Light Knight
First Post
lol
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
D&D 5E Stuff from your favorite edition you DON'T want in Next
- Thread starter RangerWickett
- Start date
I don't know much about the era of the Rise of Pathfinder, but I know it's more "Dnd-esque" than 4e by a mile. That said, 4e is fun for what it is (a spin-off with a can of spray paint and a glued on label from another product, like Super Mario 2 if you know the history of that game : hint, it's not actually a Mario game, but it was still good nonetheless).
D&D Next has to get the core 4 right. I don't want my "fighter" to be forced to be a "defender", or take this or that power. Maneuvers might only apply to a certain weapon, but I don't want a tagline in a maneuver to say : " you need this class feature of fighter/ranger to use it ". Maybe for a prestige class that's okay, but there were so many fiddly rules that interacted in wierd/unintuitive ways (like flying...eeesh. talk about the edition that killed flying). I'd be okay with wizards getting "fly" at 9th level instead of 5th, or reducing the duration or giving you less maneuverability than a VTOL jet, but not gimping the entire flying rules to say you need to land at the end of your turn even if you spent 12 levels and a PP to get your dragonborn to have wings. I detested 4e for this type of asinine limitations. Get rid of that type of rigid "balance", oooh all people have to be equally stuck to a 2-dimensional grid because otherwise all our fiddly rules and sliding combat powers break down. ..../suckitude. Attempting to balance in all areas, at the cost of making the game lame, and not even achieving balance in the end, is what I call major fail. And played it for three years.
So I'll amend my prior post : "obtuse balance for the sake of balance" is what should NOT be in DDN. They've already admitted they have learned their lesson and will not attempt to do that again, so we can rest easy. (all that said, there were a number of great innovations in 4e that I'm glad are going to continue, like at-will spells, themes, backgrounds, etc)
D&D Next has to get the core 4 right. I don't want my "fighter" to be forced to be a "defender", or take this or that power. Maneuvers might only apply to a certain weapon, but I don't want a tagline in a maneuver to say : " you need this class feature of fighter/ranger to use it ". Maybe for a prestige class that's okay, but there were so many fiddly rules that interacted in wierd/unintuitive ways (like flying...eeesh. talk about the edition that killed flying). I'd be okay with wizards getting "fly" at 9th level instead of 5th, or reducing the duration or giving you less maneuverability than a VTOL jet, but not gimping the entire flying rules to say you need to land at the end of your turn even if you spent 12 levels and a PP to get your dragonborn to have wings. I detested 4e for this type of asinine limitations. Get rid of that type of rigid "balance", oooh all people have to be equally stuck to a 2-dimensional grid because otherwise all our fiddly rules and sliding combat powers break down. ..../suckitude. Attempting to balance in all areas, at the cost of making the game lame, and not even achieving balance in the end, is what I call major fail. And played it for three years.
So I'll amend my prior post : "obtuse balance for the sake of balance" is what should NOT be in DDN. They've already admitted they have learned their lesson and will not attempt to do that again, so we can rest easy. (all that said, there were a number of great innovations in 4e that I'm glad are going to continue, like at-will spells, themes, backgrounds, etc)
I don't have a "favorite" edition, but I know and like 3e and 4e.
From 3e, I don't want:
- Unrestricted multiclassing that encourages "dipping" and pre-designing character advancement
- Save-or-dies, polymorph and general domination of casters
- Rogues that can't really do anything useful after a few levels
- HPs that work inconsistently because designers couldn't decide what they are to represent
From 4e, I don't want:
- Being forced to use a battlemap
- Fluff descriptions of powers and abilities that don't correspond to what they really do - and in general rules that only interact with rules, ignoring fiction
- Extremely complicated combats that take hours. You can play a complete game of chess in less than 30 minutes without much haste; I really don't accept a D&D combat taking longer.
