D&D 5E What direction should 5th edition take?

[eriktheguy]

Sure seemed like it... ---

The word Damage I think is misleading...
If they called it hit point loss and if we had a wound system to help point out hit point loss caused by many of these powers are not wounds in a normal sense, it would have a positive effect on the visualization. And some of the effects could/should always be seen as one form of hp loss like the inducing fatigue I mentioned in my sleeping beauty (fatiguing sleep) spell i postulated.

If hit points represented something less abstract/vague it would make sense for far fewer spells to induce or cause their loss.(how many many effects does my luck not try to defend me from??)

Note that hitpoints being vague created issues in visualization is something people came to when playing D&D 1.0.... not something new. I think that hitpoints are now truer to form ... in that there definition and in game effects are a closer match now than they were before... but given the definition over laps many things (most of which are very reasonable to recover in just a short time)



Sound ok, but lets look a little closer... at say that knockout spell... easiest to analyse since its goal is close to identical as that of normal attacks.

Against a level 2 solo it would be equivalent potency of an attack causing 92 points of hp loss. (sounds like an aweful lot and that is to do a level 2)
and a level 2 elite its like 28 to 43 hp of effectiveness.. OK and dropping down to a level 2 standard monster 15 - 24 hps.... now we are talking business

Not an unreasonable ammount of effect for a sorceror/warlock level 1 encounter power ...(They are strikers not a controllers but this spells action is actually a striker function no matter what its special effects)

I could adjust the adversaries and give them appropriate defenses like 5 points better defense (just for use against these absolute save or die effects - even if tied to bloodied state - it is what it is) for elites and that plus an extra defense roll against it for the solos.

Now your knockout spell could be a level 1 encounter spell of a Warlock or Sorceror... they specialize in this ... or a level 5 daily Wizard spell.

Hmmm... but I think I think I like Phantasmal Assailant better
which might completely disable that bloodied standard 2nd level opponent... his completely disabled state at zero hitpoints I would describe as eyes wide open in a state of permanent nightmare or maybe clawing eyes out by self(npc only) with mind completely gone in general oblivious to all attacks.

I would argue with you by saying that 'anyone with intimidate can knock out a level 2 solo with 92 HP left, so why shouldn't a Wizard?' That would be a poor argument, because the problem here is with a broken skill, not a broken class. Not to mention intimidate's use of the word 'surrendered' is widely open to interpretation. Lets look at some more balanced options.

Lets give wizards a level 1 sleep daily. Damages multiple targets, and causes one to become asleep. We don't use the 'unconscious' condition, we use asleep. A sleeping target is considered unconscious, but wakes up when dealt damage, or when a nearby ally spends a minor action to slap em around.
Of course, save ends, so if the target were a solo you need to coup de gras it immediately. A coup de gras combined with the sleep spell is unlikely to reach 92 damage. Even if it does, remember, it took 2 standard actions, not 1.

More powerful wizard spells, those that are truly 'save or die', would definitely be restricted to higher levels.
How about a finger of death attack. A level 9 daily that is restricted to bloodied targets only. Requiring melee range and bloodied is a fairly heavy condition. If you really want to stack on the requirements, you could give enemies a save to resist instant kill effects, but I don't think this is necessary.

How about dominate monster. An even higher level daily. Make it an attack with a fairly good amount of psychic damage. It deals ongoing 5 psychic damage (save ends) In addition, it has the effect "if an enemy is reduced to 0 or fewer HP by this attack, or while suffering ongoing damage from this attack, it is instead restored to it's bloodied value and dominated by you until the end of the encounter." This is like your sleeping beauty spell, but with instant combat applications.
There we go, not too game breaking, difficult to pull off, but marvelously effective when done right.
I'm not done.
Lets say that at the end of the encounter, all dominated creatures fall unconscious for the duration of an extended rest. Now create a ritual (arcana, religion) that allows them to permanently dominate a target x-levels below them that are in such a state. Perhaps the duration is limited and the ritual must be re-performed occasionally based on the skill check. Perhaps there is some danger of the target breaking free of the spell (and being very, very angry). There should be a maximum limit to the number of targets you can have dominated at one time. Maybe elites and solos are considered higher level when you try to control them.

My above suggestions would need serious balance tweaking to implement, but you can see that it is possible for wizards to pull off some 3e style effects while maintaining 4e balance. I think that WotC was so scared by the power that 3e wizards could abuse, that they hid it away without considering its uses if balanced properly. There is a middle ground to 'save or die' and 'deal damage and a minor effect (save ends)'.

