log in or register to remove this ad

 

D&D 5E New D&D Next Playtest package is up (19/9/2013) [merged threads]


log in or register to remove this ad

bogmad

First Post
At first glance I like a lot of the changes. And the bard looks fun.

Pretty disappointed that Wizardry is still the only type of magic the mage has access to. What are we even referring to Wizardry as? It's not an arcane tradition as far as I can tell, just a "class feature" which has traditions within it.
 




ferratus

Adventurer
New Playtest Package 9/19: Everyone's Chapter by Chapter Impressions

Character Sheet - Looks well laid out, and not too complicated, so I think it is a good start.

Skills and Backgrounds - Well, I see the backgrounds but not really the skills. They list some in the backgrounds, I know, but I'm not sure if I'm expected to make up proficiencies, or if they will have a comprehensive list sometime later. I do like the idea of tool proficiencies, as it makes sense to me that people learn how to use the stuff they own.

What I don't like, is that there doesn't seem to be a way to pick up new proficiencies. I would prefer training rules to spend gold and time on to get more, and skill checks don't seem to be something that would break the game if you became a jack of all trades. You would after all, be passing up the chance to use that gold on something else. Backgrounds are still great though, and I welcome their ability to customize characters.

Bestiary - I'd call this about done. A lot of the improvements that 4e made to monster stats and the format of their stat block have been retained. It isn't quite as tactically interesting as 4e, but that can't be helped unless you want to make it as minis dependent as 4e. Needs 2e flavour text to flesh it out, but that's about it. I still miss a morale check to remind me that creatures shouldn't fight to the death, but I can assign morale numbers to the monsters myself.

Classes:

Barbarians - Can choose between beserker and noble savage, which is good. Beserkers can fight naked, which is great!

Bards - Still not understanding why this class is the jack of all trades. He is surrounded by people all the time. Now the Ranger, that needs to be a jack of all trades, because he is a loner who has to fend for himself. Seems to be about buffing and de-buffing, and not a lot of personal power for himself to do damage. Not particularly interesting to me, and I hate the silly flavour text of the bard who brings a guitar to a dungeon crawl.

Clerics - Like the return of specialty priests, but would be better done with proper spell selection instead of this big wall of text they have with domains. There aren't going to many options for types of gods you can choose right out of the player's handbook. 2e Spell Spheres would be something to consider here. Not much seems to have changed since the last packet.

Druids - Like the Cleric Domains "Circle" spells seem to add too much text for the amount of customization you get. Everything else looks alright though, and I like the return to 2e style abilities and better rules for shapeshifting. This does not seem to have changed much either.

Fighter - Again, martial paths seem to require a lot of text for a little bit of customization. I like the idea of specialization and martial paths though, but I don't know why RPG systems always downplay the effectiveness of using shields. Shields are pretty essential for melee combat, but D&D has never really given them their due.

Mage - Arcane traditions aren't quite enough customization for me. I like that the tradition improves the spells of your tradition so you are more likely to select them, but I would prefer that people cast within their tradition almost exclusively, rather than making every spellcaster a more generalist mage that simply is very good at one school of magic.

Monk - Don't care. I think of the monk as about as worthy of core book treatment as the Wu-Jen, Samurai, ninjas and the rest. But then, I started with 2e.

Paladin - Too much cleric, not enough knight.

Ranger - As I said previously, I think the Ranger should be the jack of all trades class to match the solitary sentinel archetype. Brew potions when there is no cleric around, fight with stealth rather than force, know a bit of secret lore to understand the land and its dangers without having to run off to a wizard sage... etc.

At least they've effectively solved his identity crisis by removing a particular fighting style from the class, and making him more of an assassin of monsters. It has also solved the problem of "favoured enemy" making him more about killing big monsters or killing many monsters at a time. I could also see a build that specializes in silently taking out monsters one by one with stealth.

Rogue - Assassin and Thief should probably be joined by a few other rogue archetypes, like charlatan, spy or bounty hunter. Looks good at first glance, but I'd have to see how they play. I'd frankly probably put the bard in here as a rogue subclass like the assassin and thief than its own class.
 


