D&D 5E L&L 1/13/14: Low-Level Characters in D&D Next

[RevTurkey]

As I said...I like D&D to be a game where each class is distinctive and the boundaries are not so blurred as you suggest.

Fair enough if that is what you want or like...it isn't my preference.

I have my lovely Runequest 6th Edition and plenty of other games if I want to play in a more skill based classless...be anything, do anything without restriction type of game. I think other games do that sort of roleplaying better than Dungeons & Dragons ever has (or probably ever will) but that is exactly why I want D&D to stay fairly (not totally) restrictive and prescriptive in character career/background choices.

For me one of D&D's greatest strengths, not weaknesses.

Each to their own though...I am not trying to tell you what to enjoy.

 

[howandwhy99]

The old model of limiting skills by class—saying a rogue can train in Stealth but a fighter can't—appears to provide a kind of game balance, but it's an empty balance. In the end, the usefulness of skills is driven by the adventure or situation, and the more skills you have, the more likely you are to gain a bonus and to have a chance to affect the game.

I agree skills are irrelevant to balance, but that's because they are all essentially the same thing. "Player makes something up" "A skill is chosen" and roll. There is no limitation on what a skill means, so I suggest taking skills back out of D&D.

In addition, the game's level progression assumes that 1st and 2nd level each take about one game session.

XP is the easiest thing to change. However, by the language of the article Player proficiency with the game is seen as wholly dealing with character options, not the game play of how everything interacts.

Flexibility has always been a hallmark of D&D, and it's an aspect of the game we're making even stronger in D&D Next.

Not really. A slew of games were designed, especially skill games, to be more flexible than D&D. The difficulty is character building allows players to build to break the game. And "anything goes" designs ruin balance.

 

[howandwhy99]

Also, complexity is a measure of the challenge level of a game. Not necessarily the sheer mass of its components.

Experienced players can play with novices, but it's about the players assessing their ability as a team - cooperative play. 1st level 0 XP for everyone. Billy doesn't know what to do, so will likely run into something easy near the campaign starting area. Dominic wants to avoid goblins or kobolds for the 10th time and take on something interesting, maybe city politics right away. And Hannibal is an old dog who knows all the tricks and wouldn't might taking on Semmeralius the lich at 1st level just to see how it could be done.

Players need to work together to arrive at shared goals. Hannibal can really help the other players, but Dominic knows things he doesn't, and even Billy's fresh perspective matter too. Everyone adds to the game, but complexity is addressed mainly as a team and according to what they all think they can accomplish.

 

[Mistwell]

Hmm..

I might like it. Everything hinges on the execution in the final game.

The quick progression thing is an easy fix. Just change it if you don't like it.

Of more interest and pause for thought is the bit about skills...

I like D&D to have distinctive classes that are different from each other. I hope this is the case.

I don't want to see Fighters being better than thieves at thievery skills and such.

Expertise should take care of this.

I am worried that because they (according to what they showed us) only starting tackling the maths late on in development...won't have enough time to get things right in time for release.

Naw they always were tinkering with the math, every playtest package. It's just that they are finalizing the math now.

I am nervous about this incarnation of D&D....I so want them to deliver a brilliant game but everytime I read something about it or looked at the playtest material...something irked me and felt weird.

I suspect that maybe this new version isn't aimed at me or my generation of players.

Rather than looking at it, you should play it. Find out if you actually like it.

 

[GX.Sigma]

I agree skills are irrelevant to balance, but that's because they are all essentially the same thing. "Player makes something up" "A skill is chosen" and roll. There is no limitation on what a skill means, so I suggest taking skills back out of D&D.

That's kinda what they're going for, though. Mike Mearls said this before, "It's not an action resolution system; it's a character customization system." According to their data, most players like to have that differentiation. It's cool to have a little section on your sheet that says you're good at lying and stealing, but not at intimidating or persuading.

That's their thinking, anyway. Personally, I don't have a need for it, and I'll probably remove skills the first chance I get. But I understand why the majority of players like it.

 

[RevTurkey]

Hey Mistwell..

hopefully you are right about expertise and maths tinkering.

as to trying it...been tied up playing other games and campaigns and my group wanted to continue things we had already started. Best I could do is read through and read forums etc...

D&D Next will probably be an Xmas present for me. Hopefully it will be awesome and the books exciting and inviting to my players.

I am a bit skeptical and negative about it I think...I love that you are so positive Mistwell. I hope you are right and I am wrong and that this new edition is the best ever.

 

[Falling Icicle]

So if 1st and 2nd levels are supposed to be the "training wheel" levels for new players, doesn't this directly conflict with them also being the "fantasy vietnam" levels for grognards? After all, something that's designed for newbies should be more forgiving, not less, and having single digit hp and dying easily in one hit is anything but forgiving.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

So if 1st and 2nd levels are supposed to be the "training wheel" levels for new players, doesn't this directly conflict with them also being the "fantasy vietnam" levels for grognards? After all, something that's designed for newbies should be more forgiving, not less, and having single digit hp and dying easily in one hit is anything but forgiving.

I don't think they are exclusive.

Level 1 you can go up against a kobold with 2hp and a 13AC facing 2-5 of them at a time as training wheels...
or you can face 10-15 tuckers kobolds as fantasy Vietnam
or face 2-3 Orcs with 15hp and 16 AC's...

 

[Mistwell]

I don't think they are exclusive.

Level 1 you can go up against a kobold with 2hp and a 13AC facing 2-5 of them at a time as training wheels...
or you can face 10-15 tuckers kobolds as fantasy Vietnam
or face 2-3 Orcs with 15hp and 16 AC's...

Just have them face a pack of Kobold Dragonshields.

Supposedly level 1, just 20 XP. HOWEVER, they have these two abilities:

1) Shield Block: The kobold imposes disadvantage on a melee or ranged attack that is against a creature within the kobold’s reach.

2) Pack Tactics: The kobold gains a cumulative +1 bonus to attack rolls, to a maximum of +5, for each friendly creature that is within 5 feet of its target (they all start at +3 attack bonus).

The combination is deadly. They kicked my player's butts. They swarmed the party, and each imposed disadvantage for the one to their left/down, while focusing their attacks as best they could on one PC at a time.

A Balrog attacks at a +8 attack bonus...and these kobolds were able to get up to that same +8 attack bonus with that +5 bonus (while imposing disadvantage on your attacks)!

There's your fantasy Viet Nam. My players had to do a strategic withdrawal and then forced a break in the kobolds line to prevent the continual wave of disadvantage. It was pretty brutal.

 

[Plaguescarred]

I'm fine with apprentice levels for the reasons enumerated, they take only a session each to go through but help distribute powers and slow multiclassing progressions, so i see it as doing more good than harm for the system, and it can easily be ignored by people if they want to. Its true that it troncates 2 levels (10% of the progression) but most of the campaign i (and most others apparently) run or play never achieve 100% progression up to level 20, so i don't loose anything really. I also like that it may speed up character creation or ease new player begining.