D&D 5E Stripping 5e to its core

[ezo]

I get it. That entry is not like 5e. But it's how I solve a conundrum. If I'm stripping out backgrounds and feats, how do I account for customization?

First I would ask why are you taking out backgrounds? Do you find them too complex for beginning players? That hasn't been my experience. I think the "custom background" option can be a bit much, but just pick one and gain X, Y, and Z features (a couple skils, a couple languages/tools, and such).

For backgrounds, I would have 8-12 options, but remove the 2014 background features (like City Streets for Urchins) as those features are a bit more DM fiat and rarely used IME.

Instead of customization, a primer should offer direction IMO.

To me that seems the best way because it doesn't add any complexity or rules.

But it adds something that doesn't exist in the 5E game, or any equivalent in some cases. While I understand the logic behind your example dwarven traits, there is no 5E reason why something like "Forge Child". Now "Armored" is there for the Mountain Dwarf armor training trait, so I would focus on traits which are there in some fashion. In 5E, you might pick a background as part of picking your race, but that's pretty much it. Racial traits are fairly set in stone IME. Perhaps something in Tasha's custom race stuff makes it more, but that's it I think.

To me, offering those customization options (which don't exist in 5E for races, for example) is adding complexity with more decision points, not making the game easier.

A super important part of the scope is to have just enough of the rules to "prime" a player for 5e. New and younger players should be presented with only the bare skeleton.

Right!

At the same time, options and customization are core to the 5e experience (unlike b/x), so how is that accomplished?

Choose where to put your ability scores
Choose where to put your +2/+1 ASI
Choose your race
Choose your background
Choose your class

• Choose skills
• Choose class feature option (such as which Fighting Style)
• Choose equipment package
• Choose spells (if any)

Other than removing subclasses themselves and a starting feat, what options and customizations are missing?

Also, what do you see is the difference between an "option" and a "customization" to you? Frankly I don't really see any difference but if there is a concrete divide to you, please explain it if you can.

 

[Sacrosanct]

First I would ask why are you taking out backgrounds? Do you find them too complex for beginning players? That hasn't been my experience. I think the "custom background" option can be a bit much, but just pick one and gain X, Y, and Z features (a couple skils, a couple languages/tools, and such).

For backgrounds, I would have 8-12 options, but remove the 2014 background features (like City Streets for Urchins) as those features are a bit more DM fiat and rarely used IME.

Instead of customization, a primer should offer direction IMO.


But it adds something that doesn't exist in the 5E game, or any equivalent in some cases. While I understand the logic behind your example dwarven traits, there is no 5E reason why something like "Forge Child". Now "Armored" is there for the Mountain Dwarf armor training trait, so I would focus on traits which are there in some fashion. In 5E, you might pick a background as part of picking your race, but that's pretty much it. Racial traits are fairly set in stone IME. Perhaps something in Tasha's custom race stuff makes it more, but that's it I think.

To me, offering those customization options (which don't exist in 5E for races, for example) is adding complexity with more decision points, not making the game easier.


Right!


Choose where to put your ability scores
Choose where to put your +2/+1 ASI
Choose your race
Choose your background
Choose your class

• Choose skills
• Choose class feature option (such as which Fighting Style)
• Choose equipment package
• Choose spells (if any)

Other than removing subclasses themselves and a starting feat, what options and customizations are missing?

Also, what do you see is the difference between an "option" and a "customization" to you? Frankly I don't really see any difference but if there is a concrete divide to you, please explain it if you can.

I hear what you’re saying and I appreciate it. I need to think on that. A valuable, yet hard lesson I learned long ago (from a Ridley Scott quote no less) was that as a creator, you might have to cut out your favorite parts and leave them on the floor. We designers often get too attached on a way to do things we really like when it might not be in the best interest of the product. So even if I’m leaning one direction now, I really appreciate outside views and even contradictory opinions, because they should be considered.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Also, since I want to keep decision points at a minimum for brand new players, the subclasses don’t start until level 2. Get familiarity with the rules and class, then more decision points open up.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Ridley Scott

Shame he didn't listen to himself.

 

[ezo]

I hear what you’re saying and I appreciate it.

I know you do, which is why I feel comfortable telling you. Ultimately, you might decide to take the project in a way I don't quite "agree with" but it is your project and once you've made that choice I'll still try to help.

As I've said, from my POV, a primer should not add new things that won't be there once the primer has been experienced and the player moves past the primer. I worry about confusion and disappointment once the "new things" are gone. But I won't hash it over again at this point.

I need to think on that. A valuable, yet hard lesson I learned long ago (from a Ridley Scott quote no less) was that as a creator, you might have to cut out your favorite parts and leave them on the floor. We designers often get too attached on a way to do things we really like when it might not be in the best interest of the product. So even if I’m leaning one direction now, I really appreciate outside views and even contradictory opinions, because they should be considered.

Yep. I've been working with @DND_Reborn and others for years on 5E tweaks, mods, and house-rules. The current thread on compression 20 levels into 15 (D&D 5E - E15 Draft (Homebrew): 15 levels instead of 20.) is a good example. We have features from prior brews and things we wanted to add, but we kept taking steps back because we want it to be as close to RAW as possible while still fulfilling our goal.

Also, since I want to keep decision points at a minimum for brand new players, the subclasses don’t start until level 2. Get familiarity with the rules and class, then more decision points open up.

