D&D 5E Weighing in on 5e

[JoeGKushner]

Looks around....

The soul of the game? M'eh.

When WoTC evened martials with spell casters, it became a new game. The 'soul' of the game isn't a consideration at this point anymore.

Or at least, to me.

If 5e brings back leveled spells like Wish or Miracle, etc..., then we can start talking about the 'soul' of the game.

If we're going with even-even, then yeah, 3-18 doesn't really make a lot of sense, especially as racial modifiers are all done up in +2 bits. If anything, I expect if stat bonuses continue to arrive, they'll start going +2 to keep them even.

I'm not sure many people would be comfortable playing a game called "Dungeons and Dragons" which did not have a scale for stats along the "3-18" lines. While stats are effectively -5 though 5 and higher, I think it'd be wiser to maintain the stats, but come up with a way for the actual number that the stat is to also matter. Back in the day, a stat check consisted of rolling a D20, and it was successful if you rolled your stat or less, so the stat numbering made some sense.

You could say that the stat numbering of modern iterations of the game are like a description. A man with a 17 STR is stronger than a man with a 16 STR, but it's not important mechanically. It's only really important when stats are rolled with dice, which is hardly ever done any more. It would seem to lose it's "D&Dness" without that stat layout, though.

So lose players for taking away a piece of the soul of the game, or think of a way to make the numerical value of a stat actually important somehow... somehow that doesn't seem tacked on.

Which is preferable? How would you do it?

 

[JoeGKushner]

Edited out as I didn't see the mod's post.

 

[KarinsDad]

I've been saying that for years. When I saw Green Ronin do it with True 20, it made perfect sense.

Once you no longer go the route of pre 3rd ed where stats having the same score meant different things depending on the stat, the actual utility of having 3-18 is diminished vastly.

The utility of having 3-18 is dependent on which stat creation system is used. Using the 4D6 drop the lowest die method means that at least temporarily, the 3-18 stat is required.

The 3-18 stat is also dependent on the stat increase portion of the system at levels 4, 8, etc. One could increase their +3 on a stat to +3.5 (instead of 16 to 17), but then someone will just come along and complain about having to keep track of the half point instead. As long as there are stat increases in the game system, one has to keep track of that somehow.

 

[CroBob]

Looks around....

The soul of the game? M'eh.

When WoTC evened martials with spell casters, it became a new game. The 'soul' of the game isn't a consideration at this point anymore.

Or at least, to me.

If 5e brings back leveled spells like Wish or Miracle, etc..., then we can start talking about the 'soul' of the game.

If we're going with even-even, then yeah, 3-18 doesn't really make a lot of sense, especially as racial modifiers are all done up in +2 bits. If anything, I expect if stat bonuses continue to arrive, they'll start going +2 to keep them even.

You think an essential aspect of D&D was that the classes were not evenly powered?

 

[Grydan]

The 3-18 stat is also dependent on the stat increase portion of the system at levels 4, 8, etc. One could increase their +3 on a stat to +3.5 (instead of 16 to 17), but then someone will just come along and complain about having to keep track of the half point instead. As long as there are stat increases in the game system, one has to keep track of that somehow.

Or, as the .5 change has no mechanical impact, you could just change the stat increase timing so that the increases happen half as often, but are a full +1 to the ability modifier.

Or, like you say, they could drop automatic stat increases altogether.

 

[gyor]

Okay here's my first shot at designing 5e.

I'd design powers around skills and features around classes and themes.

For Skills I'd have them broken down into three or four categories, Talent, Power Source, Role.

influence(mix of inimadate, streetwise), Charm(mix of Bluff and Diplomancy), Survival(mix of nature, dungeonering, endurance, Athletics), Trades(crafts, profession, Appraisal), Education (Knowledge skills). Specializations would be by powers aquired at benchmarks like 5, 10, 15 in a skill and you aquire a skill power like Crimal Connections for infuence skill, or pottery Mastery that allows you to make quality pottery with some kind of practical use for Trade skill. No attack skills here, just utilities.

Power Sources would be Martial, Divine, Arcane, Primal, Shadow, Psionic, Elemental, Racial, Mount/Pet, Alechemy/Poison, Alien. The powers these would grant upon bench marks would be attack or utility powers depending on which benchmark you just hit. So 5 would be certain attacks, same with ten, but 15 would be a utility for example.