MoonSong

Rules-lawyering drama queen but not a munchkin
Well, just skimming over the changes. Overall I'm impressed, the Bard looks like sick fun to play(am I the only one to notice they don't preppare spells?), the mage now looks neutral enough in flavor to have the sorcerer and warlock (not that I really approve it on principle, but now it look like soemthign i could live with).

Wait, Ability prerrequisites to multiclass are back? ugghh...

Edit: and the Mage one is Intelligence? double ughhh
 
Last edited:

Jeff Carlsen

Adventurer
Well, just skimming over the changes. Overall I'm impressed, the Bard looks like sick fun to play(am I the only one to notice they don't preppare spells?), the mage now looks neutral enough in flavor to have the sorcerer and warlock (not that I really approve it on principle, but now it look like soemthign i could live with).

Wait, Ability prerrequisites to multiclass are back? ugghh...

Edit: and the Mage one is Intelligence? double ughhh

Yeah. On the one hand, it's a way to reduce abuse, but it's also an unnecessary impediment. I'd probably ignore them, and will suggest in the survey that they be removed.

The rest of the multiclassing rules look pretty solid, though.
 


R

RevTurkey

Guest
Well...had a look...

Still with the ridiculous Human across the board stat mods...I don't like that.
& The Proficiency system is clunky as hell for me. Must be a nostalgic throwback.

As it stands, I am not feeling the love for this. I actually liked the very first playtest packet more. Oh well. I am going to leave the whole development process alone and just go to my local game store and see what I think when it comes out eventually.
 

Multiclassing -- simple and straightforward, looks like it will work well for spellcasters. Some classes like fighter will definitely be worth a 1-level dip, so we'll see how this gets abused.

Wish they'd have changed the human ability score thing -- +1 per ability is just boring.
 

MoonSong

Rules-lawyering drama queen but not a munchkin
Yeah. On the one hand, it's a way to reduce abuse, but it's also an unnecessary impediment. I'd probably ignore them, and will suggest in the survey that they be removed.

The rest of the multiclassing rules look pretty solid, though.

Indeed, that will be my first commentary in the next poll, and the loudest and the last one. I don't mind them as an optional rule for people who really cannot stomach Rogue1-druid3-sorcerer4-Mystic stalker of the wild10. But I thought we had outgrown that kind of limits, specially considering the multiclass rules are very balanced without them already. but my biggest grip is that when finally it seems they overcome the mage-as-wizard by default they relapse immediately. Their Int 15 mage prerrequisite ignores people who want to be mage-sorcerers (Cha based) or mage-warlocks (Con/Cha based) because they haven't forsaken us already do they?.
 

Plaguescarred

First Post
Background & Skills: I like the proficiency and skills but i think its too narrow and there could be more. I like that some background grant additional language on top of your Race.

Classes: I miss Rage granting advantage on Strenght attacks. Glad to see the Barbarian Thick Hide back. I like the change to Extra Attack to now stack with Two Weapon Fighting. Il love the Bard and its Bardic Performances and Colleges. I'm good with Second Wind granting temporary hit points. I like the Fighting Styles a lot. I like that Cunning Action was transferred to all Rogues. The Rogue still go by without Extra Attack so i guess they feel Sneak Attack compensate enought DPR wise. I like that Fast Hand enable using object in the environement like we've seen during the A1Livestream with Rodney Thompson's Rogue.

Equipment: Glad the plate's weight was lowered to 65 lb. I wish the Thrown property would allow the choice between Strenght or Dexterity for ranged attacks like Finesse does.I find odd that the Quatterstaff is Versatile rather than Two Handed. I think Unarmed Strike should have the Light Property to allow Two Weapon Fighting with it. I miss the Halberd's Special effect and thought it was cool and that more weapons should have such property-inducing effects. The Herbalism Kit is still missing from the price list.

Races: I like the Dragonborn and how Dragon Ancestry regiment its Dragon Breath and Damage Resistance. The Drow is quite good with Lolth-Touched Magic, Darkvision and all the other Elf traits and it could probably loose Keen Senses. I think Sun Sensitivity should also break concentration to impede spellcasters as well. I like the Kender's Fearless and Taunt traits too. I dislike Kender Pocket and fear it could be too easily abused. Pulling off your pocket anything from the equpment list 25% of the time is just unrealistic. It should have more limitations based on price, weight and be from the adventuring gears list only to avoid Kender handing out Mithral Scale and Spyglass like candies. I like the Tiefling but find Infernal Wrath seems a little weak. The Warforged's Living Construct is well made even though it feels a bit lackluster.

