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

[catsclaw227]

But I do not discount using electronic tools to make your game better - use your chosen tool per taste. Whatever makes a better experience for you, please do.

No, but neither has a place at my game table.

Sorry guys, didn't mean to come across as an a**hat. Upon further reading, though, I am guilty as charged.

All I was trying to say is that we are at a point in technology in gaming that the convergence of paper and digital will only sway more towards the digital side of things.

I recognize that many people may not like subscription content or electronic content that they can't download and store. Some don't even like electronic content because of hardware failures or software obsolescence or whatever other reasons.

But the advent of in-game tools to help the DM, networked character sheets and the ability to get snapshot looks at a PCs current status (without them knowing it) are all things that are good for the game in general.

People live different lives than the ones we lived in back in 1979 or 1984 or even 1994. And I believe that because we have instant media, instant messaging, devices that speed up our productivity in different ways, as well as a perceived expectation of instant response, eventually it will spill over into out leisure habits and hobbies. It's a natural progression, I believe.

Now.... easily distracted players doing non-game related things with their iDevice while everyone else is trying to enjoy the game? That's just rude, not the fault of technology. The issues I see (or read about) that people have with technology at the table are mostly human/personality/social concerns.

Anyway, sorry for coming across as a jerk before. Not my intention at all.

(And they say, never post online when you are cranky or haven't eaten all day. )

 

[gamerprinter]

While I like me some PF, I'm not a fan of 3.x multiclassing. I much more prefer the concept of picking a core class, and draping prestiges/pp/ed over the core instead of replacing those levels of core. This adds my unqiue flavor to my character, but I'm still advancing whatever core I started with. The key point for me in 3.x/PF, I should only be able to drape another prestige AFTER i've finished all the levels in the current prestige. This prevents dipping a toe into a prestige for a level just for some features and getting broketastic pun-pun style PCs. If I want to take a prestige, I need to make a commitment to the class, otherwise, I could blow a feat to dabble in that prestige, albeit I would not get any where near as good of a deal.

I like the idea of dabling in another core via feat use, and I think creating a custom/combined core via the 4e hybrid system deserves merit, even if not always ideal. 4e Themes are also fantastic and a great way to add flavor to your PC.

In two years playing Pathfinder, only one PC has multi-classed, and nobody has taken on a prestige class. I think Pathfinder is built in such a way that the most optimal path is single class without ever going PrC. The system certainly still allows doing that, but its no longer the optimal choice. Nobody in my group wants to pun-pun - we never did through our entire history in 3x either. Optimization is something we do only minimally, as our group never consisted of min-maxers.

 

[WheresMyD20]

There are two things I really want in the 5e core:

(1) no grid & minis combat

(2) minimal character customization

I'm ok with grid & minis and complex character customization in rules supplements, but I don't want them in the core.

The "nice to have" items:

(3) a different art direction, maybe something similar to the Red Box Elmore cover that was recently reused for D&D Essentials

(4) evaluate the good & bad in all past D&D editions and use the result as a basis for 5e. Don't just iterate upon 4e (or 3e, or 1e)

(5) don't get too hung up on having a hard & fast rule for everything. The DM is supposed to be an impartial moderator, it's ok to trust his judgement for the inevitable gray areas that arise

(6) the core rules should be a small ruleset (ideally around 64 pages, maximum of 128) that focuses on the "core essence" of D&D. If the classes go beyond "cleric, fighter, rogue, wizard" or the races go beyond "human, dwarf, elf, halfling", then you're probably straying into territory best left for supplements

 

[Plane Sailing]

.

Anyway, sorry for coming across as a jerk before. Not my intention at all.

(And they say, never post online when you are cranky or haven't eaten all day. )

Thanks for that.

 

[NewJeffCT]

Anyway, sorry for coming across as a jerk before. Not my intention at all.

(And they say, never post online when you are cranky or haven't eaten all day. )

You should see me before I have my first cup of coffee in the morning...

 

[BriarMonkey]

Just in reading through the thread, it's obvious that many have very differing opinions on what they want in the next edition of D & D. Now, amplify that by those who don't post here, and I think we have pretty much an unmanageable system...

Add in that WotC alienated a lot of people with the release of 4E, and many of those now carry the Paizo banner, and you have an even larger hurdle to overcome.

While I personally have little hope for the next edition, I do think WotC would be foolish to try to make an edition that is all things to all people - it is simply too significant of an undertaking that I don't think they would be able to pull off in a fair amount of time nor reasonable cost. However, I do think that they could craft a system that would bring back some of the lost feel to the game. And to do that, I do think that they will have to go with a much more modular approach.

Start with a very simplified core. This holds your basic assumptions such as core races, classes, and the abilities thereof. The core system should not try to address much beyond the basics as that is where the extra layer of options and additional "modularity" will go - to include other campaign worlds, alternative play styles, etc. Once the core is set, you can then add all the fiddly bits. By this, look at things like themes, alternative character builds, prestige classes, and all the other elements that change the core.

Of course, there are some decisions that have to be made up front that may or may not belong in the core, such as how, or if, feats are utilized. Or whether feats are completely revisited and recreated...

Yeah, I know, not a lot of specifics there. But then, I'm not a game developer for a reason (I can do big think thinking, but some of the small stuff escapes me).

On a similar note, for me personally, regardless of who makes what, or what moniker they put on the box, if I have to pay a monthly fee to "rent" my books, or I am required to have an Ethernet or Wi-Fi tether to play the game - I'm out. That company will never see a penny from me.

 

[NewJeffCT]

Not wanting to start a flamewar, but I want to share my different perception.

IMHO, Pathfinder is to 3.5 what AD&D 2nd was to AD&D (1st).

The jump from AD&D 2nd to 3e was much more steep, similar to the jump from 3.5 to 4e.

I'd agree - 1E to 2E was a pretty easy change.
2E to 3E was a big change
3E to 3.5E was fairly easy.
3.5 to Pathfinder was fairly easy
3.5 to 4E was a big change, but I thought it was easier than 2E to 3E in terms of rules. (Though, the change in feel of the game was big)

 

[JRRNeiklot]

I honestly don't think WOTC has a chance in hell of presenting a succesful 5e. 3e fans have Pathfinder. 4e fans have 4e. I think most AD&D fans have moved on and could care less what WOTC pushes out the door with the D&D logo on it. And the brand name is worth too much for Ha$bro to sell it off. Whatever comes of 5e will do nothing but further splinter the market.

 

[Lanefan]

I think most AD&D fans have moved on and could care less what WOTC pushes out the door with the D&D logo on it.

I'm not so sure about that.

I suspect many AD+D fans still care about what WotC puts out, and are simply waiting for it to be something that suits their (our) tastes.

Lan-"we live in hope and die in glory"-efan

 

[JRRNeiklot]

Well, sure, I'd like to see a 5e that's somewhat similar to 1e, but I'm a realist. I'm more likely to have my lottery winnings delivered by Elvis who runs a LARP in my living room in which Katherine Zeta Jones plays Aleena the cleric.