Where do you see (or want) 5.0 to go?

[Lanefan]

Where should 5e go?

- More realism where possible, at expense of gamism.
- A serious shift in attitude from "the rules are rules" to "the rules are guidelines"; corollary to this is not to try and make a rule for everything, and to encourage house-ruling and tweaking.
- Fewer bonuses (or lower possible bonus numbers) of all kinds. Rule of thumb: if the bonus or +-amount is or can be bigger than the number of sides on the die you're rolling, there's a problem.
- More focus on character personalities and less on character optimization. Ideally, a char-ops board for 5e would serve no useful function at all.
- The return of resource management, be it of spells, gear, time, whatever.
- A return to archetypal classes and races as the norm, with non-archetypes as the exception.
- Spells that feel like magic; with components, casting times, chance of failure, and not everyone can cast 'em.
- A flexible system that can handle different game styles right from the start; even to the point of rules subsets for said styles. These subset expansions could be put out in booklets about the size of an adventure module (but would have to come out with the initial release to be of any use). Some ideas:
~~ A rules subset for long slow-advancing campaigns
~~ A rules subset for tournaments and one-offs
~~ A rules subset for beginners
~~ A rules subset for heroic play (like 4e, you're a hero before you start)
~~ A rules subset for grim-'n'-gritty (you're a commoner to start and might never get too far beyond that)
~~ A rules subset for games where PCs can/cannot create their own magic items (whichever is opposite to the default)
~~ A rules subset for online play

I'm sure I'll think of more later...

Lan-"and it has to have mules. And harlots, too!"-efan

 

[Shazbot79]

I think that many posters have already touched on ideas that I really like, and have been ruminating on myself.

I particularly enjoy the idea of removing enhancement bonuses from magic items and the game math. This of course comes from my own personal bias, as I like magic items to feel unique and mysterious rather than being just another set of character build options. In other words, I think that magic items in 5E should be all about the properties and daily powers and not about the +'s.

Also, I really enjoy Rechan's idea of giving characters a party role, in addition to a combat role. I'd rather like to see this replace the skill list altogether. However, I disagree with the notion of treating skill challenges like combat encounters, with "powers" and such. Something definitely needs to be done with skill challenges though.

I concur with Kamikaze Midget's notice of "mission" based resources, rather than daily resources. I think that this would go a long way towards eliminating the 15 minute workday problem that 4E set out to fix. Also, this would place a greater emphasis on resource management. However, I think that there should also be some encounter or "scene" based resources, like racial powers, utilities and such. Also, one thing I would like to see, that WHFRP 3rd ed. implemented is party-based resources. I think that this idea could be used to improve the ritual system.

I share Lanefan's sentiment of skewing the game math low. I would like to see ability modifiers a bit closer to Castles & Crusades scale. Basically, I'd like to see less emphasis placed on character attributes and more placed on level dependent bonuses. Also, no dump stats...make every stat do something for every class.

I'd also like the game to undergo exaustive playtesting before release...and not Pathfinder playtesting, but actual stress testing of the system to find as many break points as possible. Basically, I want the playtesters to treat the game as a QA project so that we don't have anymore "feat taxes."

I want the game design to be transparent and modular, so as to encourage informed houseruling and homebrewing.

I like the 4E PHB1 feats...most were pretty situational, but tactically interesting. I'd like to see the design of feats skew closer to this model, rather than blanket "must have" feats. Also, more racial feats...these were a great addition to 4E and I think these options should be expanded.

I like class powers...but many are just slightly more effective versions of lower level powers. Why not offer a shorter list of powers, that scale approproately with level, thereby creating room in the intial release for more races/classes.

Also, I think that the 5E print release could stand to learn a lesson from BECMI. I'd like to see the game released in 3 boxsets: Heroic, Paragon and Epic, each covering 10 levels.

Oh, by the way...hello everyone...I'm new : )

 

[Plane Sailing]

A return to the dungeon.

