D&D 5E Stuff from your favorite edition you DON'T want in Next


log in or register to remove this ad

I find it completely illogical that a +6 magical item costs more than some barony's gross national product.

I don't. A single suit of Plate armor could cost as much as a small castle. In the reign of Henry V, many nobles went into debt and even bankrupted themselves with their ornate suits of armor for jousting, battle or pageantry.

But I do agree with the rest of your post. I never thought any magic item "economy" was realistic. There shouldn't be one. You either quest for one, find it in a barrow-wight's lair or a troll's cave (hem hem! or many), or you inherit it, make it yourself (at great pain and expense and even risk...). I want a flame tongue sword to risk nearly burning you to bits making it. All that said, I do think crafting needs a serious revamp. So I'll say : magic item economy out, believable+fun magic item crafting rules in
 


I'd like to see the in-game mechanical benefits of all races either equal or done away with.

In 1E and 2E, why *wouldn't* you play an elf?

Equally, in 3E and 4E, why *wouldn't* you play a dwarf?

Cheers, Al'Kelhar
 

I'd like to see the in-game mechanical benefits of all races either equal or done away with.

In 1E and 2E, why *wouldn't* you play an elf?

Equally, in 3E and 4E, why *wouldn't* you play a dwarf?

Cheers, Al'Kelhar

In 1e and 2e, because dwarven, halfling, and gnome save bonuses were pretty useful. Because it was fun to play a half-orc.

In 3e, because an extra feat and +1 skill points/level were pretty good bonuses too. Because the size bonus to hiding for halflings and gnomes is also pretty awesome.

Honestly, there are plenty of reasons to play any of the races even if there are mechanical imbalances. And it's a shame that some players can't see past that.
 


But I do agree with the rest of your post. I never thought any magic item "economy" was realistic. There shouldn't be one. You either quest for one, find it in a barrow-wight's lair or a troll's cave (hem hem! or many), or you inherit it, make it yourself (at great pain and expense and even risk...). I want a flame tongue sword to risk nearly burning you to bits making it. All that said, I do think crafting needs a serious revamp. So I'll say : magic item economy out, believable+fun magic item crafting rules in

Hear Hear! Some of the best fun I ever had in D&D was a 2e Paladin questing for the pieces/parts to make his own Holy Sword.
 

So, I'd rather that sort of long unpleasant beat-down not show up in Next. If a foe is tough enough to last through 9 rounds of combat, he shouldn't spend all of them neutered.
If the design team were to do a 90 degree turn and say "Ya know, forget this modular stuff; let's just improve original 4e even further!" I'd agree with you. But otherwise, I don't want any of 4e's good features showing up in 5e.

When I crack open that 5e PHB in Barnes & Noble, I want to hate it. I want to step off the edition treadmill, and I want it to be an easy decision.
 

Play some other game. Classes are a defining characteristic of D&D.


Perhaps...like multiclassing from 2nd edition and lower, limited HD's, dual classing from earlier editions. Weapon speeds, 1 minute rounds, hmm, I bet I can do this all day. This thread was to ask what you don't want to see, and I answered.
 

If the design team were to do a 90 degree turn and say "Ya know, forget this modular stuff; let's just improve original 4e even further!" I'd agree with you. But otherwise, I don't want any of 4e's good features showing up in 5e.

When I crack open that 5e PHB in Barnes & Noble, I want to hate it. I want to step off the edition treadmill, and I want it to be an easy decision.

Then make that decision now. Step off that treadmill if your orientation toward D&D Next is so negative.
 

Remove ads

Top