log in or register to remove this ad

 

5.5E Little changes for 5.5

Paul Smart

Explorer
With the announcement of 5.5, what are some of the minor changes you would like to see? For me, it is the following:

1) Three starting arrays, Heroic, Normal and Weak.

Heroic for parties that want to start strong.
18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 12 and one free feat

Normal
No change to starting arrays

Weak for those that want to start as basically peasants.
14, 12, 10, 10, 8, 8.

2) Presdititation, Thaumaturgy and Druidcraft are free for arcane, holy and druidic magic users, respectively.

3) When multiclassing martial classes that all get an extra attack at level 5, you get an extra attack at level 5. Example: Fighter 3, Barbarian 2 = 5 total levels. You get an extra attack.

4) Eldritch Blast is a class feature for warlocks. Also, Hexblade abilities are standard for all warlocks.

5) Make monks playable. See Trentmonks video on how to improve monks and make the changes.

6) Clean up the rules for stealth and hiding.

7) Add a Warlord class

8) Add a Psionic class - subclasses Psionicist (full caster type), Psionic Warrior (half caster type), Psionic Rogue (skill expert)

9) Add a dedicated Gish class - subclasses Bladesinger, Eldritch Knight, etc.

10) Make Bloodhunter and Gunslinger official.

11) Add an alchemist class that works. Also, fix the Artificer.

12) Others as suggested below.
 

log in or register to remove this ad



Mercurius

Legend
I think people’s hopes for the anniversary core books are way too high. I don’t expect much will be changing beyond changing races/ancestries to fit the new model and incorporating optional rules from later supplements directly into the core rules.
I hear your point, but would be surprised if they didn't tweak some of the classes, in particular the ranger, and maybe monk and sorcerer, as well as incorporate a number of other smallish changes to issues that have arisen over, what will be by then, ten years of playing the edition.

Or as I have said in the past, I don't think this is will be a true "5.5" but it will definitely be more than a "5.1" and probably more than a "5.2." My money is on 5.3 to 5.4...meaning, they'll avoid any backwards compatibility issues (as much as possible), but will use the opportunity to fix certain things and improve the game as a whole.
 

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/They)
I hear your point, but would be surprised if they didn't tweak some of the classes, in particular the ranger, and maybe monk and sorcerer, as well as incorporate a number of other smallish changes to issues that have arisen over, what will be by then, ten years of playing the edition.

Or as I have said in the past, I don't think this is will be a true "5.5" but it will definitely be more than a "5.1" and probably more than a "5.2." My money is on 5.3 to 5.4...meaning, they'll avoid any backwards compatibility issues (as much as possible), but will use the opportunity to fix certain things and improve the game as a whole.
I agree they’ll likely take the opportunity to make some small tweaks here and there to address frequent sticking points. I’m not sure the ranger needs much more than having the optional class features from Tasha’s in as part of the core class and the improved Beast Master companion in place of the original MM beasts. Maybe a slight buff to Favored Foe, since common perception is that throb over-nerfed it from the UA version? But I don’t expect much more than that (not no more, but not much more). Same for the monk, I think building the optional Tasha’s features right in would go a long way to improving it. Maybe make Patient Defense a reaction instead of a bonus action or something. That’s the level of changes I expect to see - little tweaks here and there, but no big changes or additions like new classes (though I could see them including the artificer in the PHB).
 

I hear your point, but would be surprised if they didn't tweak some of the classes, in particular the ranger, and maybe monk and sorcerer, as well as incorporate a number of other smallish changes to issues that have arisen over, what will be by then, ten years of playing the edition.

Or as I have said in the past, I don't think this is will be a true "5.5" but it will definitely be more than a "5.1" and probably more than a "5.2." My money is on 5.3 to 5.4...meaning, they'll avoid any backwards compatibility issues (as much as possible), but will use the opportunity to fix certain things and improve the game as a whole.
I hope you are right as I will buy yawning portal sorts of collections but probably not core books again.
 

Mercurius

Legend
I agree they’ll likely take the opportunity to make some small tweaks here and there to address frequent sticking points. I’m not sure the ranger needs much more than having the optional class features from Tasha’s in as part of the core class and the improved Beast Master companion in place of the original MM beasts. Maybe a slight buff to Favored Foe, since common perception is that throb over-nerfed it from the UA version? But I don’t expect much more than that (not no more, but not much more). Same for the monk, I think building the optional Tasha’s features right in would go a long way to improving it. Maybe make Patient Defense a reaction instead of a bonus action or something. That’s the level of changes I expect to see - little tweaks here and there, but no big changes or additions like new classes (though I could see them including the artificer in the PHB).
You could be right. I don't on Tasha's and am not up on the various optional and additional rules that have come out. I'm still back on the "alt Ranger" and wondering why that was discarded ;)
 

Mercurius

Legend
I hope you are right as I will buy yawning portal sorts of collections but probably not core books again.
Someone at WotC said that they want to do more collections, although maybe not always retro like YP. Maybe they sprinkle those in very few years, but I do think it quite possible that we get a yearly adventure collection.
 

