Gundark
Explorer
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20131216
My input to come after reading the article
My input to come after reading the article
I'm not sure how this is meant to be reconciled with the most ubiquitous of all D&D mechanics, namely, hp.L&L said:If you have only one 3rd-level spell left to cast, it makes sense for your character to say something like, “I can cast fireball or fly once more before I need to rest and regain my power.” The mechanics describe the world in terms that make sense to your character.
When a mindflayer comes around the corner, both you, your 3rd-level wizard, and the mindflayer should plot an escape. The mindflayer's high morale won't stop it from mind blasting you before running to hide (then mind blasting you again), but your wizard shouldn't have been on point anyway. Not to mention your party is way its head, if it's randomly bumping into mindflayers.article said:When a mind flayer comes around the corner, both you and your 3rd-level wizard should be overcome by fear and plotting an escape. When six kobolds swarm your 12th-level fighter, both you and your character should be confident of victory.
The key is that rogues are devious. They prefer ambushes, tricks, and indirect attacks. A rogue fights on open, even terms only if there are no other options. Rogues aren’t straight-up warriors or anatomists—they’re devious opportunists and backstabbers. As such, a rogue knows how to maximize attacks when a foe’s guard is down. Your rogue should be able to spot a crack in a stone golem’s leg or the flickering central essence of a fire elemental as easily as he or she can target a living foe where it hurts.
Mearls said:Narrative cohesion is simply the description of what’s happening in the world. In most cases, it’s so obvious that we don’t notice it. Plate armor provides better protection than leather. Giants are stronger than orcs. However, in building mechanics, it’s easy to lose track of what’s happening in the game world. Likewise, if you pay too much attention to the reality of the campaign, then the rules can easily bloat out of control. Finding the middle ground between too much and too little abstraction is a huge challenge in RPG design.
How is "We're doing spellcasting this way because it's the D&D way!" compatible with the way they've changed spellcasting in Next? Seriously, either have the courage to do things the way you say you're doing them or not, but don't say you're doing it when you aren't.
pemerton said:"I can be take one more sword blow before I'm killed." "I can fall down one more 10' pit trap before I'm in danger of breaking my neck?" What does either of these correspond to from the character's point of view?
pemerton said:I'm also not a big fan of "Complexity in Strategy, Simplicity in Tactics" - that leads to a game in which all the real choices are made during prep (say, in spell load out) and not during play. I prefer for play to matter more than prep.
This is the problem with D&D. Everything has to be a combat class which leads to the rogue needing to be as powerful in combat than a knight. How? Backstab! In 4E it even goes so far that any flavor like not being able to backstab undead got removed because of the need of balancing the combat power of the rogue with the fighter.
When does D&D finally grow up and leave its wargaming roots behind and become a real RPG I wonder? Maybe never in the case that 5E fails.
Agreed. While I personally like the changes they've made to the casting mechanic, it's not traditional D&D casting.How is "We're doing spellcasting this way because it's the D&D way!" compatible with the way they've changed spellcasting in Next? Seriously, either have the courage to do things the way you say you're doing them or not, but don't say you're doing it when you aren't.