log in or register to remove this ad

 

D&D 6E YOU are in charge of the next PHB! What do you change?

Steampunkette

Shaper of Worlds
Oh my... let's see. How would I change things for 6e?

Far Reaching Systems Changes:
1) No longer a strict d20 System. d20s are a part of the game, but not the exclusive resolution of all systems.
2) Proficiency Bonuses do not grow as a set number, but are instead a dice you add to your d20 roll. +2 becomes 1d4. +6 becomes +1d12 And being proficient means you can never roll a nat 1, only a "nat 2" or higher.
2a) Proficiency Bonuses can be reduced by different circumstances, but can never be lowered into a negative proficiency.​
2b) If your Proficiency bonus would be increased above 1d12, roll twice and take the better of the two rolls.​
2c) Halfling Luck and other functions triggered by a Nat 1 on a d20 roll still come into play, allowing you to reroll the d20.​
3) It is possible to Critically Fail on Saves and Skill Checks. Doing so doesn't automatically have a big secondary effect, but if you roll a 1 on a jump check and your Strength Mod beats the DC but you don't have proficiency you have still failed.
4) Advantage and Disadvantage still exist, and allow you to roll 2d20 in appropriate situations and take the higher or lower of the two rolls, but do not affect Proficiency Dice.
5) Rest durations are VARIABLE rather than fixed. A short rest can be 1 minute to catch your breath in a tense situation, or 4 hours in camp. Long Rests can be a few hours between battles or a week of recovery. This variability is determined by the current situation and adjudicated by the DM.
5a) Introduce the Full Rest, which restores all Hit Dice, removes all Exhaustion, and takes significantly longer than the Long Rest.​
5b) The DM can optionally choose a set time interval for each type of rest.​
6) Magic is one form of Supernatural Power, but not the only form. It is also divided by different spellcasting traditions and sources for narrative purposes with the explicit understanding that a given setting's narrative choices override the default.
7) Countdown Dice resolve tense noncombat situations. Someone picking a lock will eventually succeed. It's just a matter of time, tools, and skill. But perhaps not before the party is found by the patrolling guards, for example.
7a) The DM selects a number of d6s based on how long it should take to complete the task.​
7b) The Players roll the dice each round and remove dice that roll a 6 from the pool.​
7c) Players with Proficiency may remove dice with a 5 or a 6 showing.​
7d) Players with Expertise may remove dice with a 4, 5, or 6 showing.​
7e) The DM rolls a similar pool based on the opposing party or danger.​
7f) Countdowns can also be unilateral, with the DM rolling to see how long before an enemy joins a fight, or a player trying to destroy an artifact while their allies hold off cultists trying to stop them.​

Major Character Creation Changes:
1) Race is broken down into Species and Culture.
1a) Cultures can be based on a given race, like a set of different Elven Cultures, but most cultures are more general like Seafaring or Cosmopolitan, or a combination of different cultures like Seafaring Raiders and Seafaring Explorers.​
1b) Species involves things like whether or not you have Darkvision, how you Sleep, the amount of Air, Food, and Water you need, how fast you move as a baseline.​
1c) Culture determines skills, feats, spellcasting traits separate from classes, and other culturally reinforced identity.​
1d) Guidelines will be provided to create new cultures and subcultures to increase narrative variety.​
2) Attributes can be Point Buy, Standard Array, or a Dice Rolls. AL will not accept dice rolls, obviously.
3) Classes will be revamped fairly drastically.
3a) All spellcasters will use Cantrips that scale in a manner similar to a fighter's total number of attacks.​
3b) Spellcasters will get a much smaller and scaling number of spell slots to use during the day, rather than a lot of level specific slots ranging from 1-9.​
3c) Spellcasters will largely function on a long-rest basis, but regain a small amount of their power on a short rest, except the Warlock which is the reverse.​
3d) Martial Characters will get their own chapter of Martial Maneuvers that have a short-rest use limit and a very small number of long-rest options.​
3e) Psionics will become a part of the core game. Psionicists will largely function like spellcasters, only that their powers are almost all Cantrips which use a short-rest recovery spell point mechanic to improve different aspects of those cantrips to change their function.​
3f) Druids will no longer have Wild Shape by default. Instead they'll have "Primal Power" which is similar to Channel Divinity, of which Wild Shape will be an option that recovers on a Short Rest rather than a Long Rest basis.​
3g) Clerics will lose their Armor Proficiencies, by default, and gain an Unarmored Defense basis, with the option of gaining armor through specific Subclasses​
3h) Clerics gain bonuses when casting from their chosen domain.​
3i) Bards will gain more song/art/performance based class features that can be Maintained as a bonus action. Maintaining a performance can require giving up a portion of your movement doing fancy dances, making a speech which cannot be disguised, or singing and playing instruments audible to normal ranges.​
3j) Ritual Casting is something every spellcaster type character gets, and the Ritual Spell Lists will be drastically increased to include a lot of out-of-combat magic. Casting times will range from Countdown(x) where X is the number of d6s used, to 8 hours for particularly high level or far-reaching rituals. Resurrection is something you set the better part of a day aside to complete.​


