Pathfinder and 4e's love child, what I want in 5e

[Kunimatyu]

Honestly, I just want a system that doesn't take forever to prep and stat (PF) and doesn't have mandatory hour-long combats (4e). Everything else is details.

Also, it had better work as pencil and paper and on smartphones and tablets within the same playgroup. Neither Paizo or WotC has really shown themselves to be even competent when it comes to software creation, unfortunately.

 

[prosfilaes]

Hit Points, in every edition, are abstract. They don't just represent physical damage, but also divine favor, random luck, will to fight, and pretty much any and all plot protection. There's never really been hard and fast rules about what exactly hit point damage is representing. In any edition, a high level Fighter could take 30 hit points of damage, still have 40, and it could all be narrated as a string of lucky misses, glancing blows that maybe stung a bit but didn't leave a mark and so forth.

I've never seen it so narrated. When we ask the DM how hurt are our enemies, he never narrates the Orc who has taken 30 HP of damage as being untouched, and I think he would have indignant players on his hands if he did. Nor do we call hits anything but hits.

If you'd asked me 13 years ago, I would have explained in great depth why D&D hit points were unrealistic. Now I shrug and go on; that's just the way the D&D universe works. Making HP an abstraction of physical damage works for me as long as I don't poke at it too hard; trying to make an abstraction of all this other stuff makes it less concrete for me, without making it feel any more realistic; they're still shrugging off the same fireballs and falls. If I felt a need to fix that, I'd go the GURPS way; you have roughly the same HP as every other humanoid, you're just better at keeping them.

 

[gamerprinter]

Honestly, I just want a system that doesn't take forever to prep and stat (PF) and doesn't have mandatory hour-long combats (4e). Everything else is details.

Also, it had better work as pencil and paper and on smartphones and tablets within the same playgroup. Neither Paizo or WotC has really shown themselves to be even competent when it comes to software creation, unfortunately.

Eh, I don't allow electronics in my tabletop games. All players place their phones, IPODs, etc on a table outside the room we game in to minimize distractions. One player a business man is allowed to keep his phone to respond to any emergency calls from his employees, as the only exception. (We do allow a calculator at the table, though)

I hate 'apps', and I don't own a cell phone. The only online accessable electronics I have is my work PCs for my graphics shop (and they are desktop PCs not laptops, so I can't take them with me when I game.)

While there is certainly a need for electronic tools for some gamers, it isn't for everybody - and certainly not for our group.

I'm glad Paizo doesn't have some kind of a DDi setup - I would really hate that too. I prefer to prep with paper, pencil, dice and books (or printed PDFs), I never use electronics for game prep either.

 

[Zelda Themelin]

Honestly, I just want a system that doesn't take forever to prep and stat (PF) and doesn't have mandatory hour-long combats (4e). Everything else is details.

Also, it had better work as pencil and paper and on smartphones and tablets within the same playgroup. Neither Paizo or WotC has really shown themselves to be even competent when it comes to software creation, unfortunately.

This.

In addition I do want complexety like 3rd edition had, and mathematic consistancy. This was what I really loved about 3rd edition, though it didn't happen unfortunaly with all the rules.

There are way too many feats. I would like less bloated system for feats/skills. So that you don't need so many to do cool things/overly specific combat manouvers.

I use to want rpg that would play out combatwise as final fantasy tactics. Though it's past desire, it still has some pointers.

I really miss fantastic feeling of old 1st edition AD&D. There were weird mystical pools, powerful artifacts, colorful magical/cursed items. I like powerful distinct magic. I think it work better with spellpoints, never was that much fan of Vancian magic.

4th edition for me killed the fantasy in fantasy. 3rd editon made it less fantastic.

4th edition doesn't work for me most part but
I like idea of at-will powers instead of crossbow for mages. There were reserve feats for that late 3.5. which unfortunaly weren't picked by Pathfinder.

Worst part about 4rd edition is that is doesn't describe world physics. It is like separe game version of them, and we are told just to make up how it interacts with reality.

To be honest I didn't get though reading 4th edition rules. It was too boring. Based on some comments on system I like some things in it. But please, next time don't write the books so painful to read.

I don't have much hopes for 5th edition after 4th. I am afraid it makes magic even less magical. And thus less D&D..

I would buy system that is not trying to be D&D, but rather just good rpg to play. More fantastic magic-system could well be additional book, rather than part of basic system. It should take more on good aspects of computer games, but not force me to use miniatures, I would love to have sofware for visual battles though. And many other softwares so I don't have to memorize boring stuff.

Worst thing about making buffs short term (1/round, 1/min) instead of hours or 10 mins was not so much loss of power (though nefs annoy me too), than it was forcing more number tracking.

There should be good (not sucky as currently) software for npc and own monster creation, where you can add house rules.

And despite digital adds I like, that I don't like is patch-hell. I don't want constant errata/fixes/nerfs/buffs/nerfs again/erratas of nerfs etc. I want books that stay valid. So I can use them without having internet connection/prints of erratas. Better play-testing, less reactions to whines of vocal minority.

