D&D 5E Starter Set: Excerpt 3 (actual)

[TarionzCousin]

Good point.

Good distinction.

This is not the type of argument/debate I'm accustomed to seeing online. Kudos for being civil and positive.

 

[TwoSix]

If fact the "help" action itself is terribly boring if used every time you can. It's weird, but the only reason why this doesn't happen seems to be that players constantly forget about the existence of this action in the first place ("Aid another" in 3e). I wouldn't be happy if the Cleric used Guidance at every check, and I wouldn't be happy either if the Cleric forgot she has Guidance.

Really? My PF players use Aid Another on pretty much every single skill check, except for when it wouldn't make sense (like Perception to notice an ambush).

As always, different players make for vastly different games.

 

[SigmaOne]

I notice here that they do not say anything about requiring a magical focus (wand, holy symbol, spell book, etc) in order to obtain the spell casting proficiency bonus for the DC. Now you just get it. Is that new? Or did they mention they were making that change? I really thought they were planning on sticking with it. (Rereading the last playtest docs, I notice in the 10/14 classes doc they have 8 + Int + Prof (with focus), while in the 9/19 How to Play they simply have 10 + Int + Bonus. I somehow never noticed that inconsistency until now.

 

[Thaumaturge]

I notice here that they do not say anything about requiring a magical focus (wand, holy symbol, spell book, etc) in order to obtain the spell casting proficiency bonus for the DC. Now you just get it. Is that new? Or did they mention they were making that change? I really thought they were planning on sticking with it. (Rereading the last playtest docs, I notice in the 10/14 classes doc they have 8 + Int + Prof (with focus), while in the 9/19 How to Play they simply have 10 + Int + Bonus. I somehow never noticed that inconsistency until now.

Could this be a Basic vs "Advanced" module difference? Worrying about a focus being the fiddly module bit for those of us who care?

Thaumaturge.

 

[Remathilis]

This should tell you how much I was out of the loop: I didn't even know Magic Missile and Detect Magic were back to First Level status after previously being Cantrips. (I rechecked the playtest and sure enough...)

Overall, its a good quick list: iconic overall. I noticed a few 4e holdouts (Sacred Flame, Guiding Bolt, Healing Word, Warding Bond, Beacon of Hope, Thunderwave, Misty Step) but it will be nice to see them done as regular spells vs. powers.

 

[Nellisir]

2. The channeling of positive energy to heal wounds is now in the "Evocation" school, rather than the "Conjuration" school.

Finally. I've been waiting for this since at least 2e (which is when it started to make a difference). In 2e, a lot of spells got shoved into Conjuration to get around specialist restrictions. Need a big blast of fire but can't cast fireball? Make a conjuration spell to summon fire from the elemental plane of fire. Summon an illusion from the plane of dreams. Etc, etc. It diluted the schools quite a bit, IMO - I switched cure to an evocation ages ago.

(I've been rewriting spells for OSR purposes over the past year, and a lot of this has been resurfacing for me.)

 

[SigmaOne]

Could this be a Basic vs "Advanced" module difference? Worrying about a focus being the fiddly module bit for those of us who care?

Thaumaturge.

That would make sense, except they keep keep saying there are no rules-changes between "basic" and "advanced"; that basic is strictly a subset. Maybe I misinterpreted what they were saying by that. I guess you're right that if focuses are added as an optional module, then it's technically not changing the ruleset. Makes sense. It certainly is a bit fiddly, too.

 

[Redbadge]

If you check the very first (partial) paragraph of the equipment preview, you'll see that holy symbols (and presumably other implements) can now be used to forgo any non-costly material components in a spell.

 

[jrowland]

If you check the very first (partial) paragraph of the equipment preview, you'll see that holy symbols (and presumably other implements) can now be used to forgo any non-costly material components in a spell.

If that is true for other implements, I'll be very happy. I like material components and as a player, I keep track, but in practice very few people do. The "Spell Component Pouch" solution (ie this pouch has all my components) is silly as well, might as well not exist for all the use it gets.

However, it could be that while save DC's are automatic with proficiency bonus baked in, spell attack rolls might still require an implement to get the bonus. I know in our playtest game it actually came up: player cast Hold Person. Targets needed to save vs DC14 and failed. Next round the Player tossed shield aside (with emblazoned holy symbol) to use warhammer two-handed while concentrating on Hold Person. Is the DC now 12? As DM I was inclined to let it roll at 14, but the table felt 12 was correct, so that what we went with. I think keeping it static is just easier, and looks like the Devs think so too. Remembering round-to-round what the DC is as a player switches out a focus is too fiddly. On an attack roll however, its once and done, so requiring it there makes sense just as using a sword or bow.

EDIT: I looked at the page again. Nothing under "Attack" RE: implements, so looks like that is gone as a requirement for Prof bonus. Perhaps implements do something else now.

 

[Sanglorian]

If you check the very first (partial) paragraph of the equipment preview, you'll see that holy symbols (and presumably other implements) can now be used to forgo any non-costly material components in a spell.

Oh. Wow ... that is actually a very elegant way of including non-costly material components and making them an important part of some stories ("we've lost/broken/had stolen/had confiscated our holy symbols and wands, what material components can we scrounge and improvise?") while ignoring them whenever they'd be fiddly and irrelevant.