Role Skills would modify or powers,especially powers. So you'd have Striker, Leader, Controller, Defender, with more distrinct goals. Striker powers would pump thier own damage, Leader healing and temp hp, defending drawing attacks and damage resistance on self, and controlling negative status effects. So invest 5 points in Striker and take the Preiscion skill power that boosts damage by boosting accracy of another power with a minor action or twist the knife for an +2 points of damage to one target or Nova Blast for a bigger but less frequently used minor action damage buffing power. Most would be minor or interuppt actions powers that create alterations to Power Source powers to help to specialize in a task. Maybe a few standard action powers that really power charge a power source power. Role powers would be mostly limited to the 5e phb1 so as to aviod power creep.

Powers would scale with level so no power becomes obsolete.

Classes would be a mix of features and automatic skill point boosts per level. So a Paladin might get 2 points per level for Divine,Mount and Martial, 2 education and 2 influence, 1 Charm and 3 defender, 1 leader, were as a Cleric might get 1 martial, 4 divine, 2 influence,1 charm and 3 education, and 3 leader per level. An Invoker (which I would rename prophet) would get 5 divine, 3 influence, 3 Charm, 1 education, and 3 Control per level. Character would also free 2 points they can spend how ever they want per level and an 1 per two levels to be spent basic skills, plus a bonus 2 points as a feature for rogues.

Themes would also provide a bonus to a skill, and a feature. Themes would be aquired at 2 at first level, 2 at paragon and two at epic in place of pp and eds. Bards would get an extra theme as a feature.

Multiclassing would be done by either on a general level by putting extra skill points in power source skill and/or by picking a multiclass theme.

Damage/Resistance types would be more meaningful. Like different effects on crits, Cold might immbolize, Fire spread on a crit. I'd bring back slashing and blugeoning as damage types. When criting with multiple damage types you pick one for the bonus effect. Cold resistance might provide a benifit in cold climates.

Races in PHB1 would be Elves, Human, Dwarf, Astraltouched(love tieflings and divas but hate the core setting), Orcs, Halflings, Gnomes, Doppelgangers, Dragonborn. Subraces would be a feature of races and all races would have them, but some more then others. Halfelf, Muls, and halforcs would be a mixed blood theme that could only be taken at first level. Genasi, Shadar-Kai, other races would come later.
Drow and Elderin would be elven themes that change subrace selection.

The Forgotten Realms would be the core setting, but still would get a campaign book. After that setting would be choosen via democracy. Campaign settings would have a digital magazine of thier own, one monthly magazine per setting.

Advice in DMG for what requires a skill check vs what is common knowledge or easily achieved by a character so does not require one. Commom knowledge basic ability increases by level or tier.

More common powers at first level then charge, Basic attack, Grapple, bull rush. Add Trip, Dirty Trick from pathfinder, maybe come up with new ones.

Classes in PHB1 divided by primary power source

Divine section: Cleric, Paladin, Prophet, Zealots,

Arcane: Wizard, Warlock, Swordmage, Bard

Shadow: Vampire, Ghost, Lich, Mummy,

Primal: Druid, Shaman, Barbarian, Zeigiest(focuses on Urban spirits),

Psionic/Ki: Psion, Empath (ardent), Monk, Enlightened(battlemind),

Martial: Fighter, Rogue, Ranger, Surgeon.

Mount/Pet: Knight, Tactician, Breeder, Nomad. Knight basically a plate armoured soldier that focuses on mounted combat, Tactician basically a warlord with minions, Breeder, uses their body as a nest for pets, Nomad a less armoured faster mounted combat with ranged focus.

Alchemy/Poison: Artificer, Assassin, Witch, Infused. Infused would be a supersoldier type created and sustained by Alchemy, Artificer would be largely the same concept, same with assasin which would also have some skill in shadow, Witch would be a controller.

Alien: Alienist, Cultist, Binder, Freak. Alien power source would be magic from beyond, not normal, understandable by sane minds and unnatural in this universe. Alienist would be a summoner of the horrors, Cultist are servants of powers that do not belong in sane reality, Binders share thier bodies with vestiages that rebel against thier none existance, and Freaks find themselves slowly evovling into some thing that should not be, powerless to stop the horrorifying transformation. Alien is not divine, Shadow or Arcane as those belong in the universe.

Instead of differing weapons by damage die, each has a unique trait or traits.

