6E Theory Theory Craft: Should Nova Abilities Be Cut?

[TwoSix]

I'm sure you could create a game where like that, but it won't be D&D. Two of the main four classes are essentially glass cannons designed for Nova attacks. To change that is to completely revise their play style. The rogue's sneak attack and the wizards big AoEs are major parts of their kit. Without them, you are going to get slogs, especially if clerics and fighters keep their tankiness.

I don't think rogue sneak attack would need to change. It's not a "recharging" power, which is the core element of what @Zardnaar is proposing. (The thread title says "novaing", but that's a downstream consequence of the core proposition, not the core itself.)

Wizard would obviously change in its overall playstyle and impact, but if it's still primarily a spell collector and problem solver, I would argue it maintains the core tropes of a "D&D wizard" enough.

Give them a lot of rituals as their main focus, and let them prepare 2-3 spells that function as encounter powers, plus cantrips, and they're still functionally wizards.

 

[GMMichael]

I'm sure you could create a game where like that, but it won't be D&D. Two of the main four classes are essentially glass cannons designed for Nova attacks. To change that is to completely revise their play style. The rogue's sneak attack and the wizards big AoEs are major parts of their kit. Without them, you are going to get slogs, especially if clerics and fighters keep their tankiness.

There was a completely different playstyle two editions ago. It was still called D&D. But I agree, the OP sounds more like an open-licensed knock-off than D&D.

 

[aco175]

There was a completely different playstyle two editions ago. It was still called D&D. But I agree, the OP sounds more like an open-licensed knock-off than D&D.

I was also thinking that it sounds like a 1e clone as well.

I could see something only 10 levels and half the spells and such, but do not think that Wizards is going to make it.

 

[Remathilis]

I was also thinking that it sounds like a 1e clone as well.

I could see something only 10 levels and half the spells and such, but do not think that Wizards is going to make it.

Basic D&D actually. If you stay within the B/X levels, you have remarkably low nova potential, save for the magic user which is nothing but nova. At that point, you swap out the big I win spells for something closer to the 3e warlock (a reliable magic attack and a bunch of at will magical effects as you level).

 

[Zardnaar]

I'm sure you could create a game where like that, but it won't be D&D. Two of the main four classes are essentially glass cannons designed for Nova attacks. To change that is to completely revise their play style. The rogue's sneak attack and the wizards big AoEs are major parts of their kit. Without them, you are going to get slogs, especially if clerics and fighters keep their tankiness.

Aware thats why I said it wont happen.

To fix D&D you woukd have to remove some fairly big sacred cows. Dailies being a prine one.

You woukd also have to nuke alot of assumptions from the last 26 years.

 

[Zardnaar]

Basic D&D actually. If you stay within the B/X levels, you have remarkably low nova potential, save for the magic user which is nothing but nova. At that point, you swap out the big I win spells for something closer to the 3e warlock (a reliable magic attack and a bunch of at will magical effects as you level).

Yeah spellcasters would be closer to 3E warlock or the 5E one.

Rogue coukd mostly nake it through as is.

Not trying to clone B/X but some ideas could come from there.

Im nit sold on d20 skill checks for example. Good idea in 2000 but the variable is huge along with +5 via 20 stat.

With nova abilities its really monster design will never be right. 5-6 PCs nova its dead or you give them enough hp to soak it and end up with slow grind.

 

[Horwath]

forget one campaign, I would probably be bored after 1 session.

Sure, you can make a simple class(one class) and that will have some audience, but I have seen that people change characters mid campaign as the get bored of them mechanically.

ideally, every martial should be battlemaster with atleast 4-6 maneuvers available at will from level 1. Low damage, d6 bonus. Once per turn. Actually battlemaster gets better damage and more usages per turn/attack.


weapon masteries were a nice shot, but landed badly in the end.

 

[Zardnaar]

forget one campaign, I would probably be bored after 1 session.

Sure, you can make a simple class(one class) and that will have some audience, but I have seen that people change characters mid campaign as the get bored of them mechanically.

ideally, every martial should be battlemaster with atleast 4-6 maneuvers available at will from level 1. Low damage, d6 bonus. Once per turn. Actually battlemaster gets better damage and more usages per turn/attack.


weapon masteries were a nice shot, but landed badly in the end.

Battlemasters kind of part of the problem.

Action surge and battlemaster dice both ramp up damage. Youre getting around 3 maybe round of damage in one round.

Its also kind of fake as they bloated monster HP to compensate.

 

[Johngernaut]

For build-up fighters: maybe give them an adrenaline trait that goes up whenever you attack or take damage, and it needs to reach a certain point to use action surge. It could also affect things like second wind, superiority dice and other subclass features.

It should stack with barbarian adrenaline, although they use it differently.

Bard's Tale 4 (great CRPG) had an ability like this. You gained Strength every time you took damage, like the Hulk. It was so cool that I homebrewed a feat for barbarians based on it.

 

[Horwath]

Battlemasters kind of part of the problem.

Action surge and battlemaster dice both ramp up damage. Youre getting around 3 maybe round of damage in one round.

Its also kind of fake as they bloated monster HP to compensate.

it still beats just rolling d20 round after round and saying; this round 7 damage, next round 9 damage