From 3e, I don't want:
- Unrestricted multiclassing that encourages "dipping" and pre-designing character advancement
- Save-or-dies, polymorph and general domination of casters
- Rogues that can't really do anything useful after a few levels
- HPs that work inconsistently because designers couldn't decide what they are to represent
From 4e, I don't want:
- Being forced to use a battlemap
- Fluff descriptions of powers and abilities that don't correspond to what they really do - and in general rules that only interact with rules, ignoring fiction
- Extremely complicated combats that take hours. You can play a complete game of chess in less than 30 minutes without much haste; I really don't accept a D&D combat taking longer.
Crazy Jerome
First Post
Pre 3E: No screwy differences in mechanics just because it was something thrown together that might work. (I can do screwy house rules myself, thank you. 
) If there is a design reason for the screwy differences, then knock yourself out. This applies equally to Basic and AD&D lines.
AD&D: Complexity for the sake of complexity--or narrow genre simulation preferences.
Basic: Over simplification as a reaction to AD&D.
3E family: "Filling out the grid" design, especially monsters and characters built the same. (To the extent that you can make a great design where it just naturally works to have similarities in monsters and characters, great!)
4E: Simple things made overly complicated trying to protect players from themselves. (Get as much of this protection as you can without going that last fatal step.)
WotC thus far (and this more than anything above): Cookie cutter text. Just kill it in a fire, and cut it's head off so that it never gets raised! Too much text is obviously written to a template, like sophomoric journalism. The template has evolved from 3E to 4E to Next, but it's still a blasted template.
And yes, I realize that some of all that might be practically exclusive, given the deadlines and budgets.
) If there is a design reason for the screwy differences, then knock yourself out. This applies equally to Basic and AD&D lines.AD&D: Complexity for the sake of complexity--or narrow genre simulation preferences.
Basic: Over simplification as a reaction to AD&D.
3E family: "Filling out the grid" design, especially monsters and characters built the same. (To the extent that you can make a great design where it just naturally works to have similarities in monsters and characters, great!)
4E: Simple things made overly complicated trying to protect players from themselves. (Get as much of this protection as you can without going that last fatal step.)
WotC thus far (and this more than anything above): Cookie cutter text. Just kill it in a fire, and cut it's head off so that it never gets raised! Too much text is obviously written to a template, like sophomoric journalism. The template has evolved from 3E to 4E to Next, but it's still a blasted template.
And yes, I realize that some of all that might be practically exclusive, given the deadlines and budgets.
Last edited:
Remathilis
Legend
What I don't want by edition:
Basic/Original: Race as class.
First Edition: screwy elements to classes (monks don't get ability score bonuses, rangers get 2 hd at first, assassins can't get bonus xp from high ability scores, druids must fight each other for levels)
Second Edition: Spheres of Influence. Yeah, they made clerics different, but so many priest classes were unplayable because they had too few spells and lacked the basic spells (healing, protections, divinations) to fill the niche.
Third: Magic Items Creation. Begone "I'll just sell it and use the gold to add another plus to my armor"!
Fourth: Martial Mindcontrol. (Aka CaGI)
Basic/Original: Race as class.
First Edition: screwy elements to classes (monks don't get ability score bonuses, rangers get 2 hd at first, assassins can't get bonus xp from high ability scores, druids must fight each other for levels)
Second Edition: Spheres of Influence. Yeah, they made clerics different, but so many priest classes were unplayable because they had too few spells and lacked the basic spells (healing, protections, divinations) to fill the niche.
Third: Magic Items Creation. Begone "I'll just sell it and use the gold to add another plus to my armor"!