OakenHart

Explorer
Honestly my biggest hope with the upcoming revision is more tools to make DMing smoother. For all my issues with 4e, it did make running/prepping incredibly smooth and easy.

They're already making the monster stat block a bit more straightforward which is good, but I'd like to see a return of descriptors/tags on the monster to make encounter building more easy. Bring back 4e descriptors/tags like "brute", "skirmisher", etc. A monster doesn't need to perfectly fit into the tag, but close enough to where a DM can tell at a very quick glance roughly the sort of role a monster would likely play in a given combat.
 

I'm disappointed that they opted for a core rule book revision in 2024 instead of 6E. No matter how big or small the changes are I think its a missed opportunity to update the game to a new edition. Personally I believe its time to explore a different set of core mechanics and move away from the d20 system; it seems outdated to me nowadays and what will be by then 24 years on only more so. 2014-2024 is a good run for 5E and I think its long enough most people would by into a new edition. Minor changes aren't enough to fix what's wrong with 5E for me.
 

Ath-kethin

Elder Thing
I'm expecting changes at least as significant as 3.5 was to 3.0. That means new/clarified terminology, new mechanics, a new approach on skills, and integrating popular options from different splatbooks from the preceding years. I doubt they will add a bunch of new classes, since that kind of approach would make it much more challenging to sell as a "minor revision."

Of course, 3.5 was actually a pretty major overhaul to the game in a lot of ways, and it paved the way for much heftier changes as well. And the later 3.0-era books were trending toward the direction 3.5 took anyway, so it will be definitely worth paying attention to incremental changes that appear between now and 2024.
 

GreyLord

Hero
What I'd say were little changes...

1) Revise the Ranger from the PHB now to match more recent updates and options

2) Give the Monk a bigger HD or more HP and deal more damage. Racism against Asian and Asian inspired things should not still be a thing in this day and time (and though may have not observed this, this is actually probably a bigger racist relic than OA is IMO. The way the Monk is made screams of White Privilege, it is ironic how it's gone under the rader for so long). The Monk CAN be an able warrior and hold their own in a fight like any other combatant. (for example, 1e Monk could have 72 HP based on base HP. Rogue could have 60. Fighter could have 90. That was 1e. The Monk has fewer HP possible now from HD in relation to other classes than it even had in 1e!

3) Revamp races more in line with recent books.

4) Revamp the Monster Stat blocks into an easier to read format

5) I like the idea of the Heroic, standard, and weak stat arrays, but would put the weak array as 12, 12, 10, 10, 8, 8.
 

Lyxen

Great Old One
First, no one officially called it a 5.5, we know (thank god, but it was absolutely impossible that they would risk killing the golden goose) that it won't be a 6e, but it might be a 5.4, 5.3, 5.2, 5.1, 5.01, 5.0.1...

As for me, I expect full backwards compatibility and nothing that breaks the game as it is. It is not perfect, but it's more than good enough. We played 20 years with AD&D (not counting the abomination that was 2e except to steal the settings which worked well enough), so that gives 5e at least 10 more years... :p
 

I'm disappointed that they opted for a core rule book revision in 2024 instead of 6E. No matter how big or small the changes are I think its a missed opportunity to update the game to a new edition. Personally I believe its time to explore a different set of core mechanics and move away from the d20 system; it seems outdated to me nowadays and what will be by then 24 years on only more so. 2014-2024 is a good run for 5E and I think its long enough most people would by into a new edition. Minor changes aren't enough to fix what's wrong with 5E for me.
agreed we have a good base but it needs an overhaul. taking what we learned for 3e,4e,and 5e they should be working on 6e.
 

With the announcement of 5.5, what are some of the minor changes you would like to see? For me, it is the following:

1) Three starting arrays, Heroic, Normal and Weak.

Heroic for parties that want to start strong.
18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 12 and one free feat

Normal
No change to starting arrays

Weak for those that want to start as basically peasants.
14, 12, 10, 10, 8, 8.
not bad, not sure it is exactly what I would do but I like the idea.

2) Presdititation, Thaumaturgy and Druidcraft are free for arcane, holy and druidic magic users, respectively.
yes cosigned.

