D&D 5E So 5th edition is coming soon

[KarinsDad]

Unfortunately, those things you like are inimical to 4e's design. 4e deliberately scaled back on options for strategic planning and for player empowerment.

I agree with the first.

I disagree with the second. Player empowerment in many ways is at a greater level than it has ever been. For example, the number of options for the development of each PC is much greater than 3.5 ever was. PCs have fewer charged items and spell casters have fewer spells, but the sheer number of options overall has increased.

4e wanted to move the power to establish the narrative structure for the game back firmly into the DM's hands. Allowing the players to purchase items that "let them have 15 encounters in a row" is nonsensical in 4e's paradigm.

What do you consider the narrative structure of the game? To me, it has nothing to do with whether the PCs have 3 encounters in a row or 15 encounters in a row. Unless he has some type of time based encounter layout, why would a DM care if the PCs got through 4, 6, 8, or 10 encounters before having to take an extended rest? With unusual dice rolls, the DM's plan of a 7 encounter day could end up being any of these.

If there's a need for 15 encounters in a row, the players and DM should be collaborating on a way to explain that.

Why?

The number of encounters per day is merely a metagame side effect of how the rules were written and how resources are typically used. It should have little if any in character correlation.

PC Warlock: "Remember team, the world revolves around 5 encounter days and this is a pretty big place. At least 200 feet by 200 feet. So, be prepared to be in here for 3 days."

Err, huh?

And, there are a lot of literary and even real life examples of heroes fighting for the better part of an entire day. Why is 15 less than one minute encounters in a row (or a day) so astonishing? It's only because that is what the designers limited the rules to.

Being "prepared for any scenario" is another way of saying that you have the ability to bypass encounters that were meant to be challenging.

No, it means being prepared.

If my PC crafts a Potion of Water Breathing and another PC doesn't, it means that my PC is prepared to go underwater for an extended period of time and he isn't prepared for that.

It doesn't mean that it will allow me to necessarily bypass an encounter. Course, a Potion of Water Breathing doesn't exist in 4E.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I agree with the first.

I disagree with the second. Player empowerment in many ways is at a greater level than it has ever been. For example, the number of options for the development of each PC is much greater than 3.5 ever was. PCs have fewer charged items and spell casters have fewer spells, but the sheer number of options overall has increased.

And narrowed. It isn't that there aren't more choices, and PHB1 certainly gave most of the tools to the players. So they occupy a fairly narrow spread of power. Nothing as astonishing as a Staff of the Magi or a Helm of Brilliance. Those of necessity are DM arbitrated. WotC could never bring themselves to make those items before. Maybe they will now, maybe that is why they pulled the magic emporium book. Maybe we'll get a whole new view of items. That is something I'd like. Could also be why they never really looked closely at existing items rarity. Why waste the time if you are just going to release a new thing that basically says "Forget those old items, use THESE instead...". I mean it can just be a suggestion at that (all 'rules' are).

What do you consider the narrative structure of the game? To me, it has nothing to do with whether the PCs have 3 encounters in a row or 15 encounters in a row. Unless he has some type of time based encounter layout, why would a DM care if the PCs got through 4, 6, 8, or 10 encounters before having to take an extended rest? With unusual dice rolls, the DM's plan of a 7 encounter day could end up being any of these.



Why?

The number of encounters per day is merely a metagame side effect of how the rules were written and how resources are typically used. It should have little if any in character correlation.

PC Warlock: "Remember team, the world revolves around 5 encounter days and this is a pretty big place. At least 200 feet by 200 feet. So, be prepared to be in here for 3 days."

Err, huh?

And, there are a lot of literary and even real life examples of heroes fighting for the better part of an entire day. Why is 15 less than one minute encounters in a row (or a day) so astonishing? It's only because that is what the designers limited the rules to.

Well sure, and the DM should absolutely pace his adventures. Some are tough throughout and may be few encounters, others can have easier encounters, but long ones, or lots of areas where there are say a few minions and a standard (half an encounter worth of monsters) and then another half that show up later, etc. Really, you could run 10 or 15 encounters for a day, but you'll just be stretching things out. Get to the tense part(s).

No, it means being prepared.

If my PC crafts a Potion of Water Breathing and another PC doesn't, it means that my PC is prepared to go underwater for an extended period of time and he isn't prepared for that.

