The 5e toolkit

[Andor]

So if they were making 5e, which will undoubtedly take place at some point in the future, barring the zombie apocolypse. (Zombies clearly prefer rules-lite systems.)

Anyway, what would you want to see tossed into the toolbox used to make 5e, what would you want to see removed?

From 4e I want minions and rituals.
From 3e I want skill points and totemists. (The rest of incarnum I can take or leave, but those guys were cool!)

Leave out? The spiked chain. C'mon.

Play nice now!

 

[Mark CMG]

I'd like to see a greater focus on roleplaying in all aspects of presentation in 5E.

 

[steeldragons]

• a 1e Players Manual
• a 1e DMG
• a 1e Monster Manual
• a set of 6 dice: d4, d6, d8, d10, d12, d20
• a pencil...with eraser! (and a pencil sharpener would be nice too)
• some paper (or maybe a bunch of pre-made character sheets, not just one)

oh wait...I have all of that already.

Still, be nice to see in a "5e" package. HEY! Maybe they can market 5e as "D&D Classic" or "D&D Zero. No additives, calories or preservatives. All D&D taste." ;P

--SD

 

[Wik]

A shift away from kitchen sink games, and a focus on worldbuilding, in the same manner we saw primarily back in the 2e days.

And not just the 'pseduo fantasy worldbuilding' that we've seen in the last decade or so, or worldbuilding that still assumes a core set of D&D rules, but a sort of mechanical worldbuilding that would make it possible to play "D&D" in worlds that ranged from high-magic horror games where humans were the only race to low-magic, semi-historical games that feature the use of guns and infections, etc.

Rules that are simple, that avoid corner-cases, and that can be easily summarized in only a few pages. It can be done! The Star Wars d6 roleplaying had something like less than 50 pages for the entirety of its rules, and they were able to cover more or less everything. And most of those 50 pages were examples!

 

[Traveon Wyvernspur]

I'd like to see a greater focus on roleplaying in all aspects of presentation in 5E.

Lack of role playing is not inherent in the edition of D&D, it's cause is the people playing it. I've had great role playing experiences in all editions of D&D so I know this to be true.

On to the question at hand:

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)
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.

Taking from 3.x/Pathfinder: I'd gladly accept the feats systems, skills, and customization available from the 3.5/Pathfinder system(s). Finding it really fun and much more dynamic. I also like the wider range of spells instead of "powers" for casters.

Anyhow those are my 2 coppers,
Trav

 

[Wik]

Lack of role playing is not inherent in the edition of D&D, it's cause is the people playing it. I've had great role playing experiences in all editions of D&D so I know this to be true.

reread his quote. He's not saying that there's less roleplaying in 4e; he's asking for more focus on roleplaying in the game's PRESENTATION. This is something that is DEFINITELY less presented in 4e, and 3e as well, in comparison to earlier editions.

Both those editions focus on mechanical resolutions for encounters, as opposed to 2e's (and other games of that era) often showing examples in which situations were bypassed through non-mechanical - ie roleplaying - means.

I'm in full agreement with Mark CMG. I beleive that if RPGs are to survive, we need to move away from the fetishization of mechanics and focus on what seperates PNP RPGs from computer games - the wider range of available character inputs. But I digress.

***

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.

 

[Stormonu]

mruhhhhh....braaaaains

(yes, I want a rules-lite system)

Also, a system not afraid to tweak the default races, monsters and whatnot to present unique worlds, rather than trying to force everything into a game world (let the DM decide if he wants to go "outside the bounds" to put something like Dragonborn in Dragonlance).

 

[Mark CMG]

I'd like to see a greater focus on roleplaying in all aspects of presentation in 5E.

Lack of role playing is not inherent in the edition of D&D, it's cause is the people playing it. I've had great role playing experiences in all editions of D&D so I know this to be true.

reread his quote. He's not saying that there's less roleplaying in 4e; he's asking for more focus on roleplaying in the game's PRESENTATION.

Yup.

 

[Traveon Wyvernspur]

Guess I misunderstood a wee bit, but what I'm saying is that Role Playing isn't a factor of presentation in the various editions, it's a product of the people playing the game to incorporate it however they like it. Some people like hack n' slash, some like heavy story based campaigns. This is the beauty of D&D any/all editions have the ability to be anything you want them to be. This shouldn't have to be stressed in any edition's GM's guide, Player's Guide, or Campaign setting(s), this is by definition the whole point of playing the game which is a "role playing game" I could see some "splat" books for "skill-based challenges" on tips/tricks to role playing or telling people to go to their forums or other community websites to learn from people who have been playing a long time for advice on how to do these more effectively.

P.S. I'm not trying to start any type of flame war on any edition here, I love every edition I've ever played and there are pros/cons to each. So I hope no one was offended by my first post in this thread.

 

[Mark CMG]

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

That could definitely use streamlining from earlier editions.