The 5e toolkit

[Quickleaf]

Like most of us hardcore gamers, I've got tons of ideas for what I'd like to see in the next incarnation of D&D. First, I wanted to respond to....

Taking from 4E: Minions (as earlier stated), healing surges, "bloodied" description, and all classes having abilities (one caveat to this being the casters need to be tweaked back to what things used to be - see below)

I'd actually like to see a "goon" between minions and standard monsters, lots of good homebrew ideas out there for this.

Also, I'd like to see the design with healing surges (or whatever healing mechanic is used) and hit points to be pushed a bit. What if surges could be used for other things? How do you handle surges/healing in one encounter a day adventures?

Drop from 4E: CONDITIONS CONDITIONS CONDITIONS (especially at higher levels, they get out of hand and the combat system bogs down and suffers from it.

I agree as they're done now they're a pain, and wouldn't mind seeing modifiers (-2 attack and such) nixed, less conditions overall, and durations changed to really obvious things like "for the rest of the encounter." Then there could be powers/spells which allow conditions to be removed. Something simpler, and, as others have pointed out, keeping in mind how these things are actually tracked at the table.

I also want to see 5e go back to having a sliding difficulty scale to classes. There should be an "easy" class, and a few "hard" classes to play.

I'm all for "beginner" and "expert" classes so long as it doesn't restrict the theme of the character a player is going for. IMO, i my friend wants to play a sorcerer or mage, she should be able to do so at either "beginner" or "expert" level.

My ideal 5E would be 4E with the following exceptions/replacements:

From 3E:
Lower monster HP's

Yes, a thousand times yes. Make monsters harder hitting, give them strange resistances to be overcome or weaknesses to be exploited, make them more *interesting*.

Gridless combat options

Absolutely.

One idea I'd be interested in seeing implemented in character creation is a talent system. For example, a Fighter (in addition to class features) would have access to say 6 talent trees like Sword & Board, Great Weapon, Stamina, Defender, etc. There could be a little crossover with some classes, for example Barbarians could also have access to the Great Weapon talents, and a Paladin could also have access to Defender or Sword & Board talents. Then talents would incorporate powers, feats, and some power/upgrade type class features. Rather than having a dozen powers you might have five which upgrade as you advance.

This makes multi-classing or hybrid characters easier to implement - mix and match talent trees. It also allows future supplements to expand on existing classes by adding new talent trees instead of new classes.

In a hypothetical 5e here's how I imagine the fighter's basic mechanics might look:

FIGHTER
Core Features: "Shake It Off", the fighter can spend healing surges/action points to remove conditions.
Talents: Choose 2 talents at 1st level and gain one each additional level
Class Talent Trees: Sword & Board, Great Weapon, Stamina, Defender, Armiger, Campaigning
Defenses: +2 Constitution
Skills: Reduce DC of all "fightery" stuff by one step, and choose one specialization
HP, Surges, Weapon/Armor Proficiency: Same as 4e
Fighter Themes: Choose one theme and gain the class features associated with it. Knight (choose an order/liege), Mercenary (choose a banner), Peasant Hero (choose an occupation)
​

 

[Crazy Jerome]

One idea I'd be interested in seeing implemented in character creation is a talent system. For example, a Fighter (in addition to class features) would have access to say 6 talent trees like Sword & Board, Great Weapon, Stamina, Defender, etc. There could be a little crossover with some classes, for example Barbarians could also have access to the Great Weapon talents, and a Paladin could also have access to Defender or Sword & Board talents. Then talents would incorporate powers, feats, and some power/upgrade type class features. Rather than having a dozen powers you might have five which upgrade as you advance.

This makes multi-classing or hybrid characters easier to implement - mix and match talent trees. It also allows future supplements to expand on existing classes by adding new talent trees instead of new classes.

Like the idea. One minor quibble though, and this is one of those things that even well-organized RPG editors continue to do--that irritate me to no end: If you are going to relate classes to talent trees, put the relation information on the side with the longer list or that is expected to vary the most. That is, nothing in the fighter write up would say what access to talents they get. In the talent, you say which classes can use it.

I realize you didn't mean it this way, and it is left over from the thinking that classes will be added. You idea, however, implied that the class list would be limited and that the talents would be the varying thing. And if really both things are going to vary that much, then just take the information out of the classes and the talents, and have a separate list that shows who gets what. This will get updated all the time anyway. So might as well keep it separate and short.

