D&D 5E new Critical Hits article about running DnD next

[Gundark]

DDXP 2012 Recap: Running the New D&D and Playing Games : Critical Hits

There are some between the lines things that I am trying to pull from the article.

Interesting piece was Paizo employees being excluded from the playtest. This could have been extended to all employees of all other employees.

 

[Grazzt]

DDXP 2012 Recap: Running the New D&D and Playing Games : Critical Hits

There are some between the lines things that I am trying to pull from the article.

Discuss.

My favorite part maybe (though I played the latest editions this way too; still nice to see it may be 'official' again though)

"DM Empowerment

Here’s the overly broad and sweeping generalization I’ve made about the game: in AD&D 2e and before, many things just did not have rules, so the DM had to make them up. In 3e-4e, there were rules for many things. In this new edition, I feel like the presentation gives you the rules you most need, and then for rules that work by being the DM’s judgement call, it tells you specifically that it’s the DM’s judgment call. So for me it’s a nice balance between there being enough rules to guide me so it’s not consistently an arguing game, while still telling everyone that some rules are going to be based on what the DM says, no more, no less. If this was intentional, or even if this survives into the final version of the game, remains to be seen, but I like it so far."

 

[davethegame]

DDXP 2012 Recap: Running the New D&D and Playing Games : Critical Hits

There are some between the lines things that I am trying to pull from the article.

Interesting piece was Paizo employees being excluded from the playtest. This could have been extended to all employees of all other employees.

Between the lines? I'm not even sure my blogging software supports that

On the Paizo thing, it's my understanding that it was Paizo that didn't want them to sign an NDA, not WotC. I've heard before as well that WotC employees aren't allowed to sign NDAs for other gaming companies, so it might be a pretty common practice.

 

[Number48]

My impression, from having read all the tidbits I can but not having been there, is people enjoyed a really fun convention game. The craziness, though, doesn't sound great for a campaign.

 

[davethegame]

My impression, from having read all the tidbits I can but not having been there, is people enjoyed a really fun convention game. The craziness, though, doesn't sound great for a campaign.

I think it's far too early to make that determination - what we ran was a convention demo adventure, based on an early D&D module that was designed as an intro in the first place. Plus the "craziness" was all brought by the players and wasn't anything that would be too out of place in plenty of D&D campaigns I've run... YMMV of course.

 

[Aehrlon]

So, any new news? I hear that the early "Alpha" tests are underway but information is scant at best. Inquiring minds want to know & all that...

 

[Glade Riven]

What I find interesting is that the paladin got hurt bad enough that he was out-of-action for several weeks. A roleplay thing? Maybe. It does suggest that healing is a little tougher to come by.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

Was an interesting read.

One line got my conspiracy mind going thinking "hhmmmm it would be awesome if they did that"

Things to note:
1) Reprinting 1st ed AD&D
2) Hints/allusions to other material being reprinted
3) Modules don't tend to make money
4) Designed to bring players of all editions to the same table
6) "the adventure that most (if not all) the DMs running the playtest was the Caves of Chaos, a portion of the original Keep on the Borderlands adventure. We used the same exact map of the caves, with the statistics updated for the new system. "

What if each of the reprinted modules had an appendix or something that included D&DNext mechanics for the module. Just Reprint Caves of Chaos, and include the monster and NPC stats in the back. Not an update, or a sequel but the actual thing, with notes for Next. Not as much in development costs (if they were going to reprint anyway) so it has a better chance of making more money.

Don't figure it would happen but that would be cool.

 

[Agamon]

What I find interesting is that the paladin got hurt bad enough that he was out-of-action for several weeks. A roleplay thing? Maybe. It does suggest that healing is a little tougher to come by.

This was the big "whoa" part that I read. So the question is:

a) Blood loss = Con loss? Therefore it couldn't be healed normally and required weeks worth of rest without a higher level ability restore spell?

b) There's two kinds of damage, sort of like a fatigue/wounds, where fatigue heals easily through spells and short rests, but wounds do not?

c) The paladin acquired some sort of condition from the blood loss that required the rest?

d) ummm...the very unlikely possibility that there is no magical healing, lol (covering all angles here)

Curious...

Also, why is the pally always getting smacked around like a lazy mule in these anecdotes?

 

[Gundark]

Between the lines? I'm not even sure my blogging software supports that

On the Paizo thing, it's my understanding that it was Paizo that didn't want them to sign an NDA, not WotC. I've heard before as well that WotC employees aren't allowed to sign NDAs for other gaming companies, so it might be a pretty common practice.

After thinking about it I got thinking it was standard practice. Thanks for the clarification. Also a good read thanks.

 

[Dragonblade]

What I find interesting is that the paladin got hurt bad enough that he was out-of-action for several weeks. A roleplay thing? Maybe. It does suggest that healing is a little tougher to come by.

I don't care for this at all, but as long as there is an option for encounter healing 4e style, I'm ok with it.

IMO, its basically telling the paladin player, "Sorry, we're going to keep playing D&D and having fun. But you're screwed and can't play anymore. Sucks to be you. So, why don't you go off and check your e-mail or something."