It doesn't mean that it will allow me to necessarily bypass an encounter. Course, a Potion of Water Breathing doesn't exist in 4E.

and what do you know, Dragon 393 comes through...

Potion of Water Walking
Level 4 Common

A tiny clay pot holds within it a malodorous glop, which, if choked down in one swallow, grants the consumer the power to walk over water.
Price: 40 gp
Potion

Power (Consumable): Minor Action. After drinking this potion, you do not sink into the surface of any liquid (unless you choose to do so). This effect lasts until the end of the encounter or for 5 minutes, whichever comes first. You can move across calm liquid as if it were solid ground. Rough or stormy liquid counts as difficult terrain. When moving across the surface of a liquid, you are in contact with it as you would be in contact with the ground. If the liquid is moving, you move with it as if the ground moved beneath you.

Anyway, nobody is saying there couldn't be a LOT of much better stuff either. Since the PCs now can't just make every possible item you can have all kinds of uncommon potions etc. Really, I think all these changes help a lot if you go with the 4e plan. lol. Seriously though, healing potions could be fixed for those who desire by any sort of extra uncommon/rare potions you want. Heck, do it random distribution if you want.

And a resourceful character can get ingredients to make some of these potions too, now and then. Give out potion components and let the PCs have a choice of making a few select brews. Then let them devise some of their own. This is what should really happen with the game, this stuff can all go into the digital tools and just let people pick who's stuff they want.

 

[triqui]

Latest Mike Mearl's Legend and Lore keep shaking some of 4e foundations. I stand in my initial thought. The cogs of 4e have started to wheel. I don't know if it's going to be out in 2012, in 2013, in 2014 (hint: 40 years of D&D...), or in 2058, but they are working on it, right now.

4e took 3 years of develop, AFAIK

 

[KarinsDad]

Well sure, and the DM should absolutely pace his adventures. Some are tough throughout and may be few encounters, others can have easier encounters, but long ones, or lots of areas where there are say a few minions and a standard (half an encounter worth of monsters) and then another half that show up later, etc. Really, you could run 10 or 15 encounters for a day, but you'll just be stretching things out. Get to the tense part(s).

Why can't all 10 or 15 be tense? You are so focused on how things work today that you cannot see how they might work better in 5E.

Seriously. What is wrong with a group of adventurers having 15 tougher adventures in a day based on the fact that the PCs themselves saved up their money and bought a bunch of charged items that allow them to continue on whereas normally, they could not.

Expensive charged items that did things like restore healing surges and restore Daily powers or just gave the PCs other capabilities.

It would take well written rules to get it properly balanced, but it opens the game up to other concepts like: we are in a different dimension where we are constantly on the move and if you sleep, you die.

and what do you know, Dragon 393 comes through...

A Potion of Water Walking is not a Potion of Water Breathing.

An entire segment of adventures (underwater) is very difficult to achieve. They threw the baby out with the bath water in quite a few ways.

 

[triqui]

Why can't all 10 or 15 be tense? You are so focused on how things work today that you cannot see how they might work better in 5E.

I fully agree with this sentence, but can't give you exp (have to spread and all of that)

 

[TwoSix]

Seriously. What is wrong with a group of adventurers having 15 tougher adventures in a day based on the fact that the PCs themselves saved up their money and bought a bunch of charged items that allow them to continue on whereas normally, they could not.

Nothing in the rules prevents that from happening now. What's prevented is the players deciding that they'll have 15 fights in a row because they bought 30 venti Potions of Restlessness.
As a DM, I don't want to (and shouldn't have to) plan out 15 encounters in a row on the off chance that's what my players want to do. If there's a narrative need for 15 encounters in a row, as a DM, I'll make sure they have the ability to do so.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

noone prevents you from using a water breathing ritual...

 

[KarinsDad]

Nothing in the rules prevents that from happening now. What's prevented is the players deciding that they'll have 15 fights in a row because they bought 30 venti Potions of Restlessness.
As a DM, I don't want to (and shouldn't have to) plan out 15 encounters in a row on the off chance that's what my players want to do. If there's a narrative need for 15 encounters in a row, as a DM, I'll make sure they have the ability to do so.

You keep talking about narrative. This really has nothing to do with narrative.

Do you never have a dungeon with 12 or more encounter rooms in it?

We do in our games. Not every plot line has that, but some do. Tomb of Horrors for example.

