Mearls on The Core Game

[FireLance]

A way to make it simple to implement both races as class and race and class is to have both races and classes as themes.

Then, if characters are only allowed access to one theme, you get race as class: Fighter, Wizard, Dwarf or Elf.

If characters are allowed access to two themes, you can get race and class and multiclass: Dwarf Fighter, Elf Wizard, or Fighter/Wizard.

 

[Mercurius]

I don't think that "core" 5e will look anything like "core" 3e or "core" 4e. According to the quotes we've seen from the developers so far, core 5e is going to be very small and lightweight. It might actually only be a section in a larger main rulebook that's chalk-full of modular, optional rules. Anything that isn't absolutely essential to the D&D experience (like character race) is likely to be moved out of the 5e core rules entirely and placed in an optional rules section.

I completely agree with you and wrote a post or two about what I feel is a common misunderstanding as to the design intentions for 5E with regards to folks trying to figure out what is core and what is not. It seem likely that the core is a very simple game engine, and almost everything is optional.

I would bet good money on edition-specific idiosyncrasies like races-as-classes not being part of core 5E, but that it is a good example of a possible modular option that could be used to capture a bit of the flavor of a specific edition.

 

[SlyDoubt]

I really, really, really hope they have some good designers to work on organizing all these modules and 'core' rules in such a way that makes actively using the book(s) as painless as possible.

That will be quite the task but with some foresight I think it can be done sufficiently.

The index for the 5E core book(s) is going to be an obscene beast. I expect tabs, color coordination. A dual built in fabric bookmark (like say in the Eclipse Phase core book) would be awesome.

 

[Aldarc]

You're obviously missing the point. Or maybe your comment is just a lame attempt to be witty.

D&D is a game about archetypes. There are a lot of human archetypes in fantasy and they make up the vast majority of characters. When non-humans show up as characters, they're usually the supporting cast. Just as not all human character archetypes are available, not all non-human archetypes are available either. More emphasis is given to human classes since the assumption is that they make up the bulk of the game world.

Race-class versions of D&D like BECMI are designed to encourage the bulk of characters to be human. The non-human characters are special cases. Some groups like playing with this assumption since it more closely models the bulk of fantasy literature and makes non-humans more special than separate race & class systems do.

Supporting cast or not, the problem is that race-as-class pushes a particular vision of the race that is not necessarily shared between settings. It is exceptionally restrictive play for a particular race almost to the point of absurdity, hence my original comment. But when you make race and class separate player choices, then modifying those races between settings becomes far easier than with race-as-class assumptions. Groups that like those assumptions can easily just force those races in certain classes or multiclass characters.

 

[foolish_mortals]

Enworld requires its posters to be civil to each other, to avoid personal attacks and name calling. That also applies when referencing the designers of the game. Feel free to disagree and argue with them, but do not insult them.

--Stalker0

 

[pemerton]

I also predict that if the marketing people and/or text of the book blurs this distinction, that there will be massive threads screaming about those arbitrary elements in the "core".

As no one else seems to have noticed your prediction, I just wanted to let you know that (i) I did, and (ii) I think you're right.

 

[gyor]

I don't think that "core" 5e will look anything like "core" 3e or "core" 4e. According to the quotes we've seen from the developers so far, core 5e is going to be very small and lightweight. It might actually only be a section in a larger main rulebook that's chalk-full of modular, optional rules. Anything that isn't absolutely essential to the D&D experience (like character race) is likely to be moved out of the 5e core rules entirely and placed in an optional rules section.

I agree. With core reduced to only the most basic stuff, the 5e PHB would be far to small and no one other then 1e fans would buy it until alot of modals were released assuming interest didn't disappear.

Plus his comment on the warfare option being in the same DMG as "core" makes me think the PHB will be designed the same.

I don't even like calling it core as such, maybe basic would be better.

So in the PHB, MM, and DMG you'll start off with a section on the basics, basic rules, classes, races, spells (spells may be in a seperate section devoted to all modals containing powers), Then you'll have different chapters being devoted to modals, and each modals can be combined in different ways. Some moduals may even add or subtract from aspects of basic.

In fact taking a race and class maybe a rule in basic, but the actual races and classes maybe in a seperate section.

So basic section might be just basic rules like the first section of the phb 4e, where they explain stats and how to build a character along with basic rules. It would tell you to pick a class and race, but it wouldn't choose them for you.

The next section would be picking optional modals on how to build your character. One modal might cover race as class via multiclassing, another regular multiclassing, another themes, another kits/subclasses, another prestiges classes and paragon paths, another power sources, and other optional choices. Then when the rules modals are done and you've pick your modals comes actual content, classes, kits, paragon paths, spells, items, with each modal telling which content section and or specific content is apprioate or needed in the second half.

Example

Pick a class and race. Here are the basic rules for how classes work, modals may adjust this see modals section for details, you most pick a class, classes are blah blah, have hitpoints, blah blah... See the classes section to pick a class after you've choosen our character design modals. Maybe with suggestions on the most basic classes.

 

[Li Shenron]

I don't know if this is a good sign or not. What they are defining as the onyl thing that will be incorporated from all the editions is a rather small list of things. Did any one of doubt that the 6 attributes wouldn't be in? Or HP? Or Races? Or Classes?

We shouldn't read too much into that Mearls' quote. I think they're just at a very early stage of design, and despite the fact that they do have a working draft for playtesting, they may be quite undecided still on what to support or not since the start. Mearls' notes are just summarizing what it's pretty impossible not to have in a game of D&D, but he's simply trying to be a bit defensive (not saying more, in case something else will not be supported at launch).

Anyway, just because anything that has been in every edition will be in 5e, doesn't mean that anything that has missed even just one edition will miss in 5e! Otherwise will there be no mechanics for races at all in the game, because "race as class" was not present in 3e/4e and "race as template" was not present in BECMI? Will there be no spells because there was no Vancian mechanic in 4e and no non-Vancian mechanic in earlier editions?

 

[Number48]

I'm pretty sure they'll want everyone to be able to play at everyone else's table. So imagine a character with all the complex optional rules. Then start taking them away and see if that character can still exist, at least for a while, without it. Bring your character to a group that doesn't have encumbrance or weight? Okay, I can not worry about that. Bring it to a group where all squares are 1 move point? Not a problem. Go to a group where skills are simplified into a 10+ roll succeeds generally with no bonuses and no DCs? Can do. Game where you either play a race or a class? No. My character isn't portable to that. I also cannot convert a character from an older edition to that. Thus, I don't think you'll see that in 5E.

 

[Li Shenron]

Uhm... I am not so sure that encumbrance and movement can be so that different characters use different rules. These seems to be areas where either the gaming group as a whole wants it rules-light or simulationist's heaven (or in between).

How can you keep two different rules for encumbrance, without ending up like "hey, give all the baggage to Bob the Fighter, he doesn't use encumbrance rules..."