What do you want & expect to see in 2024's 5.5e?

[Micah Sweet]

I've no great quarrel with that. My only point was that DMs themselves seem not to be using this aspect of the game very much; it only comes up when a player first mentions it.

By analogy, I have no special complaint against the rules for encumbrance; I've just noticed that hardly any DMs ever concern themselves with it unless and until the players do.

Most DMs don't, no. That's why I'm making a stand!

 

[Yaarel]

I don't want magic to feel innate, at least for classes that narratively learned their spells (wizards and artificers, mostly). It would basically make them indistinguishable from a sorcerer (which i think should work as you describe).

Spells are class-agnostic.

But classes can have different flavors. For example, the Artificer absolutely is about magic items and magical technologies. Even its name refers to artificial (non-innate) magic. But this is about class features, not spells per-se.

Spell descriptions need to function for innate magic concepts. But class descriptions can be non-innate.

Also, races can refer to casting spells innately, and the spell descriptions and the balancing mechanics should work for these too.

 

[Yaarel]

See, I feel making use of material components aids in immersion, and makes casting a spell feel like casting a spell and not using a super power. I dislike component bags for that reason.

For me, material components feels like Hellenistic (mainly Greek-Egyptian) magic. To some degree also Celtic magic, with regard to the crazily convoluted ingredients and requirements for potions.

 

[Parmandur]

Spells are class-agnostic.

But classes can have different flavors. For example, the Artificer absolutely is about magic items and magical technologies. Even its name refers to artificial (non-innate) magic. But this is about class features, not spells per-se.

Spell descriptions need to function for innate magic concepts. But class descriptions can be non-innate.

Also, races can refer to casting spells innately, and the spell descriptions and the balancing mechanics should work for these too.

It may be better to make "you ignore the material component" as a Sorcerer Class feature, for story reasons.

 

[Yaarel]

It may be better to make "you ignore the material component" as a Sorcerer Class feature, for story reasons.

Ignoring the material component is easy. Indeed, I consider the Sorcerers own magical blood (or similar) to be the material component for any spell. The Sorcerer is a living wand.

The problem is the costly component that is too annoying to ignore.

 

[Parmandur]

Ignoring the material component is easy. Indeed, I consider the Sorcerers own magical blood (or similar) to be the material component for any spell. The Sorcerer is a living wand.

The problem is the costly component that is too annoying to ignore.

I mean that if you want, you can waive that requirement for a Sorcerer in your games. Some Feats and lass/Rave abilities do so already. Specific trumps general.

 

[Yaarel]

I mean that if you want, you can waive that requirement for a Sorcerer in your games. Some Feats and lass/Rave abilities do so already. Specific trumps general.

I want 50e to make it officially so.

Obliterate the problematic costly component.

Heh, if you want to continue charging costly components, you can homebrew that requirement in you own games!

 

[Parmandur]

I want 50e to make it officially so.

Obliterate the problematic costly component.

Heh, if you want to continue charging costly components, you can homebrew that requirement in you own games!

Probably not going to happen, since the Spells in question involve setting up genre expectations.

 

[tetrasodium]

I've no great quarrel with that. My only point was that DMs themselves seem not to be using this aspect of the game very much; it only comes up when a player first mentions it.

By analogy, I have no special complaint against the rules for encumbrance; I've just noticed that hardly any DMs ever concern themselves with it unless and until the players do.

I require encumbrance and always have butwotc poisoned the well there on two counts.

Firstly they listed container sizes but never actually said that they needed to be used and gave such insane carrying capacities that players just assume they can be ignored because the encumbrance rules are either basically bottomless or very restrictive and punishing with almost no in-between thanks to excessive simplicity

Secondly there is the more glaring problem where dndbeyond did not even have support for containers until like late last year. That cemented in the heads of players who started with 5e that the container rules you almost need to intuit to fill in the missing rules simply do not apply to PCs

Many 5e players IME simply take a catch me if you can approach to tracking inventory weight and refuse to put in any effort unless the gm takes the time to tell them the weight of literally anything they pick up including things like weapons & armor that are listed in the phb.

 

[Krachek]

Recently I gave to the pc cleric an item that allow to cast once per day a cleric spell without material component. voilà!
There is no need for a revision to alter such low scale rules.
costly Components are there to flavor and to bring some incentive to gather them and make their use more valuable. If it is annoying for a setting ( wilderness, post apocalypse) a Dm can simply ignore them.

 

[Yaarel]

Recently I gave to the pc cleric an item that allow to cast once per day a cleric spell without material component. voilà!