Fourth: Martial Mindcontrol. (Aka CaGI)
Elaborating on the "playing lute" thing, according to my experience :* BXCMI : "DM, may I play the lute ?". Inconsistent answer, depending on the last grade obtained by the DM (we were 10) - rulings, not rules, as the game recognized that characters created by the dozen to explore subterranean mazes needn't be fully fleshed out, as they probably won't leave the dungeon alive. At least, the game encouraged players to broaden their character progrssively and gives a very good sense of a broader world (your murdering hobo might not play the lute, but he is looking forward to hire lute players when he hits name level)At * ADD : When you ask your DM he tells you to wait until next session. He then comes back with a gonzo table where you roll 2d8 and a 16 means Iuz & St Cuthbert come to hear the performance.* 2e : can't remember.* 3e : at least, you get proper rules ! Of course, they entail that you have to kill lots of things to be a good lute player, and that, if you dedicate yourself to the way of the lute, you'll get screwed by refusing to take spot like everyone else, especially if you're a fighter. Of course, you could also be a half-cestial Cleric 2/ Rogue 1/ Bard 2 / Mystic Lute player (from the complete badass musician handbook) wielding a +6 Lute of awesomeness.*4e : by player fiat, i guess you could declare yourself a lute player. You'll need to roll checks to get some effect, which would be adjudicated in a level appropriate manner (to use one of your power, one of your skill, or a p42 effect)... Even against deaf opponents.BXCMI feels too basic, ADD too gonzo, 3E too serious, 4E too abstract.I hope Next will keep : rulings rather than comprehensive rules, name level where killing thing and taking their stuff recedes to the background, a stable engine hard to derail, capability to create diverse characters, easy to create & fun to use monsters, world building (even at the expense of story building, ie unlike 4e). I am confident !
No. In fact I intend to put something like 5 times as many dungeons into my next campaign.
I'd remove
* Half-orcs as a PC race
* 6 second rounds
* Many splat books
* any level of customisation that requires a character builder instead of a piece of paper.
* multiple (martial) attacks. Ok with rolling attack rolls with say, fireball.
* Feats (maybe, not sure).
ruleslawyer
Registered User
What Remathilis said. Regarding 4e (yes, my favorite edition thus far even though I've played every single one except OD&D and have also played Arduin and Chainmail):
-Rigidity of power selection (i.e. having to stick with the exact same number of encounter/daily powers as you can use without being able to swap day-to-day)
-Having to play with a battlemat and use 2-dimensional planes for everything (yes, I know people have said this already)
-Item/treasure dependence as core (less a problem in 4e than in previous editions though)
Honestly, possibly the #1 reason I warmed to 4e was because of the DMG2 inherent bonuses alternative and the fact that WotC saw fit to incorporate that into the character builder. I hope that any future edition looks into the idea of figuring out a way to kick off that level of flexibility from the start.
-Rigidity of power selection (i.e. having to stick with the exact same number of encounter/daily powers as you can use without being able to swap day-to-day)
-Having to play with a battlemat and use 2-dimensional planes for everything (yes, I know people have said this already)
-Item/treasure dependence as core (less a problem in 4e than in previous editions though)
Honestly, possibly the #1 reason I warmed to 4e was because of the DMG2 inherent bonuses alternative and the fact that WotC saw fit to incorporate that into the character builder. I hope that any future edition looks into the idea of figuring out a way to kick off that level of flexibility from the start.
ruleslawyer
Registered User
What Remathilis said. Regarding 4e (yes, my favorite edition thus far even though I've played every single one except OD&D and have also played Arduin and Chainmail):
-Rigidity of power selection (i.e. having to stick with the exact same number of encounter/daily powers as you can use without being able to swap day-to-day)
-Having to play with a battlemat and use 2-dimensional planes for everything (yes, I know people have said this already)
-Item/treasure dependence as core (less a problem in 4e than in previous editions though)
Honestly, possibly the #1 reason I warmed to 4e was because of the DMG2 inherent bonuses alternative and the fact that WotC saw fit to incorporate that into the character builder. I hope that any future edition looks into the idea of figuring out a way to kick off that level of flexibility from the start.
