D&D 5E (2014) What would you like to see in a "revised edition" of 5E?

Point taken, folks. I never personally experienced the pain that comes with buying another version of the same ruleset you already own because it's "outdated," but I can see how it'd be annoying.
Let's instead assume that these changes were implemented in a manner more consistent with Mearls's "Living Rule Set" vision - articles available on the website for those who want to modify a particular issue. Maybe at some point a release of the books with different formatting, if that's the issue in question, but including the same content so you don't need to buy it if you don't want to.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Yeah, nothing here screams "reprint the rules" just yet.

Most of the changes are either a.) clarifications (which can be done in Sage Advice or in errata) or b.) I don't like X rule, which I don't wager will be changing anytime soon.

If I had to ask for ANY changes, it would just be incorporating Errata into the next print run (such as removing Trap the Soul off the wizard list) like D&D did for years before errata became both a dirty word and a sacred obligation.

That's not to say I wouldn't ask for additional stuff (always want more stuff), but so far the core books are near perfect. Most of my wish list would be for more stuff we were promised (conversion guides, battlesystem, more races) but didn't get.

Oh, and reword Durable. That feat is still crap.
 



It's early yet...

Early? Early? The DMG officially came out on the 9th. I have only had it a few days, much less had a chance to run a single full campaign to feel out its depths yet. And you're looking for revisions?

What the heck? Is it actually possible to satisfy you people for more than 20 minutes with a book, before you have to have something different? What does it take to make you happy? Is *nothing* good enough? Sheesh!

{/rant}
 

Early? Early? The DMG officially came out on the 9th. I have only had it a few days, much less had a chance to run a single full campaign to feel out its depths yet. And you're looking for revisions?

What the heck? Is it actually possible to satisfy you people for more than 20 minutes with a book, before you have to have something different? What does it take to make you happy? Is *nothing* good enough? Sheesh!

{/rant}

This was basically my reaction to this thread. We're doing this already?

I'm still waiting to receive my DMG, much less read it. It will likely be around this time next year before I've had a good chance to run the RAW and know what things I would like changed. Even then, that list will probably change over time. I know my revision list for 3.5E has over the years.
 

Early? Early? The DMG officially came out on the 9th. I have only had it a few days, much less had a chance to run a single full campaign to feel out its depths yet. And you're looking for revisions?

What the heck? Is it actually possible to satisfy you people for more than 20 minutes with a book, before you have to have something different? What does it take to make you happy? Is *nothing* good enough? Sheesh!

{/rant}

The DMG isn't required for rules. They're all in the PHB (and monsters manual).

About the only component the DMG brings to the table, besides a ton of fluff/inspiration and random tables are magic items.
 

There are tons of ways of boosting your + to hit in game (archery style, bless, etc), and given the design of the game is higher hit chance (so hits count more often), +10 seriously imbalances the game. Especially with Fighters.

Someone over at the official forums as also done the maths and proven it's generally always worth it using the -5/+10 option.

Having actually done the math myself, this just doesn't hold water in the absence of external bonuses. Yes, you can get bless and advantage. Melee can't use archery, of course.

At level 4 a non-feat GWF style fighter wielding a greatsword does more damage against every AC from 13-25 than the feat guy. If he's got +2 from bless it's better for the non -5/+10 guy for every AC from 16-25. Yay?

At level 8 when the feat guy has 20 Str and so does the non-feat guy non-feat guy does more damage from AC 18-27 and the feat guy only does 3-20% more damage from AC 17 on down to AC 13. Sure the feat vs. non-feat guy is better at higher levels. He had better be! You are taking a feat!!! And even then the damage bonuses are a modest 3 to a good 25% with the 25% against really low ACs. A level 4 fighter adding 2 to his strength gets better damage boosts than that. As a fighter you are likely better off boosting Strength at levels 4 and 6 and a feat that isn't better than boosting your stats isn't really a broken feat.

And I'm not particularly impressed with a lvl 17 fighter doing 80 damage a round. You can have a Rogue/Ranger with nothing but Hunter's Mark and Sentinel do 84 DPR with a 60% hit rate all day long every day and HM is a piddly 1st level spell. If he had advantage, too, he'd be at 105 DPR and that's not even an optimized build.

If you are a Champion, the GWF feat is sweet with its extra attack on critical. But you could just as easily take Polearm master and that's never worse versus any AC level. Oh, heck, just take both feats, right? You've got 7 ABIs!!!

The damage boost from Shield Mastery (assuming the DM lets you knock prone with shield and then attack) is greater than that for the -5/+10 feat and all your melee friends benefit, too!

Sharpshooter is quite good because of the hit boost although its effectiveness is mitigated for a Ranger using hunter's mark and colossus strike simply because each hit strikes harder than a fighter's so the +10 isn't as meaningful. You've already got +8 from HM and CS. For a fighter the feat rocks.

I'd rate every damage feat I can find in the book above the GWF one. At least I'd take them before I'd take a stat bump. Sentinel on a Rogue is sick! Hey, look! I get a second sneak attack opportunity. Yay! CE? Yay!!! extra attack with my hand crossbow, can fight in melee, and I can use a d10 ranged weapon with extra attack? Yay!

Except perhaps Dual Wielder. It's +1 damage going from a d6 to d8 and +1 AC. Stat boost is +1 damage and +1 hit.
 

Let's see, if I were emporer of the world and was going to decree D&D Deluxe Edition:

Feats need an overhaul; some seem too powerful or too weak, and many of them don't have a really clear concept. A few more magic-related feats couldn't hurt either.

I wouldn't mind seeing a few more subclasses, particularly sorcerer bloodlines and cleric domains. I think the DMG subclasses should be in the PHB.

There might be room for a few more backgrounds that are broad enough and iconic enough to get into the PHB.

A more informative spell list would be nice too. Spells should list which classes get them.

Ritual system is anemic and bolted-on. I'd just give every ritual spell a special section, "Casting as a Ritual:" that explains, for that spell, how it works. Then I'd make a lot more spells rituals.

More spells would have "Casting Using Higher Level Spell Slots" sections.
 

Early? Early? The DMG officially came out on the 9th. I have only had it a few days, much less had a chance to run a single full campaign to feel out its depths yet. And you're looking for revisions?

What the heck? Is it actually possible to satisfy you people for more than 20 minutes with a book, before you have to have something different? What does it take to make you happy? Is *nothing* good enough? Sheesh!

{/rant}


Based on a teaser trailer, people are already critiquing the new star wars films that are not starting to come out till next year! Fans will be fans.
 

Remove ads

Top