Heh, was that item called a "holy symbol"? : )

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

It may be better to make "you ignore the material component" as a Sorcerer Class feature, for story reasons.

"Your own body functions as your spell's material components" is something I very much would like to see in the 2024 version of the Sorcerer.

 

[Greg K]

What I want and expect are two different things. What I want (is the following which I thought I had posted the other day):

• Darkvison: Go back to 3e low-light vision, darkvision and for less things to have darkvision
• Humans should work more like Rich Howard's Ultimate Adaptability or better remove non-biological aspects from races and use the article as an example for environment/culture being an additional choice for all races.
• More PHB races: Deva, Kobold, Goblin, Lizardfolk, Orc
• Tieflings to have abyssal and infernal types
• All class too receive their subclasses at first level (Otherwise some level 1 class variants for Barbarian, Bard, Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, Ranger)
• Either stretch the 1-10 levels (or 1 to 12) to 1-20 or have PHB 1 cover levels 1-10 or 1-12 and PHB2 cover the rest (or is a supplement for mythic fantasy).
• Tohe full spellcasters toned down. 7th-9th were not originally meant for players (if necessary move them to an Epic level/ mythic fantasy book/supplement)
• More classes in PHB: Alchemist (separate from the Artificer), Arcane Warrior, Scholar, Shaman, Warlord, Witch
• Berserker change Exhaustion to a fatigued/winded condition that can be removed with a short rest.
• Cleric: would like to see on a warlock like chasis with much shorter general base list
• Fighter could use more subclasses, fighting styles, and maneuvers
  • subclasses: Brawler, Corsair, Commander, Duelist, Gallant, Kensei, Lancer, Musketeer, Swashbuckler, Hospitaer/Templar, a Wuxia (ki based warrior)
  • if subclasses are not at first level, a Light Armor Fighter variant at first level
  • Tasha's styles and maneuvers
• Monk: needs more customization to reflect styles and some other changes
• Ranger: The Ranger should be non-magical by default with magic via subclasses (see AgenderArcee's Martial Ranger on r/Unearthed Arcana and GM Binder for an example)
• Rogues
  • Thieves Cant should be a background language for Criminal and, maybe, Urchin,
  • class could use more subclasses in PHB
• Sorcerer: add a general Arcane Origin for a magic family. a Fey blood origin, and create a smaller tailored base list.
• Wizards: break the spell list down. Reduce the number of spells in the spell list by tailoring it
• Feats: some need rebalancing and reworking.
  • for example make Great Weapon Fighter and Sharpshooter based on PB. up to PB as penalty/ bonus based on twice the penalty taken
• Changes to address the ease to bypass/minimize exploration in the wild
• Crticial hits should just be weapon or unarmed damage die maxed and roll a second die
• Some spells reworked/releveled or abandoned
  • Example: True Strike should just make the target's next attack a natural 20, but not a crit (taken from Mike Mearls's Book of Iron Might (Malhavoc Press) for 3e)
• add downtime from Xanathar's and Tasha's
• add Companion /Sidekick rules
• The DMG should include:
  • skill points, armor as DR, wound/ vitality, touch AC, glancing blow as optional rules
  • More conditions Bleeding, Bloodied, Dazed Fatigued/Winded, Frozen, Shakened, Slowed, Staggered, Swallowed, Weakened Ability as options (or move to PHB)
  • More dials/variants for death and dying (fix the whack a mole), lethality, resting
  • actual dials and guidelines for tailoring the game: low magic, sword & sorcery, gothic fantasy, romantic fantasy, mythic fantasy

Now, what I expect is something that will make want to stick with 5e or move to another system entirely

 

[delericho]

I would like to see armour (and shield) proficiencies eliminated.

Instead, all light armours should give AC 11, all medium armours 12, and all heavy armours give AC 13. And shields give no AC bonus.

But for those classes known for the use of armour, they get a class feature (optional in some cases) to give them 'full' use of the armours in their category.

 

[Horwath]

returning armor from 3.5e style with max dex bonus, variable ACP for dex skills and just STR requirements for ALL armor.

I.E:
leather armor, AC 11 +dex(max 6), min str 8
hide armor, AC 12 +dex(max 5), min str 10
chain shirt, AC 13 +dex(max 4), min str 12
scale mail, AC 14 +dex(max 3), min str 14
chain mail, AC 16 +dex(max 2, min str 16, penalty -1
plate, AC 18 +dex(max 1), min str 18, penalty -2