Letting hit points and damage scale pretty quickly while accuracy remains almost flat is currently their way of making it so that higher level things are actually more powerful than lower-level things. If you kept both too flat, then a higher-level thing wouldn't be much more dangerous than a lower-level thing. (At least ones that don't have powerful non-damage effects.) Some numbers need to get bigger at a reasonable pace in order to actually make a pit fiend more dangerous than a kobold.
D&D 5E Two things I like about D&DNext
Jeff Carlsen
Adventurer
Nah. We get a lot of that already. Criticism is what we're here to do. It's good to have the occasional thread dedicated to positive elements just for psychological reasons.
What's a thread on the internet without complaints that it's the end of the world and posters that disagree with you are Hitler?
Despite not liking Next at this point, I am going to list more than two things:
1. Backgrounds
2. Specialties
3. Paladins and Rangers receiving spells at first level
4. The last packet included a method to gain a new skill as the character leveled
5. Both Class armor and weapon proficiencies and ability score modifiers are stated to be for a starting character only.
6. No +1/2 level to ability checks or skill checks.
There are also few things for which I like the idea, but not the implementation.
1. Backgrounds
2. Specialties
3. Paladins and Rangers receiving spells at first level
4. The last packet included a method to gain a new skill as the character leveled
5. Both Class armor and weapon proficiencies and ability score modifiers are stated to be for a starting character only.
6. No +1/2 level to ability checks or skill checks.
There are also few things for which I like the idea, but not the implementation.
and, to be honest, I know very little about D&D Next. When it was first announced last summer, I was in the process of finishing up a 4E campaign, and not long after that, my wife took a job to relocate to another part of Connecticut. We were so focused on moving for a few months (thankfully, our house sold its first day on the market...) and then I had no time to even look at playtest packets because of a longer commute to work and now no gaming group that I've given up on following all the intricacies of 5E... however, as I said above, the two big things that have me excited are the fact they sped up combat (we had 3.5E combats that took so long towards the end that they took up two entire sessions - 8 or 9 PCs, some allied NPCs and/or summoned creatures vs many dozens of bad guys... and, 4E was a bit quicker, but also got boring midway through the combat for me as DM and still took a long time.) and, the other thing was making magic items special again, rather than having them as something to fill a slot as you went up in level.
Gundark
Explorer
Got a chance to run a playtest for 3 4th level pcs on the weekend. I really like D&D next.
It's easily my favourite version of D&D since BECMI.
1. Simple versions of the classes that have a build feel to them, but don't feel overly complicated. My wife played a Druid and she stated that she didn't feel overwhemled when she looked at the character sheet.
2. Combat is fast. Monster math isn't right yet though.
3. (Dis) advantage, such a simple mechanic, but so easy to use
4. Spell descriptions are nice and short but create some nice interpretations of how and when they might be used
5. Bounded Accuracy , even "sub-optimal" builds are not all that far behind in how efficient they are
6. Magic items not required.
I do have gripes...but for the first time in a long time it feels like I have found my version of D&D.
It's easily my favourite version of D&D since BECMI.
1. Simple versions of the classes that have a build feel to them, but don't feel overly complicated. My wife played a Druid and she stated that she didn't feel overwhemled when she looked at the character sheet.
2. Combat is fast. Monster math isn't right yet though.
3. (Dis) advantage, such a simple mechanic, but so easy to use
4. Spell descriptions are nice and short but create some nice interpretations of how and when they might be used
5. Bounded Accuracy , even "sub-optimal" builds are not all that far behind in how efficient they are
6. Magic items not required.
I do have gripes...but for the first time in a long time it feels like I have found my version of D&D.
Falling Icicle
Adventurer
1. Bounded Accuracy
2. Backgrounds
3. Skill Dice
4. Advantage/Disadvantage
5. Scaling damage instead of multiple attacks, and overall speed of combat
6. The way spellcasting works (no "caster level", being able to cast spells in higher level slots, "spontaneous casting" of the spells you've prepared, rituals, at-will cantrips, casters don't have an insane number of spells per day at higher levels, etc.)
7. Magic items that are optional and emphasize special powers and flavor over +bonuses
2. Backgrounds
3. Skill Dice
4. Advantage/Disadvantage
5. Scaling damage instead of multiple attacks, and overall speed of combat
6. The way spellcasting works (no "caster level", being able to cast spells in higher level slots, "spontaneous casting" of the spells you've prepared, rituals, at-will cantrips, casters don't have an insane number of spells per day at higher levels, etc.)
7. Magic items that are optional and emphasize special powers and flavor over +bonuses
Falling Icicle
Adventurer
Gargoyle
Adventurer
1. Modularity - Love the idea that I can have a basic set of core rules that I can quickly teach players and get up and running fast but adopt more rules later for more detail, and dials that I can turn to customize the game to be the campaign I want to run without having to write a book of house rules.
2. Speed of Play - Love that we can play a combat quickly and that I can design monsters and adventures more quickly than previous editions.
2. Speed of Play - Love that we can play a combat quickly and that I can design monsters and adventures more quickly than previous editions.
Similar Threads
