WotC James Wyatt is on the Dungeons & Dragons Team Again

[Emerikol]

I think that was @Mistwell actually. I had the opposite reaction, 4e graphic design seemed like a breath of fresh air to me. I'm an architect and a bit of a graphic designer and it it just appealed to my training and taste.

On the other hand I had real trouble with the 2e and then 3e graphic design. They were big reasons I didn't play those editions. I am using the 3e Epic Level Handbook to update some high CR monsters and stuff like this drives me crazy:

View attachment 133951
and this:
View attachment 133948

But everyone has their preferences, and that is OK.

As everyone knows, I am no 4e fanboy, but I really despised the 3e darkness and lack of contrast in the text. I guess that is me getting old. I thought when 4e first came out that it looked clean.

Now, having said that, I don't really weigh the art very high in my adaption of a game. The rules themselves matter far more to me. That goes for a lot of products.

 

[Mind of tempest]

As everyone knows, I am no 4e fanboy, but I really despised the 3e darkness and lack of contrast in the text. I guess that is me getting old. I thought when 4e first came out that it looked clean.

Now, having said that, I don't really weigh the art very high in my adaption of a game. The rules themselves matter far more to me. That goes for a lot of products.

art does matter but if the game is trash then good art will not save it.

 

[Emerikol]

It's not about 5e being some Messiah. 5e only looks so good (imo) because people didn't like what 4e did.

I'd still go back to 3.5, as 5e is not the second coming of Christ, it's only seen as so much better (imo) because of how bad 4e was received in comparison.

If that doesn't make sense, sorry.

I agree with this take. I preferred the design approach of 3e. I would have preferred they take 3e and simplify and streamline it. So some of the things they did in 5e were good. I also think a lot of the complexity of 3e could have been put in optional rules. So optional feats was a great idea. I like some crunch but having a simple option is a good thing.

My big issues with both 4e and 5e was there assumptions about what they needed to do with healing and their use of dissociative mechanics. If these two things had been avoided as at least a reasonable option day one, I'd have been happy. Now. Could I houserule it? Of course but I can also house rule other things. At first, I thought they were going to offer a fighter for people like me and another for people who preferred a more powers based fighter. Sadly they still put stuff in the base class that was unacceptable. I didn't have to have every class meet my needs. I could easily have accepted one fighter type, one magic using type (vancian preferably), one cleric, and one rogue. If I had one each of those I can throw every other class away and still play the game if necessary.

But...having said that, I've come to realize that a lot of people are out there making games that are intended for me. I'm enjoying ACKS a lot and I like C&C a good bit. 5e is wildly popular so they obviously did a good job hitting their target market. Live and let live at this point.

 

[Emerikol]

art does matter but if the game is trash then good art will not save it.

Oh I know it matters for a lot of people but I don't think it matters much for me. I enjoy the art as a separate aspect but if there was no art I'd still enjoy a good game.

 

[dave2008]

Now, having said that, I don't really weigh the art very high in my adaption of a game. The rules themselves matter far more to me. That goes for a lot of products.

I thought about this a bit and I think differently. Even though I have some artistic talent, I really appreciate good art. It inspires me and it is something I can't or don't have the time to create. Rules on the other hand a transient and easy to change / create for me. In every edition I make changes to the rules, but I can't do much about the art.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

My own take on the 4e Turathi and the Planescape Tiefling was that while the one from the PS had actual blood of a lower plane creature in their veins and signs of that blood's presence would pop once every X generation, like a recessive gene.

4e Thurati did not mingle their bloodline with fiends, or if they did had sexy time with fiends, it did not create a new race. Their specific appearance came from behind warped by the corruption of their dealings with the forces of the lower planes. And once those corrupted rulers had children, they bred true: two Thurati parents would have a tiefling progeniture.