-Rigidity of power selection (i.e. having to stick with the exact same number of encounter/daily powers as you can use without being able to swap day-to-day)
-Having to play with a battlemat and use 2-dimensional planes for everything (yes, I know people have said this already)
-Item/treasure dependence as core (less a problem in 4e than in previous editions though)
Honestly, possibly the #1 reason I warmed to 4e was because of the DMG2 inherent bonuses alternative and the fact that WotC saw fit to incorporate that into the character builder. I hope that any future edition looks into the idea of figuring out a way to kick off that level of flexibility from the start.
My favourite edition from a rules perspective was 3rd edition (3.0 and 3.5). I've played (and still play) 2nd edition extensively and read the 4th edition rules. That said, on with my list of what I don't want from each edition:
3rd edition:
- Paladin poke-mounts.
- Too little differences between clerics of different faiths; especially non-martial clerics having access to the same weapons as more militant ones.
- "Rogue-only" skills; things like open lock or disarm device fit better as part of a class feature of rogues rather than within the skill system. That said, stealth, climb, detect noise should be available to all classes through the skill system.
- Skill system too dependent on levels. A sage that spends all his life researching a field shouldn't need to be level 15 to have a good score in his area of expertise. Feats (to show increased interest or devotion), natural talent (i.e. ability scores) and access to the right materials/tools should be what influences a character's score.
- Magic item creation shops/catalog. While I understand the necessity for XP/GP costs for balance purposes, I'd have preferred more emphasis on material or component collection over just flat rates. Want to make an unholy weapon? Obtain the blessing from an evil god or creature of sufficient power like a tanar'ri or Baatezu. Vile item? Sacrifice some innocents. Dragon plate? Go kill a dragon and skin it. And so on and so forth. I'm fine with 1 shot items like certain potions and scrolls being made quickly though. Obviously, something like a potion of longevity would require more involvement than just subtracting the gold and xp off your sheet.
-4th edition:
-Dragonborn
- The needlessly revised 4th edition planar cosmology. If the "Great Wheel" was too complicated, it could have easily been ignored for the sake of the base setting that would be centered purely on the prime material plane anyways. If players and DMs wanted to expand the game into the planes, obviously they'd have some interest in taking the time to understand everything. Maybe I'm just bitter that Planescape isn't supported anymore.
- Most of the plot for and during the time skip of the Forgotten Realms setting.
3rd edition:
- Paladin poke-mounts.
- Too little differences between clerics of different faiths; especially non-martial clerics having access to the same weapons as more militant ones.
- "Rogue-only" skills; things like open lock or disarm device fit better as part of a class feature of rogues rather than within the skill system. That said, stealth, climb, detect noise should be available to all classes through the skill system.
- Skill system too dependent on levels. A sage that spends all his life researching a field shouldn't need to be level 15 to have a good score in his area of expertise. Feats (to show increased interest or devotion), natural talent (i.e. ability scores) and access to the right materials/tools should be what influences a character's score.
- Magic item creation shops/catalog. While I understand the necessity for XP/GP costs for balance purposes, I'd have preferred more emphasis on material or component collection over just flat rates. Want to make an unholy weapon? Obtain the blessing from an evil god or creature of sufficient power like a tanar'ri or Baatezu. Vile item? Sacrifice some innocents. Dragon plate? Go kill a dragon and skin it. And so on and so forth. I'm fine with 1 shot items like certain potions and scrolls being made quickly though. Obviously, something like a potion of longevity would require more involvement than just subtracting the gold and xp off your sheet.
-4th edition:
-Dragonborn
- The needlessly revised 4th edition planar cosmology. If the "Great Wheel" was too complicated, it could have easily been ignored for the sake of the base setting that would be centered purely on the prime material plane anyways. If players and DMs wanted to expand the game into the planes, obviously they'd have some interest in taking the time to understand everything. Maybe I'm just bitter that Planescape isn't supported anymore.
- Most of the plot for and during the time skip of the Forgotten Realms setting.
Similar Threads
