D&D 5E More maneuvers at low level.

[fjw70]

None of us around here are in charge of this thing but the discussion is interesting, and who knows our discussion can possibly spark an idea with the developers as they read the forums. Okay probably not.

Back on topic, even though a first level wizard is only preparing 1 spell a day he still has 5 prepared spells to manage that day, plus he will probably have rituals to access as well. I don’t see this as being less complex than a fighter starting out with 6 maneuvers.

From level 2 – 10 the wizard gets nine new daily spell slots and at least 18 new spells. If going from 6 to 11 maneuvers is a diluted level up than the wizard’s level up is really diluted.

Neither of these arguments holds much water to me.

 

[Steely_Dan]

Unfortunately I really dug Expertise Dice (manoeuvres) at first, but now they are becoming a tad gimmicky; and I am worried about bloat.

 

[Bluenose]

Unfortunately I really dug Expertise Dice (manoeuvres) at first, but now they are becoming a tad gimmicky; and I am worried about bloat.

The thing that worries me is not that there's too many manoeuvres; there are still a lot more spells around. What I suspect is that they don't really have many original ideas for manoeuvres, so instead they're splitting some of them into narrower bits and giving the seperate parts different names. Which, while it increasing the number of names and things to pick from, actually has the effect of narrowing the abilities of the users. If you haven't learnt the right manoeuvre, there are things you can't do; if that manoeuvre does less, you need more manoeuvres just to stay still in the breadth of your abilities. For evidence I put up Parry, which worked in the October Playtest against all attacks, and now only works against melee attacks with Deflect Arrows useful against range. There's no sensible reason for that other than a desire to add more items to a list, unless the aim is to reduce the breadth of abilities possessed by ED-using characters.

 

[Manbearcat]

The core game must be "entry level" capable. However, one thing that concerns me is the potential for having to re-balance the game's moving parts based on various modules. I can say, without question, that this core game lacks the tactical depth sufficient to invigorate myself and my players. We will not play it as is. Enter the Tactical Module.

So what is in the Tactical Module? Let us compare it to 4e. 4e has 4 + deployable resources at 1st level and multiple class features that interface with those resources. You cannot get anything approaching that level of tactical depth with 5e's core game. How do you get from this core, to the above level of tactical depth without perturbing the balance of the game across multiple spectrum? There just aren't enough PC build resources (in number or potency) at first level to achieve equilibration. There will be imbalance, relative to the default setting, and there will be a corresponding imbalance feedback that has to be re-calibrated.

 

[fjw70]

The core game must be "entry level" capable. However, one thing that concerns me is the potential for having to re-balance the game's moving parts based on various modules. I can say, without question, that this core game lacks the tactical depth sufficient to invigorate myself and my players. We will not play it as is. Enter the Tactical Module.

So what is in the Tactical Module? Let us compare it to 4e. 4e has 4 + deployable resources at 1st level and multiple class features that interface with those resources. You cannot get anything approaching that level of tactical depth with 5e's core game. How do you get from this core, to the above level of tactical depth without perturbing the balance of the game across multiple spectrum? There just aren't enough PC build resources (in number or potency) at first level to achieve equilibration. There will be imbalance, relative to the default setting, and there will be a corresponding imbalance feedback that has to be re-calibrated.

If a power increase is necessary for the tactical module then the rebalancing could be done by an x% in the enounter budget or rules for buffing monsters or something along those lines.

 

[Manbearcat]

If a power increase is necessary for the tactical module then the rebalancing could be done by an x% in the enounter budget or rules for buffing monsters or something along those lines.

Yup, I expect both of those to occur (along with potential buffs to hazards as well). I hope that the Standard Manuals are module key-word driven; eg

TACTICAL MODULE

- Add this ability/power.

However, if we have multiple modules that attempt to capture various themes (tactical, narrative, zone combat, etc) statblocks could get unwieldy.