Our current project starts all subclasses at level 2, and keeps awards at consistent levels between classes.

But for the primer will you even offer subclass options? I would just choose the default subclass from the SRD and bake it into the table.

At this point (any every other in the primer) I would include a sidebar about how this is a decision point which normally the player would make in 5E, but to keep the primer straight-forward and simple, that choice has been "pre-made" for the player.

Another primer sidebar is "Levels 11-20" to explain in 5E the game continues past the 10 levels the primer offers. The "Individual Initiatve" one is another, etc.

 

[Remathilis]

Just the primer. A few optional rules at the back (individual initiative)

For sure to level 10. Most of the fans of B&B prefer the simpler 5e system and have no plans to move to full 5e. I'd hate to cut them off at level 3.

Not in the design. It would be a bit too wonky I think.

Can I ask who the target audience is for this project? Is it new players who have never played a TTRPG? Young players? Casuals who don't know a d12 from Dee Snyder? Lapsed players trying to recall the gaming of their youth? People fed up with crunch? All or none of the above?

Second question: what is the step after this? Do people move on to a more complicated 5e game like D&D or TotV? To move to OSR games like Shadowdark? To replay this over and over, ending each game at level 10? A primer assumes a second step after learning the ropes. Where do they go once they are primed?

Once you know who they are and where your going, that should focus your work.

 

[Sacrosanct]

But for the primer will you even offer subclass options? I would just choose the default subclass from the SRD and bake it into the table.

I will. I don't know if you're familiar with the original B&B (the pdf is for free here), but even that had specialties were like subclass-lite. I want to keep that familiarity. And it's in alignment with keeping it close to 5e but more simplified.

At this point (any every other in the primer) I would include a sidebar about how this is a decision point which normally the player would make in 5E, but to keep the primer straight-forward and simple, that choice has been "pre-made" for the player.

Another primer sidebar is "Levels 11-20" to explain in 5E the game continues past the 10 levels the primer offers. The "Individual Initiatve" one is another, etc.

I do plan on having sidebars, and these are two great suggestions.

Can I ask who the target audience is for this project? Is it new players who have never played a TTRPG? Young players? Casuals who don't know a d12 from Dee Snyder? Lapsed players trying to recall the gaming of their youth? People fed up with crunch? All or none of the above?

Kind of all of the above. Based on the feedback I got from the original B&B, the majority of the player base includes:

• brand new players (including younger players--a base that's exploding). This includes experienced DMs who are introducing RPGs to kids
• player who prefer a rules-lite 5e experience and won't be moving forward to full 5e.

Second question: what is the step after this? Do people move on to a more complicated 5e game like D&D or TotV? To move to OSR games like Shadowdark? To replay this over and over, ending each game at level 10? A primer assumes a second step after learning the ropes. Where do they go once they are primed?

Wherever they would like. Some like to move to 5e, others like to keep a simpler system.

 

[Remathilis]

I will. I don't know if you're familiar with the original B&B (the pdf is for free here), but even that had specialties were like subclass-lite. I want to keep that familiarity. And it's in alignment with keeping it close to 5e but more simplified.

I do plan on having sidebars, and these are two great suggestions.

Kind of all of the above. Based on the feedback I got from the original B&B, the majority of the player base includes:

• brand new players (including younger players--a base that's exploding). This includes experienced DMs who are introducing RPGs to kids
• player who prefer a rules-lite 5e experience and won't be moving forward to full 5e.

Wherever they would like. Some like to move to 5e, others like to keep a simpler system.

Kind of all of the above. Based on the feedback I got from the original B&B, the majority of the player base includes:

• brand new players (including younger players--a base that's exploding). This includes experienced DMs who are introducing RPGs to kids
• player who prefer a rules-lite 5e experience and won't be moving forward to full 5e.

Wherever they would like. Some like to move to 5e, others like to keep a simpler system.

I asked because who they are and where they are going can do a lot of your legwork. A game geared towards lapsed players probably doesn't need as much explanation on basic concepts like class roles, a product for younger players might have to meet them at their experiences (video games and recent media). Likewise, a game that leads to more complex games should incrementally add complexity while one who is supposed to keep the "rule minimum" tone probably should have as few moving pieces as possible.

Good luck with this project.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I asked because who they are and where they are going can do a lot of your legwork. A game geared towards lapsed players probably doesn't need as much explanation on basic concepts like class roles, a product for younger players might have to meet them at their experiences (video games and recent media).

Absolutely. The bolded part is why I have to put my old school mentality to the side, and include things like Dragonborn and Tieflings as core species options. What is the experience of younger players in today's pop culture? Integrate that.

Likewise, a game that leads to more complex games should incrementally add complexity while one who is supposed to keep the "rule minimum" tone probably should have as few moving pieces as possible.

Agreed as well. I have that planned. I have a "moving to" section at the back that includes some optional rules and what to expect if one decides to move on to the full game.

Good luck with this project.

Thanks!

 

[ezo]

I will. I don't know if you're familiar with the original B&B (the pdf is for free here), but even that had specialties were like subclass-lite. I want to keep that familiarity. And it's in alignment with keeping it close to 5e but more simplified.

Yes, I have a copy from when you first finished it. I haven't looked at it in months, so maybe I'll review it this weekend.