Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 5778527" data-attributes="member: 1465">I agree a lot with your opinions.Agree completely.Agree as long as the fluff is generic enough that it would work in most traditional settings. The usual fluff about elves being long-living creatures with ties to the nature and harboring magical secrets is OK to capture the attention on newcomers, but if going too much into the specifics (such as e.g. saying who exactly is the king of elves, or which is their capital city) should be avoided. It's ok to mention names of famous elves characters from books, movies and also D&D settings alike, but at examples without implying that they must exist in your game.I can't comment on this...(I skipped point 9, and all points to which I agree)Points 4 and 5, I'd accept even less classes and races, Fighter/Wizard/Cleric/Rogue and Human/Elf/Dwarf/Halfling are enough for me. These are also the most stable concepts across almost various setting.Point 6, big NO to spell creation rules (IMXP they are extremely rarely used, given the plethora of spells published) and small NO to item creation rules. I think a lot of gaming groups don't bother with creating non-magical items, so perhaps it could be moved to the DMG. And about creating magical items, it should be moved to the DMG so that everything is under DM's control more.Point 8, it all depends on which "basic" magic items will be included. The problem is not trivial... even being able to easily make scrolls and wands in 3ed had huge strategic implications. Maybe if all magic item creation rules are moved to the DMG, it is then possible to put a bunch of magic items on the PHB without fear (if by default the characters will have to find them, not make them). Certainly, simple stuff like healing potions of various kind and minor protective trinkets can be in the equipment section of the PHB.Agree on everything else, but point 2 may depend on how the concept of "modularity" will be really implemented.I still leave the door open for some rules option/module that increase the details of combat, for example with more differentiations of actions by type. This could be in the PHB if it is believed that quite a lot of gaming groups will end up using it, so that every player can study such rules carefully from his/her own PHB.A similar thing can happen e.g. on battlemat rules, in case the game wants to support both a minis-based combat and a mapless, minisless combat. Tho I doubt this will be the case, if it is then both versions should be available to all players in the PHB.(EDIT) Another example could be the skill system. Should it work like 3ed where most of the times you need to roleplay + roll once? Should it work like 4ed skill challenges? It's possible that 5ed will have 2 or even more options all of which are "default", so as not to displease anyone. In this case, they should all be in the PHB of course.</blockquote>

Verification