Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
WotC Developer Google Hangout on Youtube
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 6045379" data-attributes="member: 3192"><p>1. I don't think of spells as "I win" buttons, but as game changers. Invisibility doesn't mean you get to sneak past the guards, it simply means you cannot be seen without further interference (like dumping a bag of flour from above). There is a new, probably easier path to success, but still a path. Spells always have a saving throw when cast on creatures too, so killing one with, say, Finger of Death isn't a sure thing just because it was prepared. Spells shouldn't really be focused on Hit Point damage either, or at least not as their primary in game purpose. They are the tools Magic Users have to explore the world. Combat is for Fighters. Are there exceptions to this design? I can think of some like <em>Knock</em>, but for the most part spells should radically alter a situation not end it.</p><p></p><p>2. Very few Spell Slots / Day does mean more powerful spells and that's appreciated, at least by me. But are you balancing for all out of encounter play? I notice mentions to at least cursory time tracking. Is this for balancing long term resources like food, how long a torch lasts, not to mention distance traveled in a day? Daily (and longer) resource refreshes don't operate on a 5 or 10 minute scale because not all exploration occurs on such a scale, usually only stuff like dungeon movement, searching and item use. I expect all non-combat game system play to be something of a point of contention though, given how healing has such a split of expectations in the community. </p><p></p><p>3. Clerics are neither gish nor melee experts. They overlap w/ swords & sorcery, but their combat abilities are really enablers for them to engage in their class's area of expertise - their core game. They aren't able to deal damage like a Fighter as they aren't aiming to do so. They able to cast spells that radically alter the world like Magic Users for the same reason. They are playing at a third focus, a growth oriented one (or decay oriented) for living (or undead) creatures. They are not Heal-Bots on a battlefield, but just like the Wizard - a class not designed for battle at all. They have greater combat defensive abilities as they need to be able to go anywhere in combat to perform their class. They are better at both combat & magic than either of the other two classes because the Cleric's scope was the smallest of the three. They seek to gain Followers and improve (or use up) the world. Their most useful powers in regards to combat have been designed towards avoiding and ending it. But I guess I could see the the option of offensive combat too when the inherent Alignment conflict is looked at. But I would think of these as secondary or tertiary objectives.</p><p></p><p>4. Warlord is like naming a Class "Strategist" and then letting die roll results determine that "good strategy happens". Imagine if we named another core class "Actor" and let results mean "good role play happens". Please be careful not to remove the key aspects some people are coming to the game for. Players, when they actually work as a team just like in sports, can inspire each other. This doesn't mean a numerical bonus, but improved strategizing, acting, or any of the other activities actually done around the table by the players and not emulated as character abilities. </p><p></p><p>5. Ability modifiers are too high for the class-based Combat Ability modifier and its flat improvement rate. This goes for the Magic Ability modifier too. To paraphrase the video, "early D&D didn't get a STR mod to damage" and it was possible monsters could operate that way now? However, early MM modifiers were built into monsters when determining what a creature's Hit Dice should be. HD were then used to reference the To Hit Table - all any DM needed to memorize (or look at) to speed up monster combat. (It would be nice to have a limited number of useful tables like this to improve play again) But my point is, STR scores for monsters were in all of the early D&D versions. They simply weren't always included in the text. The work wasn't written long hand in the stat blocks. That doesn't mean there were no factors taken into account in their derivation.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="howandwhy99, post: 6045379, member: 3192"] 1. I don't think of spells as "I win" buttons, but as game changers. Invisibility doesn't mean you get to sneak past the guards, it simply means you cannot be seen without further interference (like dumping a bag of flour from above). There is a new, probably easier path to success, but still a path. Spells always have a saving throw when cast on creatures too, so killing one with, say, Finger of Death isn't a sure thing just because it was prepared. Spells shouldn't really be focused on Hit Point damage either, or at least not as their primary in game purpose. They are the tools Magic Users have to explore the world. Combat is for Fighters. Are there exceptions to this design? I can think of some like [I]Knock[/I], but for the most part spells should radically alter a situation not end it. 2. Very few Spell Slots / Day does mean more powerful spells and that's appreciated, at least by me. But are you balancing for all out of encounter play? I notice mentions to at least cursory time tracking. Is this for balancing long term resources like food, how long a torch lasts, not to mention distance traveled in a day? Daily (and longer) resource refreshes don't operate on a 5 or 10 minute scale because not all exploration occurs on such a scale, usually only stuff like dungeon movement, searching and item use. I expect all non-combat game system play to be something of a point of contention though, given how healing has such a split of expectations in the community. 3. Clerics are neither gish nor melee experts. They overlap w/ swords & sorcery, but their combat abilities are really enablers for them to engage in their class's area of expertise - their core game. They aren't able to deal damage like a Fighter as they aren't aiming to do so. They able to cast spells that radically alter the world like Magic Users for the same reason. They are playing at a third focus, a growth oriented one (or decay oriented) for living (or undead) creatures. They are not Heal-Bots on a battlefield, but just like the Wizard - a class not designed for battle at all. They have greater combat defensive abilities as they need to be able to go anywhere in combat to perform their class. They are better at both combat & magic than either of the other two classes because the Cleric's scope was the smallest of the three. They seek to gain Followers and improve (or use up) the world. Their most useful powers in regards to combat have been designed towards avoiding and ending it. But I guess I could see the the option of offensive combat too when the inherent Alignment conflict is looked at. But I would think of these as secondary or tertiary objectives. 4. Warlord is like naming a Class "Strategist" and then letting die roll results determine that "good strategy happens". Imagine if we named another core class "Actor" and let results mean "good role play happens". Please be careful not to remove the key aspects some people are coming to the game for. Players, when they actually work as a team just like in sports, can inspire each other. This doesn't mean a numerical bonus, but improved strategizing, acting, or any of the other activities actually done around the table by the players and not emulated as character abilities. 5. Ability modifiers are too high for the class-based Combat Ability modifier and its flat improvement rate. This goes for the Magic Ability modifier too. To paraphrase the video, "early D&D didn't get a STR mod to damage" and it was possible monsters could operate that way now? However, early MM modifiers were built into monsters when determining what a creature's Hit Dice should be. HD were then used to reference the To Hit Table - all any DM needed to memorize (or look at) to speed up monster combat. (It would be nice to have a limited number of useful tables like this to improve play again) But my point is, STR scores for monsters were in all of the early D&D versions. They simply weren't always included in the text. The work wasn't written long hand in the stat blocks. That doesn't mean there were no factors taken into account in their derivation. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
WotC Developer Google Hangout on Youtube
Top