The only thing I am talking about is going into a large "dungeon" (e.g. getting caught on an island, being in another dimension, fighting through Moria, etc.) and never taking an extended rest. Why would you as DM care whether the PCs did that with 0, 1, or 2 extended rests? Why are you so wrapped up with the max number of encounters per day that the designers came up with as the only reasonable one?

One encounter in a day is reasonable.

15 encounters in a day is reasonable.

There is nothing wrong with the players making those types of decisions instead of the DM. It is their PCs after all. They are handcuffed by the rules as written and by how much the DM is willing to bend those rules via plot devices, but that doesn't mean that 15 encounters in a day is unreasonable. It only means that the 4E designers didn't take it into account.

 

[triqui]

I think Karinsdad hit the nail. 1 enounter per day, or 20, should be supported by the game. Ill daresay, it sshoukd be supported even without resorting to magic, expendables, or items. I made a thread a couple days ago in the official.forums about this. Designers should avoid the "this is the canon and supported way to play" mentality.

 

[KarinsDad]

noone prevents you from using a water breathing ritual...

Until you fall into a pit with water in it, suck at Athletics, and your heavy armor is weighing you down. A 10 minute ritual cast time in that circumstance is really tough, especially if you are not a ritual caster.

Course, some DMs wouldn't put that situation into the game system because the PC powers and abilities are designed to do damage, not help out in a drowning scenario.

This is the basic flaw of the ritual system. It severely limits the possibilities.

Solutions like I mentioned earlier like a "10 minute casting time ritual in a can" (be that a scroll, potion, power, or whatever) where the PC can gain the benefits of the ritual with a Standard Action would open the game up quite a bit.

It puts magic back in the word magic. With the 4E rules, the PCs are handcuffed pretty heavily as to cool magical effects in combat shy of "hit and do damage".

 

[TwoSix]

You keep talking about narrative. This really has nothing to do with narrative.

Do you never have a dungeon with 12 or more encounter rooms in it?

No, because that would mean I'd have to prep 12 encounters ahead of time. Or improv it, which I can do, but I'd rather not. 4e encounters are usually more fun when you have a few minutes to plan them.

I have the strong feeling from your examples that you run sandbox games, where the story line is directed foremost by the player's actions. I know that many people hold that as the holy grail of how D&D games should be. Personally, I'm not a fan.

As the DM, my games have always run better when I've been the director, not merely the adjudicator. That's why I keep referring to narrative, because to me, that's what the game is.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Agreed.

Really have no issues with that. Actually, feather fall should be exactly this kind of ritual...

Bind magic into the feather (the good old material component), and if you need it, it activates... this is really nothing that belongs into a utility spot.

To be honest, would even allow binding fireballs into your sulfur and bat guano, to be used as a standard action... this would be nothing different from an alchemical item... i also see no reasons, why not allow this... if it is expensive enough, and the magic does not hold forever... why not...

Since I am converting an old adventure to 4e, i face the problem, that you can´t have/use scrolls in 4e for fireball, etc...

My simple solution is allowing the mage to read scrolls to switch out a daily/encounter for that day, and the magic fades... and to honor past editions, i really think about allowing the thief to read scrolls as well... (for a feat, as a PP feature, or just with skill training arcana, i am not sure)

I want my magic back!

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Until you fall into a pit with water in it, suck at Athletics, and your heavy armor is weighing you down. A 10 minute ritual cast time in that circumstance is really tough, especially if you are not a ritual caster.

Course, some DMs wouldn't put that situation into the game system because the PC powers and abilities are designed to do damage, not help out in a drowning scenario.

This is the basic flaw of the ritual system. It severely limits the possibilities.

Solutions like I mentioned earlier like a "10 minute casting time ritual in a can" (be that a scroll, potion, power, or whatever) where the PC can gain the benefits of the ritual with a Standard Action would open the game up quite a bit.

It puts magic back in the word magic. With the 4E rules, the PCs are handcuffed pretty heavily as to cool magical effects in combat shy of "hit and do damage".

Just quoted you here, because i am too lazy to edit it into my last post...

Of course, i would use pits of water, even if the fighter sucks at swimming... i am not that kind of DM that has its decisions decided by which skills players take...

also, I think, circumventing hp with non damaging effects seems abusive... save or die was less fun, than you think...