By that, I mean, a return to the dungeon as the basic element of gameplay.

Most of 3e and all of 4e specifies the encounter as the basic element of gameplay. Encounters are designed in detail, and played out in detail (especially combat encounters). Encounters are what you need resources for, and what consumes resources. Encounters are where you do things that need to be done. Encounters are where you play the game.

In 5e, it will be the dungeon (or the wilderness path, or the plot of the assassin, or whatever other discrete point-a-to-point-b mission you want to think of). We'll still have encounters, but, for instance, HP (healing surges, whatever) will only return after you complete the dungeon, and each encounter will be one bit of the overall dungeon, and the dungeon will also be made of non-encounters: traps, obstacles, scenery, NPC's, whatnot. Choices that the PC's make will become more important in action, rather than at character creation: it is important to decide what path to take out of this room, to try Door A or Door B, it is not (as) important to pick the right power, or the right race.

This will pull the game back a little bit from combat. Big setpiece combats will still be prominent, but your party will also have resources to face things that aren't combats -- divinations and spying for determining which choice is the right choice, resources for recovering from bad choices, etc. These "noncombat things" will directly be the dungeon itself trying to kill your characters, or otherwise make them fail.

Dungeons will award treasure, and XP, not encounters. Instead of 10 encounters, it'll be 3 dungeons to gain a level. You will have powers of exploration, and interpersonal skills, based on your class and race, to solve the problems dungeons create, rather than just the problems combats create.

Love it.

I'll have to start a secret plan to get Kamikaze Midget into a senior staff position at WotC by the time they start designing 5th edition

 

[Nikosandros]

Love Rechan and kamikaze Midget ideas.

 

[Aberzanzorax]

I love Kamikaze Midget's vision...


...but I must spread more experience points around.




Alas.

 

[Shazbot79]

In my home games I award XP per adventure, rather than per encounter, much in the way that Kamikaze Midget suggests...I find that it works out pretty well and encourages creativity in the players, knowing that they don't necessarily have to overcome every obstacle by killing it to death.

 

[RangerWickett]

A return to the dungeon.

By that, I mean, a return to the dungeon as the basic element of gameplay.

Most of 3e and all of 4e specifies the encounter as the basic element of gameplay. Encounters are designed in detail, and played out in detail (especially combat encounters). Encounters are what you need resources for, and what consumes resources. Encounters are where you do things that need to be done. Encounters are where you play the game.

Brilliant!

 

[Raven Crowking]

I predict:

(1) Any complaint made about 4e now, which is roundly lambasted when made, will suddenly have always been obvious, when WotC announces that 5e will fix it.

(2) 5e will be more fun than 4e. You will wonder why you ever even thought that 4e was fun at all.

(3) Some folks will have been ridiculed for thinking 5e was imminent, because it is obviously not time for a new edition yet, until the announcement, when suddenly it will be the perfect time for a new edition.

About the rules or flavour, I have no clue. I suspect, though, that some folks who are offended that other folks don't think 4e is "D&D" will not think 5e is "D&D", and so the wheel will turn.....


RC

 

[Windjammer]

I love Kamikaze Midget's vision...


...but I must spread more experience points around.




Alas.

Consider it done.

I too love K's idea, though I fear the instant turn off when you'd break it down as basing combat encounters on skill challenges (in 2008 it was the other way round). Imagine running a dungeon as one huge skill challenge with players activating skill powers. That sounds god awful to me. In other words, I'd love it if Kamikaze's game was implemented by wholly new mechanics not tarnished by rampant 4E'isms.

 

[Ahnehnois]

I know I'm probably in the minority, but I'd love to see 5th being a hybrid of all the best stuff of 3.5 and 4E.

I hope you're not in the minority.

I'd like to see the best aspects of 3e (a variety of different classes with fundamentally different mechanics, free multiclassing and customization, a fully fleshed-out skill system) combined with simpler math and a magic system closer to 4e's power system. More options, less bookkeeping (yes I know it's a contradiction).