Also, I do agree with your interpretation of damage. I don't consider HP to be health, it is a large pool of resources. I consider bloodied to be the first time the character is wounded. This is a great aid for describing the effects of certain spells. The sleep spell makes them drowsy, so they dodge the next attack (which bloodies them) poorly. The vicious mockery distracts them while the barbarians swing (KOing them) takes their head off.

EDIT: Wasn't their an illusion spell in 3e that allowed 'save or die' but was only second level? I think it allowed two saves.

 

[AllisterH]

Both of these things - sound and effects of someone invisible moving through an area - are exactly what the 1e tables for detecting invisible are all about. They take the place of specific Spot and Listen rules. The skill structure in 3e broadens it to every character, not just the smart or powerful.

I don't think so...We're reading two different interpretations it seems.

I'm not positive about 1e, but in 2e, the DMG said that if the person was invisible but the DM thought that it was reasonable for the invisible person to be noticed (a plate wearing fighter is the actual example), the DM automatically rolled a save vs spell in secret.

Of course, this was independent of rogues and bards who if they took a minute to just listen, if they succeeded on their Detect Noise roll, automatically got a saving throw roll vs spell.

This was on-top of what the actual spell did itself. Namely, in 2e at least, as long as you had at least 13 INT and 10 HD/levels, you automatically get a save vs spell.

3e and for that matter 4e's "invisibility" spell is actually stronger IMO since in both 3e and 4e, only the 1st situation (DM thinks an invisible person is being loud) applies to an invisible character.

OF course, there's ANOTHER way magic got unnerfed post 3e. Blanket immunity to spells doesn't exist. If somehow you ran across a monster/critter that had 21 INT/21 WIS, you automatically were immune to levels 1-3 spells AND a whole set of enchantment spells.

 

[Garthanos]

I would argue with you by saying that 'anyone with intimidate can knock out a level 2 solo with 92 HP left, so why shouldn't a Wizard?' That would be a poor argument, because the problem here is with a broken skill, not a broken class.

Thanks... but I do want to mention an idea I had for bringing it a bit under control... Alll the race and background skill boosts and skill focus , change those to +1 per tier. Well atleast it would give scaling so it wasnt so heavily front loaded. I like the usefulness and my having bloodiably minions is partly to enable its use against them... (enter in to a fight some of the minions may even already count as bloodied)

Ever wonder why the bad guys tell speeches to there minions?

Not to mention intimidate's use of the word 'surrendered' is widely open to interpretation. Lets look at some more balanced options.

Lets give wizards a level 1 sleep daily. Damages multiple targets, and causes one to become asleep. We don't use the 'unconscious' condition, we use asleep. A sleeping target is considered unconscious, but wakes up when dealt damage, or when a nearby ally spends a minor action to slap em around.
Of course, save ends, so if the target were a solo you need to coup de gras it immediately. A coup de gras combined with the sleep spell is unlikely to reach 92 damage. Even if it does, remember, it took 2 standard actions, not 1.

Well lets see one action to clear all his minions that can stop the cdg and make the big bad subject to a CDG... its not completely by passing his luck... because his is bloodied.

My above suggestions would need serious balance tweaking to implement, but you can see that it is possible for wizards to pull off some 3e style effects while maintaining 4e balance.

I call it balancing on a teeter totter ;-) a couple die rolls (which can be hacked by compounding abilities - see orb wizard hacking) versus many more... Lets say you get the probabilities figured out perfectly and prevent them from being tweaked in to an unreasonable state...(sounds like a lot of work)... Now the odds of it working are suitably low versus odds of a wasted daily.... wasted dailies are typically considered un fun... so now the character takes an ability who's most likely effect when its most useful is it does nothing at all.

And as I said even if you get the odds right - you are still saying...
picture it now... "Hey you know it doesnt matter if you have 400 points of luck and skill and energy left you just went down ... your luck and skill and energy just failed you entirely .... sigh life sucks and then you die. -- That evil monk has some wicked touch attack. (just to point out it isn't only wizards with this kind of evil).

Critical hits are bad enough ;p, charopt boards run away run away ;(

Also, I do agree with your interpretation of damage. I don't consider HP to be health, it is a large pool of resources. I consider bloodied to be the first time the character is wounded.

