D&D 5E So...what [should be] next?

[steeldragons]

If I've read everything properly, there won't be another batch of playtest material until the end of the summer.

Instead of rehashing and debating what we've already seen (which I think everyone's done a bang up job doing ), I thought it might be fun to see what everyone is hoping for in the next iteration?

What fluff was missing from the original playtest you'd like to see presented in the next batch? Mechanics (optional or not) that you feel are necessary, or just would want to give a test drive? Classes beyond the "big 4" that you'd want to try out/see how they're thinking of them in 5e terms? etc...

There's been quite a bit of "but what about <insert preferred stuff from Xe>?!" and "they don't have <insert preferred mechanics here>!!!" and umpteen "this is how they should do/have/incorporate X."

So...let's try to congeal all of those disparate threads/thoughts/desires into a nice workable and civilly discussable list.

What do you want to see included in the next batch of playtest material?

For my two coppers, from what I've read, it seems a few of the biggest topics are:
1) Reworking/-thinking the "full hp after rest" mechanic
2) How one would incorporate the tactical minis style of combat
3) What/How they're going to add maneuvers/exploits/whatever to the Fighter class features...be they with or without themes and backgrounds
4) A more thorough/complete Theme and Background list.
5) How Clerical "Domains" (and presumably Mage "Specialists") are going to work beyond 3rd level.
6) How/what they're going to really define for various spellcasting systems.
7) And just for myself, anyway, I'd like to see a couple of the "subclasses" (yes, I know they aren't "sub classes", per se, it's just a convenient term to differentiate from the big 4) presented beyond the base classes...Paladin, Druid and Warlock top my list (though I think Assassin is high priority for many folks, also).

Have at it and happy Monday, all.
--SD

 

[erleni]

1, 2, 3, 4 and 7 from your list would be enough to me, but honestly today's L&L article pretty much killed my hopes for D&DN.

 

[steeldragons]

1, 2, 3, 4 and 7 from your list would be enough to me, but honestly today's L&L article pretty much killed my hopes for D&DN.

Really?! I haven't read it. What's it say?

 

[Stormonu]

For my two coppers, from what I've read, it seems a few of the biggest topics are:
1) Reworking/-thinking the "full hp after rest" mechanic
2) How one would incorporate the tactical minis style of combat
3) What/How they're going to add maneuvers/exploits/whatever to the Fighter class features...be they with or without themes and backgrounds
4) A more thorough/complete Theme and Background list.
5) How Clerical "Domains" (and presumably Mage "Specialists") are going to work beyond 3rd level.
6) How/what they're going to really define for various spellcasting systems.
7) And just for myself, anyway, I'd like to see a couple of the "subclasses" (yes, I know they aren't "sub classes", per se, it's just a convenient term to differentiate from the big 4) presented beyond the base classes...Paladin, Druid and Warlock top my list (though I think Assassin is high priority for many folks, also).

Have at it and happy Monday, all.
--SD

For my list it would be:

1) Show us an alternate (non-vancian) spellcasting class
2) Enough information to self-build a few low-level PCS.
3) An example rules module (pointed out as rules module)
4) "Fixed" armor and weapons

At some point I hope they'll let us playtest in the 5th-10th level area and a playtest in the 11th to 20th range - people need to be able to take the higher levels for a spin to help make sure they're working correctly - the game does go past 3rd level. I want this to be a play test, not a test of play.

 

[BASHMAN]

Personally, I'd like to see them at least explain all the "rolled in" mechanics of the character sheets. As is, it's obvious that there are mechanical stuff they are not explaining, and just putting into the character sheets. I'm not sure if this is an attempt to make the game appear "simpler" because they removed the explanation of why the dwarf does so much damage with an axe, or if they think they're protecting some sort of "trade secrets" but it's annoying when the Dwarf Fighter picks up another weapon and you don't know what to tell him regarding how much damage he should do with it.

We should not have to be "Reverse Engineering" whether the dwarf gets a racial bonus with axes and hammers, or if it is a class bonus, or if it is both. They should just TELL US.

There is a lot more of this kind of thing hidden and rolled into the other builds, but that is the most obvious one I noticed.

 

[GX.Sigma]

I felt the game was in dire need of exploration rules. After one session of playtesting, I made up a few wandering monster tables and copy-pasted the dungeon exploration rules from Labyrinth Lord. To me, the game just doesn't make any sense if there's no way of measuring time. It's an easy houserule, but it doesn't interface perfectly with the kernel. I'd like to see their take on it.

Otherwise, just more character options, more monsters, and more levels.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

The next playtest should, in a general sense, give people who prefer 4E over other editions of D&D some evidence that this game will be something worth playing.