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

[Dr_Sage]

As a new player to 4e I found the stat system to be remarkably counter intuitive. What, the stats start at 10 and not zero? 14 equals 2 (in game mechanics terms) and 15 equals 3? That doesn't make any sense at all! Why bother. Something simpler and more direct please.

My friend.. please take a good look at the books and talk to more experinced players.

Stats does not start at 10. Player characters - the heroes by the way - have most stats from 10 above, mostly becuse its the human average for any stat.

If every point above 10 gave you bonuses, we woul be doing a lot more math and maybe we would have to use a d100.

Take a good look at the Monster manual, you will see creatures with 2 inteligence and 30 strenght.

 

[Dr_Sage]

I still say bring back mystery and magic as well... Because of these two things, my group tends to just stroll down a corridor confidently awaiting something to whack! We have more fun and more danger/excitement/mystery in town talking to NPCs (and this is mainly because our rogue who is our diplomat tends to roll either 18-20 or 1-3... need to check his die and see if other numbers exist... the other diplomat is our fighter who worships Bane... got kicked out of town for being a Bane worshipper, sneaks back in, walks in a bar, tells the guards "You have 24 hrs to leave MY town")...

IMHO the fighter against town thing has little to do with the rules, its a problem with the campaign. There are a number of ways of dealing with this, and the most likely would be: does the fighter wants to become the campaign main bad guy? Will adventurers try to stop him? Will the player have fun becomming a tyrant? Will the DM play along?

We saw things way worse tham this in previous editions, specially in 3.5 epic clerics.

Regarding the magic: the rules about identifiing magic and so can easly be rouse ruled, and as a matter of fact the rituals (if not sold every corner) make acces to campaign shaking spells only acessible if the DM allows (specially ressurrect like ones and teleportation).

The DM has now way more power tham in 3.5 in my opinion.

And if the players are just tiggering traps, again... maybe you should analise if its really a system problem.

 

[Derren]

5E should take some experiences from 4E and incoopoerate them into 3E.
Generally it should focus less on balanced tactical combat like 4E and more on building interesting settings where you can role play in like 3E.

 

[xatharas]

I agree with avalon, 5e might want to bring back the fear of dying back.
I know the PC's are supposed to be heroes but heroes are born out conquering fear and challenge. If fear is unexisting (dropping to -80 on level 22 is nearly impossibe and even then there are powers that bring you back instantly and the worst that you suffer is being prone!)
I know it's not the job of a DM to kill chars but when those chars start saying things like " oh a tarrasque? there's no challenge there! Let the town guard try to lure it to town and then we'll take it down between beers' Or better yet they go sit on a bench waiting for it to come and then trick it to move through the gate the wizard has set up, destroying it forever while having a drink! something is amiss.

I think the main problem is that dmg hardly scales with the higher level monsters (I know you are supposed to do at least three encounters before an extended rest to deplete the party). I usually don't like to do many encouters and let them do some investigation and then do a climatic battle at the end but in 4th this hardly possible as you either have to make it too hard or they wals through!

 

[Garthanos]

Removed snarky pointless post.

 

[Tai]

My friend.. please take a good look at the books and talk to more experinced players.

Stats does not start at 10. Player characters - the heroes by the way - have most stats from 10 above, mostly becuse its the human average for any stat.

If every point above 10 gave you bonuses, we woul be doing a lot more math and maybe we would have to use a d100.

Take a good look at the Monster manual, you will see creatures with 2 inteligence and 30 strenght.

The reason why the stats are as they are is for legacy reasons rather than reasons of practicality. It would make more sense to have average stats be 0, and below-average stats be -X, or at the very least would be more intuitive for new players. They tied the odd stats into feat requirements in order to make them mean something, and I think that they did a good job with the system they've inherited, but that's the reason we use it, rather than because it's intrinsically a good idea.

