D&D 5E Pages from the PHB

[Uchawi]

They also have to be carefull with the types of random effects a table may select. Changing an alignment is equivalent to a wish spell and is powerful in consideration to other effects. It would be nice if the random table makes a distinction between a low level class versus a higher one; where the risks of some detrimental occurring when you ignore the warning signs is more dire.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Opinions on art are crazy subjective, but I rather like (what we've seen of) the piece, it seems weird and otherworldly and dark and very much in fitting with the vibe of the warlock.

It's not a great perspective on it, looking at it via a picture of someone's computer screen, so I'm looking forward to what it looks like in print.

I didn't have a major problem with Hennet (AKA Captain Buckles) in 3e art, either, though, so it takes more than a bit of slight cartoonishness to turn me off.

 

[mechascorpio]

Basic D&D is a loss leader. It costs more to provide than it sells for in the hope that the audience it creates buys more stuff down the line. I don't think that can be reasonably denied.

Fine, you say it's a loss leader. Then the same is true for every other company that ever makes any of its rules or supplements available as a free download.

(As one who, you know, actually works in Product Marketing, I will say again, these kind of downloads are not considered a loss leader. But feel free to continue thinking that way, for WoTC and everyone else, for D&D and so many of today's games)

I'm not a marketing expect, but my understanding is that something has to actually be sold to technically be called a loss leader. Something that is given away, like Basic D&D, would probably be better described as a free sample, or a demo product. Like a loss leader, a free sample still has a cost associated with it, but no effort at all is made to recuperate any part of the cost through a sale. Of course, that's really a semantic distinction; whether Basic D&D is a loss leader or a freebie, it serves the same purpose.

You are more of a marketing expert than you think! As another example, a free-to-play game software app or demo that is a subset and a gateway to the full product is not considered a loss leader. The Basic D&D PDF was never intended to have a price. It is not an inkjet printer, waiting for people to buy cartridges.

I don't see why some here would decide to selectively apply the term only to this particular D&D product, unless it helped further an agenda.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

I don't really agree, and as Dausuul points out, the current wording is somewhat ambiguous in that it doesn't say your behaviour changes. By breaking the link between behaviour and alignment, which imho, is putting the cart before the horse, one creates a confusing situation.

We've always played with alignment being equal to your characters personality and morals. It doesn't matter which order you create them in. Alignment, as I remember it from our 2e days(and I don't remember it changing in function in 3e at all) was a role playing aid. The game said "Use your alignment as a guide on how to role play your character. If you are LG, then think about what that means when you are making decisions. How would a LG person respond to this situation?" Even if you made up your character's personality in advance, you were still assigning the alignment to him that best suited the way you were planning on roleplaying him anyway. Therefore, your alignment was still a reminder of the morals of your character.

Some people weren't good at coming up with personalities so alignment helped them flesh that out: "I don't know how my character should act...wait, I'm Chaotic and Neutral. I don't care about helping anyone since I'm not good. I also like to act randomly and without pattern. Alright, I'll randomly steal that guy's pants."

I should note that the Helm of Opposite alignment pretty much said the exact same thing in its description(at least in 2e): "Your alignment becomes the opposite of what it is currently". It's fairly obvious that it's purpose was to turn good people into evil people who would backstab the party.

I think the point is that when you're alignment suddenly becomes CE, you should use the new alignment as a role playing aid to help you decide your character's actions.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

Fine, you say it's a loss leader. Then the same is true for every other company that ever makes any of its rules or supplements available as a free download.

(As one who, you know, actually works in Product Marketing, I will say again, these kind of downloads are not considered a loss leader. But feel free to continue thinking that way, for WoTC and everyone else, for D&D and so many of today's games)



You are more of a marketing expert than you think! As another example, a free-to-play game software app or demo that is a subset and a gateway to the full product is not considered a loss leader. The Basic D&D PDF was never intended to have a price. It is not an inkjet printer, waiting for people to buy cartridges.

I don't see why some here would decide to selectively apply the term only to this particular D&D product, unless it helped further an agenda.

I don't have an agenda. I'm merely duck typing. Free products and supplements meant to encourage further purchases certainly have varying terms to describe them. But loss leader is as good as any for the purposes of discussion.

My point was simply that, even as a loss leader, Basic serves as a common baseline, yet it is no more or less the true form of the game than the PHB is.

 

[mechascorpio]

But loss leader is as good as any for the purposes of discussion.

Nope. "Loss leader" is an industry-specific term with a precise set of meanings and characteristics (believe it or not, "free" is not one of them, never has been).