And then eventually it expands so much that you get the 3.5 spell lists issue, but that could be handled by keeping the class list under control. Which is why what I would really prefer is that the connection not be direct (e.g. fighter <--> sword and board) but via keywords. I recognize, however, that those kind of keyword relationships are a lot easier to do after the fact than to plan ahead of time, when you don't know exactly what will be on both lists.

Gee, that's a lot of text on a minor irritant. Can you tell that I've been dealing a lot lately with poorly designed relational databases, especially improper many-to-many relationships?

Oh, and I completely agree about the hit points. I'd really prefer damage-dealing scale very slowly, and hit points to match. But have attack chances and defense scale more rapidly. Not only is it easier to track, it reduces some of the rapid multiplicative effects (hit chance times damage) on the scaling.

 

[Gargoyle]

I guess I'd like to see:

More Layers so we don't need so many classes. Get it down to seven or eight classes to cover the basic archetypes. For more esoteric concepts like ardents and seekers, or even assassins and barbarians, use layers like themes and paragon paths to define these character types. There should be enough layers so that we never feel the need to see a new class appear in a Dragon article or splatbook. That way the classes can all get adequate support.

Variety of Class design. No two classes should be quite the same, some should be fully AEDU, some fully essentialized, but all should have their tweaks to make them play differently. I'm perfectly ok with some using point systems and some using Vancian magic, etc. Variety is the reason to have different classes, as long as the mechanics support the feel of the archetype. With fewer classes, adequate balance should still be obtainable, and a new class should only be acceptable if it supports an archetype that can't be supported any other way, and only if the class has unique mechanics.

Multiclass support right out of the gate. Classes should be designed from the get go to support easy multiclassing using the concept of 4e hybrids, not 4e multiclassing. So within the 5e fighter and wizard class descriptions, you can easily tell which options a multiclassed (I just dislike the word hybrid) fighter/wizard would get.

Feats need to be divided into combat and non-combat silos. You shouldn't have to ever choose between a non-combat feat and a combat feat, they should be two different lists.

Skill Challenges need to be part of the combat system, not a separate system, and they should probably be a minor part of that system, just like skills are a minor system compared to combat. In other words, I don't want encounters that are entirely skill challenges, I want combat encounters or roleplaying encounters that sometimes have a skill challenge or two in them.

Roleplaying does need more presentation in D&D, and not just in 'starter' rules or DM books. To support this, they need to experiment with some tangible ways to increase roleplaying, not just give examples of play in the books and encourage players to create backgrounds. Card play in Torg springs to mind, where players are rewarded for roleplaying out sub plots and for dramatic actions other than blasting the bad guy. I'm not saying the Fate cards are the right direction, as I'm not familiar with them, but the Torg deck actually did work well for encouraging roleplaying. But I also think that roleplaying itself, and systems that encourage it, should be optional. Not everyone wants to roleplay, and they are perfectly happy playing hack n slash D&D.

Combat needs to be quicker. I think simplifying the initiative rules could go a long way to this. I shouldn't need cards or a computer to track initiative. Going back to a simple system where the highest Initiative bonus goes first seems to work well enough. More complex systems like the current one could be optional.

Miniatures and battle grids need to be optional. I like them, but I certainly see the need for D&D games without them. I'd like to play a quick game at lunch sometime and not have to dig through my mini's and dungeon tiles.

Skills like Diplomacy and Intimidate that replace roleplaying need to be optional.

Magic items shouldn't have math bonuses on them, ever. It's boring. Magic items shouldn't be so necessary as they are now. They aren't rewards, they are simply scheduled to appear at certain levels and players are even encouraged to create wish lists to get what they need. Not want, need, because if they don't get a certain bonus on their weapons and implements, they can't fulfill their role, which leads me to:

Ability scores need to be less important in combat. You shouldn't feel like you are hamstringing your party by playing a fighter with average Strength. The other scores should give you some interesting choices, and you should still be a basically decent fighter if played well, but right now you are crippled.

Only one rulebook that you have to buy to play or DM. The book would be a combination of the PHB, DMG, and Monster Manual, and would include a lifetime license for DDI to use the Character Builder only. I wouldn't expect or need a lot of monsters, but I'd like complete rules in there for all the classes, and all the non-optional rules. Advanced rules for mini's and battlegrids, for skills and rituals, etc, and even for roleplaying, could be in other volumes and of course in DDI.