Multiclass: I like the multiclass rules and how Advancement works but i find Multiclass Prerequisits too limiting.

How To Play: I find Carrying Capacity to be too high and think it should be STR x5 rather than x10. I like the Interaction rules, Attitude & Reactions remind me a lot of the AD&D Reaction tables. Ideals, Flaws & Bonds sounds like a good way to flesh out characters and have it interact in the game. I'm good with Variant Rules: Movement on a Grid except for Moving Diagonally which i think should cost 1 square rather than 1 1/2 to keep things simple. I like the new Charge action even though the movement is limited, and i think it should allow you to push rather than attack if you want, like a Bull Rush. I like that Two-Weapon Fighting now allow movement between attacks. I also like the Critical Hits rules of max damage + 1[W]. I thought Short Rest duration would be more flexible as heard in recent talk. I'm ok with the change to Death Rolls.

Feats: I like the new Athlete feat and how it incorporate ability score improvement + skill proficiency. I think Charger should should let you move all your speed rather than half and allow the normal Charge action to push.
 
Last edited:

ppaladin123

Adventurer
The paladin actually gets a spell list that isn't just a subset of cleric spells! There all sorts of aura and smite spells unique to the paladin that make can really boost the defenses and damage of the paladin while offering a lot of party support too. Smite is now just a way to spend down spell slots that you'd rather covert into damage. Of course the actual smite spells are often quite cool given their extra effects. I am very happy that the mount will now be a spell rather than a feature imposed on us. And the extra immunities gained as you advance are a nice bonus.

Overall I think things are really shaping up. I liked the bard and the monk got a lot of love too. Some of the crazy stuff like elves being immune to charm has been toned down. Progress all around.
 

Majoru Oakheart

Adventurer
Yeah. On the one hand, it's a way to reduce abuse, but it's also an unnecessary impediment. I'd probably ignore them, and will suggest in the survey that they be removed.
Avast! I be happy to see multiclass prerequisites back in. Back in the days of 2e, multiclassin' was considered to be something ye did rarely, like set foot on land. However, when all t' restrictions were lifted in 3e, almost every character was multiclassed and it removed t' point o' havin' a class based system.

(apologies for the ease of readin' my posts today. It be Talk Like a Pirate Day and it can't be helped if landlubbers are havin' trouble understanding the lingo)
 


Talath

First Post
I don't believe I have ever played a game of 1e or later D&D in which multiclassing was not very common, so this is clearly a playstyle thing.

Must be. We didn't multiclass all that much in 2e, but when 3e came out, holy crap, multiclassing everywhere. It would probably have been more prevalent if multiclassing pre-3e didn't suck so much.
 

I don't believe I have ever played a game of 1e or later D&D in which multiclassing was not very common, so this is clearly a playstyle thing.

Yeah, every demi-human was a multi-class when we played; that was the benefit from playing a demi-human.

Dual-classing, on the other hand ... that was extremely rare.
 

Majoru Oakheart

Adventurer
I don't believe I have ever played a game of 1e or later D&D in which multiclassing was not very common, so this is clearly a playstyle thing.
Multiclassin' was something we that people wanted to do. Me mateys and I had many an ARRgument about it. Whether it be better to get to as high level as possible or if it be better to multiclass. After enough parley we mostly agreed that if the group be starting at high level, it be best to single class or be a human and dual class. The XP loss was just too great, savvy? At 1st level, it be a different story. Everyone in the group would be triple classed.

Many of our DMs applied social pressure to convince our mates to single class. We all agreed that multiclassing was cheesy and overpowered most of the time. However, we are all powergamers and that was precisely why we chose to multiclass when given the chance. Mostly the combination of social pressure from the DM and the other players sayin' things like "We already have a Wizard, we don't need another one. Why don't you just be a fighter? I don't want our fighter wearing no armor because he's also a Wizard" is what made the difference.
 

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top