 

[silverwhisper]

i think jools is right. while he simply isn't familiar with the history, it's also true that almost all RPGs out there have abandoned the 3d6-based range for stats.

i gave my thoughts on the matter already.



mkultra: i really don't see the respective classes as all being a single class. personally, i find the uniformity of class abilities vastly preferable to each class basically having its own kludged-on subsystem--because that's really what happened a lot in previous editions, IMHO (see also: AD&D1 psionics).

ed

 

[-Avalon-]

IMHO the fighter against town thing has little to do with the rules, its a problem with the campaign. There are a number of ways of dealing with this, and the most likely would be: does the fighter wants to become the campaign main bad guy? Will adventurers try to stop him? Will the player have fun becomming a tyrant? Will the DM play along?

We saw things way worse tham this in previous editions, specially in 3.5 epic clerics.

Regarding the magic: the rules about identifiing magic and so can easly be rouse ruled, and as a matter of fact the rituals (if not sold every corner) make acces to campaign shaking spells only acessible if the DM allows (specially ressurrect like ones and teleportation).

The DM has now way more power tham in 3.5 in my opinion.

And if the players are just tiggering traps, again... maybe you should analise if its really a system problem.

I don't understand this... we ask for directions 5th should go, and in response to our comments the universal answer is "Nothing is wrong with 4th, just houserule it"...

If I houseruled every problem that my group has with 4th... I would be re-writing 2/3 of the PHB, all of the monster manual, just dropping the DM's guide entirely, etc etc... at some point we need to realize that "houseruling" should not be necessary to that extent...

Also, have you ever displayed a lot of gifts before people, told them that by law/rules/etc they are theirs for the taking, then told them "But I disagree... you gotta work for it!"...

Those people stop listening to you at all and move to someone else who WILL give them what is in the rules...

Now, on the other hand, if you have rules that keep things hard/challenging/etc, and items are not just handed out "monty haul" style, the players go "well its the rules, so we do what the rules say..." If the DM really likes how 4th does it, they can then "houserule" it and both games work fine then...

It is easier to houserule a more lenient method of play, than to houserule a harder and more challenging method of play. My players prefer to play exactly what is in the rules except stats, we prefer to play more super-hero stats than elsewise because we believe that the players are not peasants, there is a reason the world's safety relies on them and that they rose above the regular and normal citizens, threw down the pitchfork and picked up a sword. We play "Conan"s and "Raistlin"s.... but as a general rule, every other rule in a book is the end of it, we don't houserule anything else, if we need to houserule, we just stop playing a game and play something else that makes sense.

We have played 2 campaigns in 4th Edition, and have decided that we will take an "extended rest" before we play it again because of how the game has changed... (btw, 3rd we dealt with, and played almost religiously for the entire length of time it was out, we are already thinking of not playing 4th again)

So 5th (whenever it comes out, years from now) needs to be play tested better and more thoroughly, with plenty of testers. 4th edition combats take way too long, are very tedious, offer no challenges, give out magic items, and more.... We were looking at a fix for 3rd's problems, not a brand new game that had more and different errors.

 

[kelufeng]

I love 4e overall, but...

-I could go for the un-Diablification of magic items.

-Likewise, I don't need lots of magic items with overlapping abilities (different kinds of lightsabers, etc.). Flipping through AV (whether on screen in CB or Compendium or in print) just feels like a tax on my time.

-Fewer item slots.

-I guess the above three all indicate that I want less of a role for magic items, especially as "standard gear."*

-That said, more items should look like wondrous items and less like iron armbands of power.

...

I agree. I recently started DMing a 4e game (had played before this) and I'd prefer if the bonuses from magic items that are required to make your character functional (weapon, armor, neck) were part of the basic stat progression. I prefer magic items to be more special than they are, and probably slightly rarer too. Groups that like the way it works could continue handing out items regularly, but you could also be stingier with magic items without your players being too weak.

 

[Stalker0]

I think the best parts of 4th are the DM side of the screen.

As much as I've balked (and on occasion continue to balk) at the differences between npc/monster and player mechanic...it makes things so much easier to tweak and balance.

Monsters design took a huge step forward in my opinion, and terrain use is a lot easier now. I want to see that pushed forward.

On the player side, I wouldn't mind a step back towards 3.5. I think 4e got a little too straightlaced at time, I would like to see that opened back up again in 5e.