Perhaps some of you should just go back to describing it as a "lost leader", since there is no ascribed marketing definition associated with that, and it's just as silly.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

The thing to remember about alignment in 5e (unless they've changed it since the playtest) is that it has no interaction with hard game rules. Ie, there are no spells that can detect alignment, no powers that key off of alignment, etc. Such spells now affect only creature types. See the paladin's divine sense, or the couple of spells that reference "evil." (There is a mention of "evil fey," and they probably need to clear up what they mean on that.)

Given that, it appears the only way such an entry can make sense is from a behavioral perspective. From a behavioral standpoint, chaotic evil generally means you are selfish to the point of potential murder, tend to have anger management issues, and have problems with discipline and consistency. All of which can be role-played.

Otherwise, the only conceivable "mechanical" effect on a humanoid would be to change where you go when you die, if you assume standard D&D afterlife designations. Bummer to find yourself accidentally in entirely the wrong place with no possible way to avoid it.

 

[Savage Wombat]

Plot seed: Chaotic Evil Wild Mage dies under the influence of the aforementioned wild surge and her soul ends up in Mt. Celestia. She's causing no end of trouble running around being evil, but the powers that run the place don't want to kick her out because, by their code, she needs to be redeemed.

It's up to your band of cutters to slip into the plane and sneak her soul out for everyone's own good.

 

[Mistwell]

Basic D&D is a loss leader. It costs more to provide than it sells for in the hope that the audience it creates buys more stuff down the line. I don't think that can be reasonably denied.

But it also serves as the heart of the game. The PHB, MM, and DMG are each being written to not require the other two as best as possible. The rules are definitely intended to be fluid, differing from game to game to suit the needs of the table. Basic represents the simplest practical rule set for a D&D game. That makes it easy to see and use as a mutual baseline. But it no more represents the true form of the game than any other set of optional or house rules. Like water, the game takes the form of the space it occupies. It has no true form.

Actually it certainly IS a loss leader. Time is money, so anything a company has an employee do costs money.

I'm not a marketing expect, but my understanding is that something has to actually be sold to technically be called a loss leader. Something that is given away, like Basic D&D, would probably be better described as a free sample, or a demo product. Like a loss leader, a free sample still has a cost associated with it, but no effort at all is made to recuperate any part of the cost through a sale. Of course, that's really a semantic distinction; whether Basic D&D is a loss leader or a freebie, it serves the same purpose.

In marketing, if the item is free it is not a loss leader. Instead, it's called freebie marketing. But really this is just semantics, we all know what you guys mean, and the intent is essentially the same behind the two anyway.

 

[Lanefan]

Responding to several topics at once...

As the game unfolds, I expect to see suggested alternatives for the more problematic wild surge entries, and variant surge lists (e.g. a list comprised entirely of amusing but harmless effects).

I have a 6-page surge list and some of the results are anything but harmless! Just ask the guy who got petrified due to a magic surge not long ago...

Some, however, can be extremely beneficial.

Many are much more mundane, or silly, or both. And one leads automatically to a sub-adventure: "The next night, the party enters a dreamworld dungeon." Meaning, the party share and interact with a dream that is so vivid they remember all of it (including xp earned in it) on awakening; but items found do not really exist, items used are not really used, etc. A great opportunity for a DM to bust out an adventure completely different from the ongoing saga, as a diversion or break.

Which is my long way of saying that while I enthusiatically applaud the existence of the wild magic surge (WMS) table, I find it sadly lacking in content.

=================

As an old-school type, there's a lot about basic 5e that's really encouraging me to take a long look at it...and the stuff that's missing from the basics will be trivially easy to bake back in:
- classes - once I've seen how the core 4 are built I can add Rangers, Druids, Assassins and Illusionists back in on a whim. Monks and Bards will be harder, but that's nothing new.
- races - again, after seeing the core 4 it'll be easy to put Part-Elves and Part-Orcs back in, and (if I have to) Gnomes.

The one huge disappointment to me after reading about the Mearls interview was the designers' ludicrously fast expectation of advancement rates - about a level every other session. But again, that should (in theory) be trivially easy to re-code.

==================

I too am somewhat thrilled to see a d% table in an official D&D book again; I hope there's more where that came from!

==================

To some extent I don't mind if alignment is mechanically baked in somehow, to the point that changing it makes a difference to how you play your character and-or how others perceive it. I also hope there are aligned items - things that work for you if you follow a certain ethos and bite you if you don't. That said, I can do without the black-and-white alignments as presented in the early editions; they should be somewhat malleable, gray scale, and subject to slow change over time. Also, your alignment should probably be determined by the DM once you've been played a while; if it says "NG" on your character sheet but your in-play actions have amounted to a lot of C and a little E then Ce you are.

Lan-"lawful is for those who can't, or won't, think for themselves"-efan