 

[JoeGKushner]

You think an essential aspect of D&D was that the classes were not evenly powered?

Not evenly powered in one straight line.

Wizards sucker hard at low levels and ruled at higher levels.

In theory differing xp tables with stats that did different things provided different bits for different characters to fill in.

3rd ed changed a bit of that and 4e took it further. I see no reason why 5th ed wouldn't continue that methodology.

But at a point, which I think with all of its splat books, 3rd ed managed to almost hit, the game almost becomes a point buy system and 4e with its various evening mechanics, hits that 'even' field far more than even 3rd ed did.

Now perhaps I'm wrong and for several previous editions classes have been fairly and equally balanced but that was not my experience. In most games I ran or played in it wasn't necessarily a problem because rarely did games get up to that level 'legally' although in 'basic' D&D as the xp for treasure and the numerous high level adventurers allowed a lot of material to boost levels did make it possible.

Ah well, rambling. Excuse me.

Anyway, as they move away from unbalance, I can't see it becoming anything but more balanced and that menas 3-18 gotta go.

 

[Kzach]

What they should do is embrace the philosophy they've engendered with the Essentials line and take it further in the next edition.

Create a 'core' D&D. Call it Basic D&D. And have that be as solid as a rock. Something well balanced but providing all the sacred cows that make it recognisable as D&D. Something that provides all you need to play a game and have fun.

And simultaneously release "AD&D", which is a modular system of additions that make a game more complex but provide more options for customisation.

 

[Grydan]

What they should do is embrace the philosophy they've engendered with the Essentials line and take it further in the next edition.

Create a 'core' D&D. Call it Basic D&D. And have that be as solid as a rock. Something well balanced but providing all the sacred cows that make it recognisable as D&D. Something that provides all you need to play a game and have fun.

And simultaneously release "AD&D", which is a modular system of additions that make a game more complex but provide more options for customisation.

I'm in partial agreement with you here.

I don't care much for the idea of going back to a Basic/AD&D split, even if only in name. In particular, the split as you seem to be describing it here could lead to people picking up AD&D books ("I don't need a basic system, that's for newbs...") and then being confused as to why the core materials aren't presented. Even experienced players could be confused by it, as the original incarnations of those titles were separate, stand-alone, games.

Where I do agree with taking the philosophy of Essentials is the idea that the core books should remain evergreen for the duration of the system, and should be clearly marked as the necessities you need to play the game. The "essentials", if you will. The base ruleset should include the core races and classes (and no, we're not all going to agree on what those are), and every rule that's needed to play the game.

Names like Player's Handbook 2 should probably be avoided. WotC themselves have seen the confusion this caused to (some) consumers and retailers, which is what led to the creation of the Essentials product line to begin with.

(Also, I can think of one or two sacred cows that I think should be put out to pasture, and a few others I probably wouldn't miss...)

 

[CroBob]

Not evenly powered in one straight line.

Wizards sucker hard at low levels and ruled at higher levels.

In theory differing xp tables with stats that did different things provided different bits for different characters to fill in.

3rd ed changed a bit of that and 4e took it further. I see no reason why 5th ed wouldn't continue that methodology.

But at a point, which I think with all of its splat books, 3rd ed managed to almost hit, the game almost becomes a point buy system and 4e with its various evening mechanics, hits that 'even' field far more than even 3rd ed did.

Now perhaps I'm wrong and for several previous editions classes have been fairly and equally balanced but that was not my experience. In most games I ran or played in it wasn't necessarily a problem because rarely did games get up to that level 'legally' although in 'basic' D&D as the xp for treasure and the numerous high level adventurers allowed a lot of material to boost levels did make it possible.

Ah well, rambling. Excuse me.

Anyway, as they move away from unbalance, I can't see it becoming anything but more balanced and that menas 3-18 gotta go.

That's definitely how older editions worked, I simply thought it was a bad part of the game, not an "essential" part of it. If you remove the bad things, but leave the good things, then it qualifies as a new edition, so long as nothing has been pointlessly changed. The stats, however, do not need to be changed. Sure, mechanically, the stats are already simply whatever the modifiers are, effectively, yet you still get increases by one once in a while, and a conversion would make it a half instead of a whole number. Pointless? Perhaps, but it's also not at all harmful or bad to the game, and it's an essential description for stats, and it allows stat generation through the traditional method of rolling d6s.