The "Smell Test"

[nnms]

Hmmh, I think you are judging too early and most probably wrong...

On the other hand: they should have given some different hp variants maybe. So old school: drop themes, background and -10hp

I do hope I'm wrong that the modularity won't pan out. That was what excited me about 5E when the talk about it started. I want modularity. And not just house rules suggested in the playtest passed off as modules. I want modules that are designed to produce specific modes of play.

The only thing I'd state strongly at this point is my bewilderment that they decided to open test the core game and then didn't really include the whole "reunification" elements that are supposed to be the whole point of 5E.

The basic rules should have been hammered out in the friends and family test and then they should have opened up with a nice barrage of modules and advice text about which ones to pick to emulate a couple different editions.

 

[jadrax]

They really should have lead with modularity. People keep talking about how the playtest is about making the core work and not to worry about modularity yet. But that makes me wonder...

The playtest already has the Backgrounds Module and the Themes Module plugged in and able to be disabled, what other modules would you have liked to see?

 

[Steely_Dan]

The playtest already has the Backgrounds Module and the Themes Module plugged in and able to be disabled, what other modules would you have liked to see?

Exactly, this is about barebones.

I like the base mechanics, so far, flattening and all, gives me room to breathe.

 

[nnms]

The playtest already has the Backgrounds Module and the Themes Module plugged in and able to be disabled, what other modules would you have liked to see?

• HP
• Healing rates
• Explicit combat grid rules
• AoO
• Forced movement rules
• AEDU powers
• No cantrips/orisons
• Non Heavy/Medium/Light armour rules
• Encounter design/XP Budget
• Roll under ability checks
• How to run dungeon exploration with no skills/checks (like OD&D)

So much of this can be taken from previously published editions that all they'd need to do is rewords some stuff and paste it in for us to try out.

I'm not looking for an explicit 3E or 4E take on the rules (I have Pathfinder and 4E for that) but WotC has existing customers who like 4E and they should have lead with modules that include the type of play those customers like.

They also talked about appealing to all editions, so they should have also lead with even more old school dials to turn on.

Get the core system hammered out in friends and family testing and then copy/paste from other editions and then edit as needed. Then add some advice text and let people truly do this modular thing.

I like the base mechanics, so far, flattening and all, gives me room to breathe.

The flattening is the best thing about 5E. It's a removal of an element of 4E I got really sick of.

It also makes a good base to add back onto the game 4E style pacing as a module for those who want it.

 

[Steely_Dan]

The flattening is the best thing about 5E. It's a removal of an element of 4E I got really sick of.

Try removing 1/2 level from all character's and monster's attacks, defences and skills in 4th Ed, I did, much better, IME/IMO.

4th Ed tried to go to eleven.

 

[Tallifer]

Try removing 1/2 level from all character's and monster's attacks, defences and skills in 4th Ed, I did, much better, IME/IMO.

4th Ed tried to go to eleven.

I started to play Pathfinder and in that system Fighters and some other classes actually get +1 to attack every level. I am glad to see all of this dialed back in the Fifth Edition.

 

[Steely_Dan]

I started to play Pathfinder and in that system Fighters and some other classes actually get +1 to attack every level. I am glad to see all of this dialed back in the Fifth Edition.

It could get to the point in 3rd Ed where the d20 was basically irrelevant (only rolling for a fumble or critical), when you got into d20 + 47 territory.

I also like that it looks like monsters don't even have levels anymore.

If the end result is I need to roll a 9 or higher on a d20, does it really matter if the bonus is +25 or +5.

Trust me, anyone currently playing 4th Ed, in your next session gut the 1/2 level business, it really makes a difference (the good kind).

 

[n00bdragon]

I do not understand this topic. How does an edition of D&D have a smell? And supposing it did why would you ever assign pros or cons to it based on how it "smells" compared to other editions? If smell is really so important to buyers of D&D (far more than content apparently) why not just douse the books in perfume?

 

[Steely_Dan]

How does an edition of D&D have a smell?

My 1st Ed AD&D books have one.

 

[Tallifer]

QUOTE=n00bdragon;5940170]I do not understand this topic. How does an edition of D&D have a smell? And supposing it did why would you ever assign pros or cons to it based on how it "smells" compared to other editions? If smell is really so important to buyers of D&D (far more than content apparently) why not just douse the books in perfume?[/QUOTE]

My 1st Ed AD&D books have one.

The Fourth Edition is mostly odourless for me: on my computer. AD&D chiefly smelt like cigarette smoke: back in those days second-hand smoke filled every gaming store, university study area and friend's basement.