I think (at least) two new design paradigms are in the process of emerging (or have already emerged) for D&D.
1) Classes should gain a special ability at every level: There should be no dead levels for classes. This is in order to both make each level interesting and something to look forward to and probably to make base classes more attractive vis-a-vis prestige classes.
2) Balancing classes on a per encounter basis: There appears to be an attempt to balance new classes on a per encounter basis. Evidence for this can be seen, for example, in the factotum class as well as the new skill tricks.
3) Monsters will be designed in such a way as to eliminate the dissonance between their respective Challenge Ratings and their Hit Dice. If combined with per encounter balancing of monsters... and it will likely be thus combined... this will also eliminate the discrepancy between the usefulness of abilities to monsters and PCs and thus unify Challenge Ratings, Hit Dice, Level Adjustments and Effective Character Levels into one number: Hit Dice
Any other new design paradigms you can think of that are making their way into D&D design?
As to my thoughts on these new paradigms:
1) I like the first of the new paradigms a lot. Dead levels are boring, so it is a great idea to grant all classes some abilities at every level. Big yay and full support from me for interesting class abilities at every level!
2) Unfortunately, though, I don't like per encounter balancing of classes (and I realize I will probably be in a minority here
). I much prefer a system where balancing is done in such a way that characters do not have infinite or near-infinite staying power and that each encounter leaves them weaker for the encounters to come. This also enables designers to make tradeoffs between sustainable power of a class and peak performance, which for me makes things more interesting. Alas, they probably would not be making this move if it did not appeal to a lot of people, so I expect to be clobbered on this one.
3) I have mixed feelings on the unification of Challenge Ratings, Hit Dice, Level Adjustments and Effective Character Levels into one number: Hit Dice. On the one hand having hit dice deal with everything four numbers used to cover previously seems like a good idea, as it appears to be more streamlining than the elimination of any important mechanisms. Conversely, however, I feel this may restrict monster design choice/freedom by bundling abilities into hit dice. Personally, I would give this change a tentative heads up, as I suspect that monster design freedom/choice might not be too adversely affected and if done right, it might also simplify the creation of new monsters by DMs. I guess it depends on implementation, but it does sound promising. I should also add, that per encounter balancing, although it will surely be used, is not actually necessary to achieve this - it is merely necessary to design monsters in such a way that their abilities equivalent to PC abilities of the same hit dice are not useable more frequently than those of the PCs unless there is some equivalent tradeoff.
Edited to add: I should also mention that it is my feeling these changes will make it into the eventual fourth edition of D&D. I am one of those people who would not mind to see a new edition if it were closer to my tastes, but I have an unpleasant foreboding that it might well depart further from my tastes than the current edition.
1) Classes should gain a special ability at every level: There should be no dead levels for classes. This is in order to both make each level interesting and something to look forward to and probably to make base classes more attractive vis-a-vis prestige classes.
2) Balancing classes on a per encounter basis: There appears to be an attempt to balance new classes on a per encounter basis. Evidence for this can be seen, for example, in the factotum class as well as the new skill tricks.
3) Monsters will be designed in such a way as to eliminate the dissonance between their respective Challenge Ratings and their Hit Dice. If combined with per encounter balancing of monsters... and it will likely be thus combined... this will also eliminate the discrepancy between the usefulness of abilities to monsters and PCs and thus unify Challenge Ratings, Hit Dice, Level Adjustments and Effective Character Levels into one number: Hit Dice
Any other new design paradigms you can think of that are making their way into D&D design?
As to my thoughts on these new paradigms:
1) I like the first of the new paradigms a lot. Dead levels are boring, so it is a great idea to grant all classes some abilities at every level. Big yay and full support from me for interesting class abilities at every level!
2) Unfortunately, though, I don't like per encounter balancing of classes (and I realize I will probably be in a minority here
). I much prefer a system where balancing is done in such a way that characters do not have infinite or near-infinite staying power and that each encounter leaves them weaker for the encounters to come. This also enables designers to make tradeoffs between sustainable power of a class and peak performance, which for me makes things more interesting. Alas, they probably would not be making this move if it did not appeal to a lot of people, so I expect to be clobbered on this one.3) I have mixed feelings on the unification of Challenge Ratings, Hit Dice, Level Adjustments and Effective Character Levels into one number: Hit Dice. On the one hand having hit dice deal with everything four numbers used to cover previously seems like a good idea, as it appears to be more streamlining than the elimination of any important mechanisms. Conversely, however, I feel this may restrict monster design choice/freedom by bundling abilities into hit dice. Personally, I would give this change a tentative heads up, as I suspect that monster design freedom/choice might not be too adversely affected and if done right, it might also simplify the creation of new monsters by DMs. I guess it depends on implementation, but it does sound promising. I should also add, that per encounter balancing, although it will surely be used, is not actually necessary to achieve this - it is merely necessary to design monsters in such a way that their abilities equivalent to PC abilities of the same hit dice are not useable more frequently than those of the PCs unless there is some equivalent tradeoff.
Edited to add: I should also mention that it is my feeling these changes will make it into the eventual fourth edition of D&D. I am one of those people who would not mind to see a new edition if it were closer to my tastes, but I have an unpleasant foreboding that it might well depart further from my tastes than the current edition.
Last edited:
