D&D 5E Will I like D&D Next?

Jeff Carlsen

Adventurer
Seriously? It's a hodge-podge with bad math leading to an internal Alpha test. I like some of the ideas we've seen, disliked others and have precious little idea what the final product will look like outside of maybe a few basics. It has the potential to be a good, throwback-style stystem with some modern elements but it's in no way close yet.

That doesn't answer the question. It just restates the opinion for which I'm seeking an explanation.

If it helps, here is what I see:

D&D Next has a unified resolution mechanic based around ability scores. Training in something, whether it is a weapon, tool, or skill, is represented by a single mechanic.

Classes determine your hit points, proficiencies, and special abilities that function beyond the base resolution mechanic. Subclasses are a universal mechanic for providing variations on an archetype.

After choosing a background, all character options are filtered through your class, even ability score increases or feats, which are interchangeable parts.

My point is that the resolution mechanic, training mechanic, size of optional character abilities, and method for acquiring abilities are very structured.

So, when you say you see incoherence, I'm genuinely curious as to which aspects of the game you are talking about. Just because I don't see it doesn't mean it isn't there.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Salamandyr

Adventurer
[MENTION=61749]Jeff Carlsen[/MENTION], nice sum up. I think you've pretty much described the core of the game.

I'm a bit curious to understand what people mean by "bad math". Personally, I found the mathematics of 5e, as of the last packet, with introduction of proficiency bonuses to be as good as any edition prior. It's light years better than 3e, better than 1e post Unearthed Arcana, 2e post 10th level, and at least as good as 4e prior to the Expertise "patch".

It's not a question of whether the math works; it obviously does. It's a question of whether it meets expectations--ie, do character succeed at the rate they should while still feeling like something is a challenge.

I'm really happy the design team is focussing on that prior to release.
 

am181d

Adventurer
Seriously? It's a hodge-podge with bad math leading to an internal Alpha test. I like some of the ideas we've seen, disliked others and have precious little idea what the final product will look like outside of maybe a few basics. It has the potential to be a good, throwback-style stystem with some modern elements but it's in no way close yet.

It sounds like you're saying that it's being relegated to an internal Alpha test because of weaknesses in the game, but actually the opposite is true. (The game has advanced to the point where they're ready to move it to the pre-planned internal Alpha.)

You're certainly welcome to like some things and not others, but if you're going to discuss your opinion of the game, it's probably better to call out the things you don't like rather than to simply say "there exist things that I don't like."
 

Herschel

Adventurer
It doesn't matter what I/we like (or don't like) as far as individual features/elements at this point. The "public playtest" was, more or less, a survey. We've had a number of different iterations of many elements. Which ones make it to the final production run, or in which form, we don't know and won't know until it's released.

Bounded accuracy and ability score resolution are all fine and dandy, and we've seen some (what I feel are) good ideas that may (or may not) be in the final version (or in which form), but those claiming they know how the system will be when it's finished are delusional. We have some base elements to play with, which people may (or may not) like, that's all.

There will be a rather large number of changes in the final product. That's not a bad (or necessarily good, I suppose) thing but claiming a system not even fleshed-out yet is somehow "great" is ridiculous.

Mod Note: See my post below. ~Umbran
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
Because it's not a "real" (re: complete) system yet. Which playtest packet rules do you use?

The current one of course. Which is the final one.

Which version(s) of the Fighter?

The current one of course. Which is the final one.

How about skills?

Just as they are stated in the current playtest rules. Which is the final one.

Nobody knows what the final system is going to look like yet.

They've said this final playtest package is the core rules. They've repeatedly said feedback has guided them to this point, that people think this version is the direction the game should go in, so the final product will look relatively similar to this final package.

Playing with the packets is all fine & dandy, it's what they're there for, but if you truly want to run a campaign using actual D&D Next then the system is going to have major changes by the time it's released.

Where are you getting this assumption it will have "major" changes from this final playtest package? They've said where they are going from here...some math changes (but the current math works fine), a few more sub-classes, some classes they have not released yet, and then developing the optional modules. But the existing classes and sub-classes and monsters, it looks like (to me anyway) they're where they're going to be at in the final product, with the exception of some relatively minor math changes and other relatively minor tweaks.

But none of this answers my questions. Why do you think it is a "mess", and why is it wise to discourage someone from trying it given you just said playing it is fine and dandy and what it's there for? It's not like he'd be facing tons of changing playtest documents (like you implied), as they're right now today releasing the final open playtest package. The next version available is roughly a year away, as a final release. He'll have a year of playing under these rules (roughly) and these rules work well. So...what's so messy and incomplete about that?
 
Last edited:

Herschel

Adventurer
"Trying it" is cool, but the OP talked of setting up a campaign starting around January, which likely means a boatload of revisions a few levels in.

Also, what makes you think the final packet is what will be released on a number of things? Look at the fighter and it's abilities. Will it end up with power attacks (deadly strike type stuff) or multiple attacks, or a combination thereof. Or module options to go for one or the other (or neither)? (for example)

Or when the game is actually released and players want to play warlocks, psions, or whatever else classes/subclasses are in it because they like them more? There's a lot still missing from the game.
 
Last edited:

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
It doesn't matter what I/we like (or don't like) as far as individual features/elements at this point. The "public playtest" was, more or less, a survey. We've had a number of different iterations of many elements. Which ones make it to the final production run, or in which form, we don't know and won't know until it's released.

The L&L articles disagree with this assessment.

Bounded accuracy and ability score resolution are all fine and dandy, and we've seen some (what I feel are) good ideas that may (or may not) be in the final version (or in which form), but those claiming they know how the system will be when it's finished are delusional. We have some base elements to play with, which people may (or may not) like, that's all.

OK, so now people who disagree with your view are delusional? How about you stop insulting people and back up your assertions with some facts. The L&L articles have revealed pretty openly where they are at, and we know pretty well they are settled on what we're seeing, with some relatively minor changes in the works, most of which they've already listed.

There will be a rather large number of changes in the final product. That's not a bad (or necessarily good, I suppose) thing but claiming a system not even fleshed-out yet is somehow "great" is ridiculous.

It is fleshed out. The system as-is already is far more extensive that OD&D and BECIM, and not that far off from AD&D core books. And again with the insults that people who disagree with you that the current system is great are being ridiculous? How about you stop judging others and maybe play the game out yourself and give it a chance? That, or decide it's not for you and stop insulting those who think it is?

Maybe it's been a while since you read the playtest package and you're working off old information? Have you been following the L&L articles and tweets on the topic that explain where they are at and going with stuff?
 

Li Shenron

Legend
Wow, that is not even vaguely close to my experience. And given you said you have not played since Christmas...where on earth are you getting that sort of estimate from?

From the playtest package before xmas, in fact! Our Wizard player at that time was practically casting cantrips all the time, both in combat (Ray of Frost IIRC) and out of combat (she had Minor Illusion and either Mage Hand or Prestidigitation). She had Identify but only ever cast it as a Ritual because there was no reason to waste a slot. She tended to save the slot for fights with harder monsters, but since battles were over quickly, she could go a long way with just Ray of Frost.

Maybe now things have changed...
 

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
"Trying it" is cool, but the OP talked of setting up a campaign starting around January, which likely means a boatload of revisions a few levels in.

What the heck are you talking about? The final version is, roughly, a year off. The current playtest document is the final playtest package. He will have, roughly, a 9 months to a year to play with this set of rules. How is that not appropriate for a campaign? Seems about right to me.

Also, what makes you think the final packet is what will be released on a number of things? Look at the fighter and it's abilities. Will it end up with power attacks (deadly strike type stuff) or multiple attacks, or a combination thereof. Or module options to go for one or the other (or neither)? (for example)

The L&L articles and tweets saying this final package is where they were led to by the prior feedback, it's pretty set and being sent to a secondary team purely to work on some math issues now, and they're going into the phase where they work on the other classes and sub-classes that have not already been playtested and settings, and the optional modules. They've told us all this already. That fighter in the final package - that's your fighter, at least for those sub-classes, with some minor math tweaks to come, unless they run into something unexpected.
 

Herschel

Adventurer
What the heck are you talking about? The final version is, roughly, a year off. The current playtest document is the final playtest package. He will have, roughly, a 9 months to a year to play with this set of rules. How is that not appropriate for a campaign? Seems about right to me.

A nine-month full campaign? Almost every campaign I've ever been a part of lasts multiple years, not months, even in college when we played weekly with marathon sessions fairly often.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top