And maybe there should be support for different playstyle, from awesome loving powergamer, to those who want to play ordinary man's adventures.

With support for different game-types as well, meaning that basic system is easy to translate let's say to sci-fi or modern conspiracy gaming.

 

[Pentius]

I've never seen it so narrated. When we ask the DM how hurt are our enemies, he never narrates the Orc who has taken 30 HP of damage as being untouched, and I think he would have indignant players on his hands if he did. Nor do we call hits anything but hits.

I narrate it that way fairly regularly. If I have an orc down 30 Hp, and players ask me how he looks, I'm not going to cheerfully pipe up, "Oh, fit as a fiddle!". I'll say something like, "You guys have been pressing him pretty hard, his breathing is heavy, sweat drips from his brow. But he's got some fight left in him, that's for sure." Saying something like, "Well, he's got 7 arrows in his chest and a huge gash across his stomach." when actually that orc has 40 hp left is way more off-putting to me. My players seem to enjoy it.

If you'd asked me 13 years ago, I would have explained in great depth why D&D hit points were unrealistic. Now I shrug and go on; that's just the way the D&D universe works. Making HP an abstraction of physical damage works for me as long as I don't poke at it too hard; trying to make an abstraction of all this other stuff makes it less concrete for me, without making it feel any more realistic; they're still shrugging off the same fireballs and falls. If I felt a need to fix that, I'd go the GURPS way; you have roughly the same HP as every other humanoid, you're just better at keeping them.

I guess we can chalk this up to a playstyle issue. For me, just about every mechanic, pre-4e, made me feel the way you do about hit points. By finally just coming out and making a lot of things openly abstract/narrative, I don't have to shrug it off. I can poke at it.

 

[Walking Dad]

Yeah, it doesn't matter to me how much Pathfinder is combined with 4e concepts - no matter what 5e looks like, I won't be a customer. If it says WotC on the cover, I won't buy it.

So if Paizo would do the same mechanics you would buy it? You just dislike the company...
And I thought we were speaking about rules and fluff here...

 

[Walking Dad]

So with the news that Monte Cook is coming back to WotC R&D, I've been thinking about what I'd like to see in 5e. I have played both Pathfinder and 4e extensively and there are elements of both games that I'd like to see in a Fifth Edition.

Starting off, here is what I LOVE from each game:

I will just use your thoughts as a guideline and comment where necessary from my point of view.

4e

Saves as defenses
Implements that add magical attak/damage bonuses instead of having charges
Static HPs
Point Buy
Self-contained monster stat blocks
Saving every round vs. spells/conditions
Healing Surges
Inherent bonuses to remove magic item dependency
Consolidated skill system
Heroic/Paragon/Epic tier support
DMG chart of expected monster bonuses/damage output per level
Codification of status effects
Combat Advantage mechanic
No cascading buffs
Rituals
Immediate/Standard/Move/Minor action system
Action Points
1/2 level bonus to defenses/attacks/skills
Skill training rules

all this, but I also liked some simplification from Gamma World (no need for feats, specific items, level = bonus to defenses/attacks/skills.

Pathfinder

Distinctive and unique classes
Distinctive and flavorful magic items
Rule books that are fun and enjoyable to read
Wide variety of flexible spells
Multi-classing
Equally easy to run both narrative and mini based combat
CMB/CMD based maneuver system

Hm, no.

The classes are to too unique. Rage, Ki, Grit.... points? Totally different resource managements for martial classes spell casters and Grit.

I don't consider the items more flavorful.

I enjoy the rulebooks to read... but I enjoy my novels and story books and even comics more.

Flexible spells = useless non-spellcasters
(putting ranks in a skill each level or choosing 1 spell?)

Multi-classing is still bad for spellcasters.

Narrative combat isn't easier to do than in 3.5.
Ever resolved throwing a fireball at an approaching goblin horde in narrative combat?
Really using monsters and/or weapons with reach?

The maneuver system is still not as good as some solutions from other companies (Mutants and Masterminds 3rd, for example. Or 4e.)

And here is what I HATE about each:

I will do this point for point:

4e

Minis are required

Not more than in Pathfinder. You can winging it in both.

Powers are too limiting/fiddly

Please explain.

Rituals are cool, but need some that can be combat applicable

No, this is what powers are for.

Powers and classes are cookie cutter/feel the same

They do not in my opinion. Can you give an example?

Magic items are too fiddly/limited

They do not in my opinion. Can you give an example?

Horribly limited multi-classing/hybrid rules

Right, they could be better, but I wouldn't say 'horribly'.

Rule books that are boring to read

Could be, depends on personal taste.

No mid-combat encounter power refresh mechanic

Some leader powers, items, class features.

Pathfinder

Random HP and hit dice

Easily houseruled.

Too many fiddly combat rules that serve little purpose other than to annoy: (Crit confirmation rolls, can only charge in a straight line, double counting diagonal movement, etc.)