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

My group has experimented a little with having spells/powers bound to scrolls, which are then used as a standard action (plus the minor action to retrieve it). Our cleric used a scroll of Colour Spray while we were trying to defend the mage (me) from hordes of minions so that she could complete the Linked Portal ritual and get us the heck out of dodge.

It was fun. Mind you, I was playing the NPCs for this fight, and if I hadn't been doing that, it would have been pretty boring for me.

Based on that experience, I don't think it will be a problem, but there is definite potential for abuse, so care must be taken. There needs to be some kind of "cost" so that you can't just bust off scrolls of powerful spells and rituals all day long. Maybe it eats healing surges, or APs, or maybe it gives you a good use for the Item Daily tickbox.

Maybe throw in a few more conditions; it has to be your level or lower, casting "across power source" will have you make an Arcana/Nature/Religion check or it fizzles, etc.

 

[KarinsDad]

No, because that would mean I'd have to prep 12 encounters ahead of time. Or improv it, which I can do, but I'd rather not. 4e encounters are usually more fun when you have a few minutes to plan them.

I have the strong feeling from your examples that you run sandbox games, where the story line is directed foremost by the player's actions. I know that many people hold that as the holy grail of how D&D games should be. Personally, I'm not a fan.

On the contrary. Our DM comes up with all of the major plots, subplots, and basic storylines. He decides most of the major directions towards which the PCs go. But as players, we merely reserve the right to just ignore a plot completely and head off in a different direction.

There are 6 people at our table, not 1.

We don't often ignore a plot or head off in a weird direction, but an enviroment where the player's actions and decisions have no real bearing on the overall outcome of the campaign feels railroaded. Personally, I'm not a fan of the DM limiting his campaign to a few select encounters per session and no way for the PCs to go do something other than his limited plan for the day.

As the DM, my games have always run better when I've been the director, not merely the adjudicator. That's why I keep referring to narrative, because to me, that's what the game is.

A pet peeve of mine is something like:

Player 1 (myself): "Let's go to the mine and search it. We might find a clue."
DM: "The PCs found out last session that the mine is flooded."
Player 2: "Let's not go to the mine. It'll be a waste of time cause it's flooded."

As a player, I remembered that the mine was flooded, but that doesn't mean that I don't want to go check it out for myself. By interjecting himself here, the DM is effectively railroading the game away from the area that he did not prepare. He isn't really letting the players decide what the group does, he's strongly influencing the direction of the story by strongly influencing some of the players (and DMs have a lot of influence). It's ok for the mine to be completely flooded (a bit heavy handed by the DM, but no big deal) and the PCs go there and find that out, but there's a problem with the DM just backhandedly cutting it short completely.

If this is what you mean by "being the director", then you can keep it. No thanks.

If this is not what you mean, then fair enough. I personally prefer group story telling without the DM's narrative taking center stage all of the time, but I understand different strokes for different folks.

Let me ask you a different question though.

For those players and DMs who enjoy the occasional dungeon crawl, do you think that the rules should allow for those possibilities?

I'm not talking about forcing you to play a different game style here. I'm talking about allowing for game styles other than the average 5 encounters per day one that WotC more or less forced (shy of the DM going way out of his way to augment resources and/or make encounters so easy that they aren't a challenge at all).

 

[KarinsDad]

Just quoted you here, because i am too lazy to edit it into my last post...

Of course, i would use pits of water, even if the fighter sucks at swimming... i am not that kind of DM that has its decisions decided by which skills players take...

also, I think, circumventing hp with non damaging effects seems abusive... save or die was less fun, than you think...

I agree. I wasn't talking save or die spells. Those suck.

I was talking Potions of Water Breathing when the Fighter falls into the pit of water, Tokens of Feather Fall when the Cleric falls off a cliff, a clay disk of Tensor's Floating Disk to get the unconscious Rogue out of combat when the Leader is low on heals, a key of Knock when nobody has Thievery in the group and they want to retreat through the locked door mid-combat, etc.

I did add a house rule of "Power Scrolls" (i.e. relatively inexpensive scrolls of Encounter or Daily powers that could be cast via a Standard Action in combat) and "Ritual Scrolls" (i.e. scrolls of 10 minute rituals that could be cast via a Standard Action in combat) when I was running last year and the year before, but none of my players really took me up on it. They crafted a few, but for the most part, didn't really use them a lot. As a player though, I would be all over this, just to get the versatility when I deemed it necessary.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I thought about using it in addition to your usual spells, but then i think, it would be unfair and leads to 3.5 bag of scrolls...

so i just allow the mage to use different spells he could not put into his spellbook, but still want to have sometimes...