In short: Planescape's Tieflings were the descendant of a fiend and a human. Turathi Tieflings are the descendants of high-level Fiend Warlocks

 

[dave2008]

I would like more options for combat for the none caster as they can get super samey but building entirely around that would make it not feel like a world and I want a world with the craziness that brings.

I posted this in another thread recently, but there are a lot of things you can do. Not including class specific actions, the general actions available on your turn are below. (Also, Feats give you a lot more combat options. The Martial Adept feat alone can give any character access to two maneuvers.). I hope this helps!

Movement:
Move up to your speed
Get up from prone
flank (optional flanking rule in DMG)

Bonus Action:
Cast a spell
Make an attack with an off-hand weapon
Use a class feature

Action:
Attack (class specific but many options here)
Cast a spell (class specific, but many options here)
Cleave through creatures (optional rule in DMG)
Dodge
Dash
Disengage
Disarm (optional rule in DMG)
Dodge
Escape
Grapple (an Attack action)
Help
Hide
Improvised Actions:

• Ability Checks (PHB)
• Advantage and Disadvantage (DMG)
• Damage severity by level (DMG)
• Improvising damage (DMG)
• Object Armor Class (DMG)
• Object Hit Points (DMG)
• Targets in areas of effect (DMG)
• Typical Difficulty Classes (PHB & DMG)
• Mob attacks (DMG)
• Using Ability Scores (DMG)

Make an Ability / Skill Check
Mark (optional rule in DMG)
Overrun (optional rule in DMG)
Ready (an Action)
Search
Shove a creature
Shove Aside (optional rule in DMG)
Tumble (optional rule in DMG)
Use a class feature
Use an object

Additional Optional Rules to review (DMG):
Facing
Flanking
Lingering injuries
Massive Damage
Morale

Additionally, advice on adjudicating actions:
Some advice for Cinematic combat stunts on D&D Beyond
Advice on Improvised Actions from Sly Flourish

 

[Emerikol]

I thought about this a bit and I think differently. Even though I have some artistic talent, I really appreciate good art. It inspires me and it is something I can't or don't have the time to create. Rules on the other hand a transient and easy to change / create for me. In every edition I make changes to the rules, but I can't do much about the art.

Well it is subjective for sure. I guess I don't need that much inspiration and I have many sources of inspiration beyond the rulebooks. And yes I too can house rule a game fairly easily but to me the value of purchasing a rule book is the rules. The art is nice to have but there are many sources of art and art is not intrinsically part of the rules.

I know there are many like you because I see criticisms of the art and style of the game (which beyond readability doesn't matter a lot to me either). I just don't really get those criticisms myself. I'm far more interested if this mechanic works and does it's job effectively.

 

[dave2008]

Well it is subjective for sure. I guess I don't need that much inspiration and I have many sources of inspiration beyond the rulebooks. And yes I too can house rule a game fairly easily but to me the value of purchasing a rule book is the rules. The art is nice to have but there are many sources of art and art is not intrinsically part of the rules.

I know there are many like you because I see criticisms of the art and style of the game (which beyond readability doesn't matter a lot to me either). I just don't really get those criticisms myself. I'm far more interested if this mechanic works and does it's job effectively.

I see both the art and the "rules" as inspiration. I use what I like and discard the rest. They are just both mechanisms to achieve the fun at the table.

I do want to be clear, art rarely has a negative impact for me. It is just that a good piece of art can be provocative, while art I don't like doesn't illicit much. It is a more a failed opportunity than something to criticize.

 

[dave2008]

The art is nice to have but there are many sources of art and art is not intrinsically part of the rules.

But in the best work they are!

Now, I need to back track a little bit. In my previous post I said art doesn't negatively impact me. That is not quite true. I just realized this situation came up recently with LevelUIo.

I am really interested in the LevelUp Bestiary. The mechanics and lore they are adding to 5e monsters are really inspiring. However, the art previews have left me cold. So much so that I've waivered in my desire to get the book. I am still likely to purchase, but the art is definitely having a negative impact.