/Finesse attacks - possibly all melee - part of Dex)
Reflex (Initiative Armor Class part of Dex)
Education (Knowledge aspects of Intelligence)
Perception (part of Wis)
Willpower (other part of Wis)
Self (Charisma)

 

[Yaarel]

Why Athletics as a seperate ability score?

My gut feeling would probably incline to something like

Might (STr/Con)
Coordination (Ranged Attacks/Finesse attacks - possibly all melee - part of Dex)
Reflex (Initiative Armor Class part of Dex)
Education (Knowledge aspects of Intelligence)
Perception (part of Wis)
Willpower (other part of Wis)
Self (Charisma)

Athletics works better as its own thing.

D&D discourages swashbuckling themes by splitting up the athletics − run, jump, fall, climb, balance, tumble, etcetera − between both Strength and Dexterity.

Athletics covers every body stunt and mobility. As a separate ability, it works perfect.

Then Strength handles tests of brute Strength (and extra damage), and Dexterity handles cautious precision and manual dexterity, like aiming a bow and stealth.

A separate Athletics also makes sense of small creatures that comparatively lack strength but are extremely athletic and mobile.



The most important thing is to ensure that the abilities are defined bottom-up: things that players actually roll for − perception, hiding, hitting, dodging − rather than vague abstractions that practically never happen during gameplay. (Looking at you, "good memory" "book knowledge" Intelligence. I have never rolled to see if my character "remembers" something. But even if it happens via a lore check, it would need to happen in almost every encounter to be worthy of an ability.)

 

[Mordhau]

Athletics works better as its own thing.

D&D discourages swashbuckling themes by splitting up the athletics − run, jump, fall, climb, balance, tumble, etcetera − between both Strength and Dexterity.

Athletics covers every body stunt. As a separate ability, it works perfect.

Then Strength is handles tests of Strength (and extra damage), and Dexterity handles cautious precision and manual dexterity, like aiming a bow and stealth.

Hmmm...

Really you could replace Strength with Athletics (it sort of already is that in terms of skills). Rolls to do things like lift heavy objects aren't really all that common, that they need a whole ability score to determine them.

I could see basically renaming Strength as Atheltics and using that as an excuse to switch some things around and take acrobatics out of Dex.

But I wouldn't want to have Athletics and Strength as that makes Strength even less useful than it is now. If you were to merge the remainder of Strength into Con it could work I guess.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

If they were ambitious, they would add elements to make the game modular, since people want to adapt it for every style of rpg anyway. The "DMs workshop" section of the dmg could be expanded into a full book that provides optional rules for each pillar of play and also advice on slimming the game down into something more rules lite and deadly. They could also provide optional rules for adapting the game to different genres.

This is what they were supposed to do when 5e was playtesting but once it came out the "crunchy" options never really developed.

 

[HammerMan]

This is what they were supposed to do when 5e was playtesting but once it came out the "crunchy" options never really developed.

yeah remember nobs and dials

aka vaporware

 

[Yaarel]

Hmmm...

Really you could replace Strength with Athletics (it sort of already is that in terms of skills). Rolls to do things like lift heavy objects aren't really all that common, that they need a whole ability score to determine them.

I could see basically renaming Strength as Atheltics and using that as an excuse to switch some things around and take acrobatics out of Dex.

But I wouldn't want to have Athletics and Strength as that makes Strength even less useful than it is now. If you were to merge the remainder of Strength into Con it could work I guess.

The thing is: whichever ability gets the athletic agile dodging mobility, should also get the AC bonus. So it means Strength improves AC, not Dexterity.

Separating Athletics out makes the shift more neutral.

Also, a creature with high Strength and low Athletics would feel like a lumbering brute. Vice versa, low Strength and high Athletics might feel like a cat.

The two dont necessarily correlate.



I figure Strength as in brute muscle will always add the damage bonus, so it will always have its fans. Also, Strength allows heavier armor and heavier weapons.