Well the barbarian in our group is a tough guy hero every attack doing hitpoints gets him a scratch or a minor bruise...

and the Skilled warden type breaks a sweat and yes gets first hit around the time of being bloodied

And the Halfling is almost entirely a luck monster.. plus morale he freaks out when an attack gets close... even a ongoing damage is him going through second guessing why he is in the fight and similar psychological effects, heal checks are sometimes psycho therapy ;-)

This is a great aid for describing the effects of certain spells. The sleep spell makes them drowsy, so they dodge the next attack (which bloodies them) poorly. The vicious mockery distracts them while the barbarians swing (KOing them) takes their head off.
.

You certainly got that right.

 

[Garthanos]

- just remove the concept of daily powers as "daily" entirely and instead say that the powers have recovery times measured in encounters. martial characters get powers that recover after every encounter but are only half as effective as the arcane powers that recover every two encounters (not defined as every 5 minutes). Of course, trying to keep this verisimilitude is another matter. (What's the game world significance of encounters?)

Plot based pacing idea I thought was kind of interesting / impressive.

I probably should have QFT'd the rest of your post ;-)

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I noticed an interesting Avenger or Raven Queen / Channel Divinity / Domain feat recently. A minor action Channel Divinity power that can be used on a bloodied target. If the targets current hit points are less than 1/2 level +WIS (or something like that), it is reduced to 0 hit points.

This is kinda like the old Power Word spells - blinds creatures worth 100 hp.
The "save or suck" or "save or die" or just "die" spells could work like this, too. (And that's possible now, we don't need 5E for that).

Mordekainens Disintegrating Wave - Wizard Attack 25
A wave of destructive energy waves over your opponents
Daily - Acid, Arcane, Necrotic
Standard Action - Close Blast 3
Target: All creatures in blast
Attack: Intelligence vs Fortitude
Effect: f the target has 30 + Intelligence modifier hit points or less, it is reduced to 0 hit points.
Hit: 1d10 + INT acid and necrotic and 10 acid and necrotic ongoing (save ends).
Miss: Half damage and 5 acid and necrotic ongoing (save ends).


Charm Person - Warlock Attack 1
Using the beguiling trickery of the fey, you convince your target to your side.
Daily - Arcane, Charm, Psychic
Standard Action - Ranged 10
Target: One creature
Attack: Charisma vs Will
Hit: If the target has 10+CHA hit points or less, it is dominated (save ends). Aftereffect: The target is dominated until the end of its next turn.
If the target has more than 10+CHA hit points, your regain the use of this power.

 

[AllisterH]

Isn't there an epic destiny that works the same way?

 

[billd91]

I don't think so...We're reading two different interpretations it seems.

I'm not positive about 1e, but in 2e, the DMG said that if the person was invisible but the DM thought that it was reasonable for the invisible person to be noticed (a plate wearing fighter is the actual example), the DM automatically rolled a save vs spell in secret.

Of course, this was independent of rogues and bards who if they took a minute to just listen, if they succeeded on their Detect Noise roll, automatically got a saving throw roll vs spell.

This was on-top of what the actual spell did itself. Namely, in 2e at least, as long as you had at least 13 INT and 10 HD/levels, you automatically get a save vs spell.

3e and for that matter 4e's "invisibility" spell is actually stronger IMO since in both 3e and 4e, only the 1st situation (DM thinks an invisible person is being loud) applies to an invisible character.

OF course, there's ANOTHER way magic got unnerfed post 3e. Blanket immunity to spells doesn't exist. If somehow you ran across a monster/critter that had 21 INT/21 WIS, you automatically were immune to levels 1-3 spells AND a whole set of enchantment spells.

1e's actually quite explicit the chance to detect invisible being because of good senses and perceptual acuity. It's not about a save in that edition at all. It's a straight % chance of noticing something.

But I don't agree that the 3e (or 4e) character can only check if the DM has reason to believe the invisible character is being loud. The game assumes that the Hide/Spot, Move Silently/Listen and, I presume, Stealth/Perception applies. Invisibility gives the character a +20 on the Hide check and, even if detected, provides benefits against visual characters.

But I have to agree with magic getting the nerf in 4e. It's just that certain defenses (but not all) have gotten it too.

 

[KarinsDad]

KD: Have you used the stunt rules on page 42 much? How do you make rulings like that as a DM? How does/did your DM handle those sorts of actions?

Once in a great while.

My players are old school DND players and they rarely try fancy maneuvers. In fact, I'm trying to think of anything other than trying to use Acrobatics to get over a 6 foot tall bookcase and I cannot think of one at the moment.


We had a player of a Rogue who wanted to Tumble Through foes.