Another reason I don't like long term healing is it screws up adventure flow and can completely derail a story. Let's say you are rescuing a PC's kid sister from some gnolls, and you have to get to her before they sacrifice her to Yeenoghu.

Well, lets say the adventure goes poorly in the first encounter and the players are low on HP and other resources, but they survive. If there is limited post-encounter HP or resource recovery, then to press on would be certain death. Hmm, that kind of sucks. Talk about a crappy ending to the story. To go back and take your bedrest, means you can't save her. That kind of sucks too.

Sure, in an old school game, you could just say "them's the breaks" and let the gnolls kill her. Some players like that grim cruel world approach, but most of the people I have gamed with don't. They want to be challenged, but they want to ultimately have a reasonable chance to succeed and if they feel the game is stacked against them, they won't want to play anymore.

So, what usually happens is the DM handwaves it. You find a cache of potions, or the gods aid you by healing you. I personally find that kind of DM fiat unsatisfying. Its like the game has failed, so the DM has to cheat to make the game work.

So what I prefer is a game that provides PCs enough post-encounter healing and resource recovery that even if they roll horribly and just totally botch that first encounter, they still automatically recover enough HP and other resources automatically that they can reasonably press on. They are not back to full, but not totally screwed either. And while the second encounter should now be a bit harder, its not certain death.

 

[the Jester]

What I find interesting is that the paladin got hurt bad enough that he was out-of-action for several weeks. A roleplay thing? Maybe. It does suggest that healing is a little tougher to come by.

I, for one, welcome the end of the "1st to 30th level before you turn 18!" trope.

 

[Iosue]

"Almost died by blood loss" suggests two possibilities to me.

1. He was brought to negative hit points, and stabilized, but going negative means can't just pop back up and continue the adventure.

2. This is a particular effect used by stirges and other blood suckers. It's not just damage, but blood loss damage, and thus may require more powerful healing magic (or else, this particular group ran out of heal spells).

IMO, its basically telling the paladin player, "Sorry, we're going to keep playing D&D and having fun. But you're screwed and can't play anymore. Sucks to be you. So, why don't you go off and check your e-mail or something."

Not necessarily. I imagine the whole group stayed with the paladin until he recovered, and the weeks of game time were just glossed over. "Okay, two weeks later you're back at the dungeon."

This is a rather early D&D take on healing and recovery, and might be included for older edition players, but would be easy to work around if the group wants a more "cinematic" experience. Not to mention that even a player "out of action" may not be out of the game. I'm thinking of Edward the Spoony Bard in Final Fantasy II.

 

[Agamon]

I don't care for this at all, but as long as there is an option for encounter healing 4e style, I'm ok with it.

You're assuming that this was regular old healing. I don't think so, check my post above.

 

[Thaumaturge]

Another reason I don't like long term healing is it screws up adventure flow and can completely derail a story.

I am assuming the stirges did a different kind of damage. I think Con damage makes the most sense based on previous editions and the context. If I'm wrong, and they just did hit point damage, I agree with you.

If the stirges did, in fact, do Con damage (or something other than hit points), then I'm ok with a long healing period. The DM (or adventure designer) should take that into account when putting it together. If you put stirges in the first room of a cave, you should do it knowing the PCs are going to want to go lick their wounds afterward.

I can still see a place for doing that on a time sensitive mission, to add to the dramatic tension, but I would think there wouldn't be enough stirges (in this example) to cripple a character. Being down a point of Con or two, would ramp up the tension. Being down ten ramps up the frustration. It's about having an appropriate amount for the overall narrative to be positively impacted.

Thaumaturge.

 

[Rex Blunder]

Also, why is the pally always getting smacked around like a lazy mule in these anecdotes?

Because they were all made with the 5e Playtest Report Generator?

 

[Agamon]

Because they were all made with the 5e Playtest Report Generator?

Hmmm, maybe that's actually obfuscating this apparent problem.

 

[Dragonblade]

You're assuming that this was regular old healing. I don't think so, check my post above.

Ahh, interesting.

I'm not normally a fan of ability damage, mostly because I don't like the cascading ripple effect it has across your whole sheet.

But, if 5e looks more like the stat as bonus method I theorized here, I might be ok with it because the numbers are transparent and easy to adjust.

 

[Glade Riven]

Besides, if a player insists on doing dumb things (not ignorent things, but outright stupid things), bad things happen to a character. Like taking on NPCs that, as DM, I have just described as "Sizing them up, it doesn't look like your character can take them." It's happened. And the PC woke up later face down in the gutter. This time it was nonlethal, but not always.

 

[Aehrlon]

Regardless of how much ability damage may have been sustained, the rate at which you recover them is in need of improvement. v3.5 you healed at a rate of 1 Ability point a day normally, twice that will full bed rest. I don't recall how it worked in 4E. Point being, how about healing a point every 4 hours. That way if you get drained 5-6 points, you'll be back up to snuff the next day (but will still suffer the penalties in the meantime). Either way, the adventuring party may wait it out but it would only take a day or two to recover without expensive clerical aid (if you don't have access to Restorations within the party). One thing is for sure, I prefer Ability Damage to Level Drain that we used to have to deal with back in 1E & 2E. Now THAT was rough...