Yes.

Save or Lose mechanics

They removed some, but I agree that there is still work to do.

Magic item dependency

YES

15 minute adventuring day

See my class commentary above.

Wizards with crossbows

I liked the beta rules, when nearly all schools gave gave limitless access to a ranged attack SU/SP. But the changed it back in the final release

As you can see there is a lot I like about 4e, but the mini's are mandatory, cookie cutter classes and fiddly powers really really kills it. This is where the "4e feels like a boardgame" meme really comes from.

Already commented above. I'm not sure D&D will ever change to be mpre like FATE, Cortex Plus, ...
and I'm not sure I want it. I can play those games for this.

Pathfinder really excels with fun, flavorful, and unique classes. My only complaint is that too many classes powers rely on a daily refresh mechanic as opposed to something a bit more encounter based.

If they can solve your complaint and balance the classes more, I will happily by Pathfinder 2nd.

...

Make inherent bonuses a core rule,

Isn't it a core rule? It is in the builder and one of the DMGs. Where should be placed else?

and make magic items both rare and powerful with enhancement bonuses that overlap but don't stack with inherent bonuses.

No. Rarity either means:

1) no one gets them -> they are irrelevant.
2) everyone gets them despite their rarity. This means the math is of with the characters being to powerful or there will be item dependency again.
3) some characters have them and the others not. The former will be more effective, gaining automatically more 'screen-time'. The others will be jealous.

I'll also give a shout out to M&M 3e which actually offers the flexibility of Fort/Ref/Will saves that act as defenses or as rolls depending on the situation. Thats also something I'd like to see in 5e.

Isn't this mechanically the same and just a flavor thing? Not opposed to it, but not necessary and easily houseruled.

 

[ashockney]

5E Love Child

On the outside chance that our favorite designers closely follow critical social media outlets, print out some of the good ideas, and kick them around the bullpen. Here goes:

LOVE FROM PATHFINDER
Character building, optimization, multi-classing, prestige classes
Adventure Path and setting/system support model
Some of the best written modules ever published
Gorgeous BOOK products
Lots of "magic" and "abilities"
Lots of interesting flavor baked into the races and classes (ninjas, alchemists, etc.)
Less bad choices in Char Dev (little or no minus, mostly bonus)
Well designed, playtested products with an open community

LOVE FROM 4E
Skills system and the use of Skill Challenges (incredible!)
Character Builder Online Tool
Quick development rules for monster/villians/villian roles
Leader class and it's effectiveness compared to "the healer"
Strong base systems to improve balance

CHALLENGES TO OVERCOME
Good CONCEPT with rituals, but they deserve far more treatment. Please use the work done on skill challenges as a model.
Simple, seamless, and effective tools like character builder
Combats and challenges should be able to be interesting and complex (taking an hour) and simple but fun (taking 15 -20 min)
Character development in the game world MUST be integrated into the level/class system - keeps, armies, responsibility, resources, etc.
Striking the right balance and options to allow PC's to get what they want from their character development in games - it's fun to get stuff every time you play and every time you level, but don't take away the "magic" of effects. A standard "+2 to STR" item is awesome...the first time you get it. Then it becomes less exciting, then it becomes a "necessity". How do we be sure we cover the basics of what we need, from several different possible soures (+1 to a roll) but do it with unique and interesting flavor that will still feel like achievement, even five campaigns in, and still hold the "magic" and unique cool flavor.
Understanding and leveraging the use of conditions in the game, in a simple and elegant form that will be scalable through epic, easily managed in game.
Providing opportunities for more narrative control by the players through the use of skills, powers to achieve desired effects in the story.

All the best to those contemplating the next steps in our hobby and gaming community. I know one thing, which is that a healthy D&D means a healthy hobby and community.

 

[NewJeffCT]

The biggest plus in 4E to me as a DM was the fact that prep time is way, way easier in 4E than it was in 3.5E. Most of the bad guys at the end of my 3.5E campaign were powerful evil clerics - so, I had to pick out dozens of spells, feats, skills, equip them with magic items and regular equipment, decide on a prestige class and/or template, if needed, etc. And, since the campaign was against the followers of this evil deity, I also tried to make each bad guy a bit different than the previous one, just so they wouldn't feel like carbon copies.

 

[Aeolius]

What 5e needs is a good first impression. The 2e core rulebooks seemed "dummied-down", to me, so I stuck with 1e. The 4e core rulebooks would not allow me to run the game I had in mind without a boatload of work, so I stuck with 3.x.

5e needs to appeal to grognards, new gamers, and potential gamers alike... good luck, with that.

And when it comes to the DDI, it needs more of a sense of ownership. Let gamers get their books, adventures, and supplements online as a purchase, not a subscription.

5e needs to be less "videogamey" than 4e, while simultaneously embracing current trends in technology... another tough sell, there. If I could run my online game using a virtual tabletop on my iOS device, linking players into my game using Game Center and utilizing my television as a larger display using AirPlay , I would be a happy camper.