I came up with the following rule, but I'm sure there is something easier:

The PC makes an Acrobatics check against the better of the NPC's Athletics, Acrobatics, or overall Dex modifier plus 20. If successful, the PC can get through the square. If not successful, the PC uses 2 squares of movement for the attempt (i.e. moved into one square and got denied) and remains in the last legal square he was in. The PC still provokes OAs like normal (regardless of success) and this move cannot be combined with a Shift. Moving through an opponent's squares is considered difficult terrain. The size of the opponent does not matter. With a running start, the DC is 15+ instead.


The player of the Rogue also want to jump over pits using Acrobatics, so I stated that this could be done if there were a wall there, but the DC would be normal Athletics DC + 5 since this is an Athletics maneuver, not an Acrobatics maneuver.

 

[Tervin]

Not that I think the 4th Edition rules are perfect, but I still don't want to go into detail with what things should be changed for 5th edition. Other things though, I really hope that they will be done differently.

With 4th Edition WoTC seemed to want to approach every game world from the same angle, with the "Point of Light" concept. The concept is useful, but it is not needed for every supported world. Different worlds can support different themes, and be built for different types of stories. By allowing for different themes they will get improved design space, and allow for mopre unique and exciting products.

Another problem I have is the "everything is core" concept. I would prefer a small core with a modular approach to how things are added to it. In the core there might be three races and a dozen or so classes. All standard worlds and campaigns would be expected to support this. Added modules could cover things like psionics, martial arts, steampunk, undead characters, planetouched characters, various civilized monster races...

The default D&D world on the other hand would support everything that was not explicitly unique to a specfic world or story. Something like Forgotten Realms would support almost every added module, while Dark Sun would support only a few (which would also be changed a little for a perfect fit).

Why do I want these changes, after all WoTC doesn't decide how I run my game as it is? It would make it easier for people to set up and advertise campaigns in the ways that they prefer. It would also make worldbuilding easier, and less of a choice between forcing everything to fit where it doesn't belong or feeling like you are limiting the players' rights to their characters. It would also make it possible for designers to create things that only fit in a very specific place, as not everything would be needed to fit everywhere.

 

[Afrodyte]

a few thoughts

There's nothing preventing me from trying this in 4e but lack of a group of guinea pi- er, players.

This may have been covered already, but I was thinking about integrating skill training for combat and non-combat skills (possibly armor too, but unsure exactly how). I'm considering using the weapon groups as a basis and giving them out by class.

Basic ideas:

• Every class should have options within and outside of combat
• Integrate weapons into the skill training system
• Make better use of weapon groups outside of feats
• A more intuitive sense of weapon proficiencies
• Greater flexibility for creating specific character concepts from the outset (well-known example: swashbuckling character)

MELEE COMBAT SKILLS (Strength for basic attacks): Axes, Flails, Hammers, Light blades, Heavy blades, Maces, Picks, Spears, Staffs, Unarmed
RANGED COMBAT SKILLS (Dexterity for basic attacks): Bows, Crossbows, Slings, Thrown weapons

COMBAT SKILLS BY CLASS: Barbarian (2 melee, 1 ranged), Bard (1 melee, 1 ranged), Cleric (1 melee, 1 ranged), Druid (1 melee, 1 ranged), Fighter (2 melee, any 2), Paladin (2 melee, 1 ranged), Ranger (2 melee, 2 ranged), Rogue (Crossbows, Light blades, any 2), Sorcerer (1 melee, 1 ranged), Warlock (1 melee, 1 ranged), Warlord (2 melee, 1 ranged, any 1), Wizard (1 melee, 1 ranged)

NON-COMBAT SKILLS BY CLASS (Can't think of a better term): Barbarian (any 2 from 4e class list, plus 3), Bard (Arcana, any 1 from 4e class list, plus 4), Cleric (Religion, any 1 from 4e class list, plus 3), Druid (Nature, any 1 from 4e class list, plus 3), Fighter (Athletics, any 1 from 4e class list, plus 3), Paladin (Religion, any 1 from 4e class list, plus 3), Ranger (Nature or Dungeoneering, any 1 from 4e class list, plus 3), Rogue (Stealth or Thievery, any 1 from 4e class list, plus 4), Sorcerer (Arcana, any 1 from 4e class list, plus 3), Warlock (Arcana, any 1 from 4e class list, plus 4), Warlord (any 2 from 4e class list, plus 3), Wizard (Arcana, any 1 from 4e class list, plus 3).

Not sure how I'd manage armor yet. But I'll work on it.