 

[triqui]

As the DM, my games have always run better when I've been the director, not merely the adjudicator. That's why I keep referring to narrative, because to me, that's what the game is.

The best narrative games out there (i'm thinking about things like Dresden Files, Feng Shui, or Dogs in the Vineyard) heavily rely on the players contribution to the narrative, even allowing them to make changes on the plot, or assessments in the narration or descriptions on the scenes. Otherwise it's not a narrative game, it's a slideshow.

 

[TwoSix]

The best narrative games out there (i'm thinking about things like Dresden Files, Feng Shui, or Dogs in the Vineyard) heavily rely on the players contribution to the narrative, even allowing them to make changes on the plot, or assessments in the narration or descriptions on the scenes. Otherwise it's not a narrative game, it's a slideshow.

Agreed. But those games have rules that support spur-of-the-moment improvisation to drive the plot, like FATE's aspects. And none of them feature abilities that let you go to places or encounter things that the DM couldn't possibily anticipate (well, in Dresden you could), and then have to fight a large scale tactical battle against them.[/QUOTE]

 

[TwoSix]

On the contrary. Our DM comes up with all of the major plots, subplots, and basic storylines. He decides most of the major directions towards which the PCs go. But as players, we merely reserve the right to just ignore a plot completely and head off in a different direction.

And I tend to find that (ignoring a plot completely and moving in a different direction) pretty annoying unless I get some heads-up that such a move will be coming into play.

Now, I'm not saying I sketch the entire game in advance and make giant mountains appear in the west when I want you to go east. I throw out lots of story hooks in the beginning, ideally with some tailored to the character's backstory. I see which ones the characters take a liking to and run with those. I also have a major arc running in the background that will smack the characters eventually, even if they turn a blind eye towards it. How they choose to grapple with the major story is up to them.

But if we're in the middle of a story, and then decide "Hey, I can turn invisible and fly! Let's drop this and go rob people in Major City X!," then I get perturbed. I'm fully aware that "Don't play with those kind of players" is the best advice, but even good players can have a bad night and flake off.

A pet peeve of mine is something like:

Player 1 (myself): "Let's go to the mine and search it. We might find a clue."
DM: "The PCs found out last session that the mine is flooded."
Player 2: "Let's not go to the mine. It'll be a waste of time cause it's flooded."

As a player, I remembered that the mine was flooded, but that doesn't mean that I don't want to go check it out for myself. By interjecting himself here, the DM is effectively railroading the game away from the area that he did not prepare. He isn't really letting the players decide what the group does, he's strongly influencing the direction of the story by strongly influencing some of the players (and DMs have a lot of influence). It's ok for the mine to be completely flooded (a bit heavy handed by the DM, but no big deal) and the PCs go there and find that out, but there's a problem with the DM just backhandedly cutting it short completely.

If this is what you mean by "being the director", then you can keep it. No thanks.

I guess my thought process is different on this. What is the mine? Why did I (as a DM) introduce it? Is there something important there? Was it just intended as flavor?

If I introduce something as flavor, and the players decide to interact it with anyway, I try to think ahead a bit. Maybe I had been planning on them deciding to kill the vampire lord that had been stalking them for revenge. An abandoned mine shaft might be a good time for an ambush by some spectres or some dominated townfolk. Maybe the vampire decides to flood the mine while the party explores it. Maybe the mine is already flooded because the vampire flooded it, because deep within its bowels it holds the entrance to an abandoned lair of a lich who is an old rival of the vampire, and the vampire fears the lich may be freed by the miners (or the party!)

Now the key is, depending on what I decide in those few seconds between the party's decision and my reply, I can control their access. They can't just swim to the back of the mine before I'm ready. The powers that control progression are in my hands.

I never cut my players off from exploring what they want to explore. But everything they do is going to tie back into the major arc.

Let me ask you a different question though.

For those players and DMs who enjoy the occasional dungeon crawl, do you think that the rules should allow for those possibilities?

I think that they already do. The number of encounters I'm setting up is no limitation on what you can choose to do in game. The mechanical restrictions are merely telling you not everything will be easy, or solvable by magic.

Your "warrior in a well" example is telling. Why does that situation require water breathing or levitate? Why aren't you tying a rope to the halfling and throwing him in after him?