3) When multiclassing martial classes that all get an extra attack at level 5, you get an extra attack at level 5. Example: Fighter 3, Barbarian 2 = 5 total levels. You get an extra attack.
yes cosigned.

4) Eldritch Blast is a class feature for warlocks. Also, Hexblade abilities are standard for all warlocks.
Eldritch blast and a hex ability I would say, I don't think all warlocks need cha attacks with a melee weapon (but blade locks do)

5) Make monks playable. See Trentmonks video on how to improve monks and make the changes.
give them d10s for hp or evasion sooner, don't start the die for martial arts at the lowest possible.... yeah revisions needed.

6) Clean up the rules for stealth and hiding.
actually have rules not just "New DMs will figure it out

7) Add a Warlord class
100% my dream co sign (It doesn't need to be that name though, just a resource manageing martial class, warblade sword sage are both good options)
8) Add a Psionic class - subclasses Psionicist (full caster type), Psionic Warrior (half caster type), Psionic Rogue (skill expert)
nope... psionics should be worked on but not for core.
9) Add a dedicated Gish class - subclasses Bladesinger, Eldritch Knight, etc.
Yes 100% cosigned someone called one an arcanaknight or somthing... take the artificer base but replace the spells on the spell list with things like bigger versions of green flame blade and maybe a throw the sword it explodes then reforms in your hand mixed with some buffs like haste.
10) Make Bloodhunter and Gunslinger official.
nope... both COULD work in a later supplement (but with bloodhunter getting a rewrite) neither needs to be in the core.

11) Add an alchemist class that works. Also, fix the Artificer.
I would include the artificer, but I think fixing the alchemist sub class would do. Heck just having a crafting subsystem would work that anyone can opt into (like the ritual caster feat an alchemist feat)
12) Others as suggested below.
go back to con score HP at 1st level, and no con bonus to hp per level (but keep the con bonus to HD spent to heal) then give different classes 2,or 3 HD at first level so they can use them to heal during short rests. (front line classes get 3 less combat classes get 2)


Better ways to read monster entries, better encounter design rules and suggestions, different levels of monsters and different types including putting the mythic rules right in the MM. More monster templates too.

Make alignment an optional rule (like feats are now) yeah alot of old school gamers will keep it, but no need to burden the next generation with a mandatory 9 pt grid that no one can agree on... heck maybe have 2 different ways to do alignments and both be optional.
 

wait one more, remove default deities, and go back to a 2e style "spheres" over domains (you can keep the name I mean the mechanic). instead of knowing all cleric spells you have 10-12 lists of spells (one being general) and clerics start with access to the "all/generic" +2 other spheres of spells, and as they level they get more spheres up to a max of 6 (5+ generic/all). give each sphere a major and a minor channel divinity (all/generic is turn undead as minor but no major) then you choose one of the 2 you start with to be major (you get both channels) and at latter levels add a 3rd of your spheres to be major (getting another channel) but some of them replace the major with a class feature (like armor prof or weapon prof)

so two 5th level clerics of different gods can know very different spells with only a bit of overlap, and even 2 5th level clerics of the same god may have some slight differences (based on order they took the spheres)
 

Lyxen

Great Old One
agreed we have a good base but it needs an overhaul. taking what we learned for 3e,4e,and 5e they should be working on 6e.

What we've learned from 3e and 4e is that publisher greed kills a game really quickly. Also, what we've learned from both these games and 5e is that extensive playtesting and feedback helps you make a far better game. And this we learned from the negative side of 3e and 4e, which needed to do a new sub-edition to incorporate the feedback, whereas 5e had the intelligence (and the budget) to do it before publishing, so that 5e is already [D&D Next].5. So, although not perfect, it does not need an overhaul, just maybe some streamlining, and some revision of the debatable parts of the game which, frankly, have more to do with legacy than anything else (races, etc.).
 


What we've learned from 3e and 4e is that publisher greed kills a game really quickly. Also, what we've learned from both these games and 5e is that extensive playtesting and feedback helps you make a far better game. And this we learned from the negative side of 3e and 4e, which needed to do a new sub-edition to incorporate the feedback, whereas 5e had the intelligence (and the budget) to do it before publishing, so that 5e is already [D&D Next].5. So, although not perfect, it does not need an overhaul, just maybe some streamlining, and some revision of the debatable parts of the game which, frankly, have more to do with legacy than anything else (races, etc.).
wait how are 3e and 4e "needed new sub edition" but 5e that just had a sub edition annoinced some how doesn't?
I am confused.

and yes it needs a whole overhaul
 


Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top