Major Skill Changes:
1) LSA rolls. Luck (1d20) Skill (Proficiency Dice) Attribute (Ability Score Modifier)
2) Critical Failure of a skill check is possible if you do not have Proficiency on a roll of a Natural 1. Other than failure there is no associated serious penalty.
3) Skills have Default Attributes
3a) A player may request, and a DM adjudicate, the use of an unconventional skill/attribute combination.​
3b) The DM may outright request an unconventional skill/attribute combination if it fits the situation.​
4) Expertise does not increase Proficiency Size, but allows you to roll your proficiency dice twice on relevant skill checks and take the higher of the two rolls.
5) Skill Based Countdowns are a default for activities which are performed until completion, such as searching for a secret door or picking a lock. These Countdowns involve a no-fail scenario where the only cost is time.
6) Passive Skills are 10+1/2 Proficiency Dice Value+Attribute.


Major Combat Changes:
1) LSA rolls. Luck (1d20) Skill (Proficiency Dice) Attribute (Ability Score Modifier)
2) Armor uses both Absolute Defense and Damage Reduction values.
2a) Absolute Defense is the value applied to your AC to determine whether or not an attack hits or misses.​
2b) Damage Reduction is a set amount, modified by magical bonus, which reduces incoming damage by that value.​
2c) Absolute Defense is not increased by an armor's magical bonus, damage reduction is.​
3) Initiative is a Skill Check based on the situation.
3a) Default to Perception.​
3b) Optional Rule for using Dexterity as default​
4) Critical Hits (Nat 20 on the d20 regardless of proficiency roll) double all damage and apply Wounds.
4a) Wounds reduce your Maximum HP by the amount rolled.​
4b) If your Wound total is equal to your Maximum HP you are Doomed to Die.​
5) Defenses can negate a critical hit.
5a) A shield can be sacrificed outright to negate a critical hit and the wound it would cause, resulting in a normal hit.​
5b) Your armor's value, both in Absolute Defense and Damage Reduction, may be halved until repaired to negate a Critical Hit. You can only damage armor this way once until it has been repaired.​
5c) A critical hit which deals no damage due to Damage Reduction does not apply any Wound.​
6) Flanking, positional combat benefits, and basic combat maneuvers are added.
6a) When flanking an opponent (Characters on opposite facings of the target's square) treat your proficiency die as 1 size larger for attacks or skill checks against the target.​
6b) Being positioned above your target increases your proficiency dice to attack rolls by 1 size. Being below reduces it by 1 size.​
6c) Standing back to back moves two willing allied creatures within 1 size category of each other into the same space, these creatures cannot be flanked, but also move of their lowest combined speed if they choose to remain back to back.​
6d) Disarming a target can be performed with melee attacks, whether natural, weapon, or spell attacks. And with a class feature or feat, ranged attacks can also be used to disarm a target. Disarming only works on targets using manufactured weapons, not natural weapons or magical effects shaped like weapons.​
7) Cover alters your Proficiency Dice by 1 negative step against a target behind partial cover, 2 steps behind half-cover, and 3 steps behind 3/4 cover. It no longer provides an Armor Class Bonus.


Major Magic Changes:
1) There are 4 different types of Magic.
1a) Arcane: Used by Wizards, Sorcerers, and Artificers. Has it's own spell list with spells labeled by School. No Healing. Baseline otherwise.
1b) Divine: Used by Clerics and Paladins. Has it's own spell list with spells labeled by Domains. More Buffs without concentration required.
1c) Occult: Used by Bards and Warlocks. Has it's own spell list. More Target Control/Manipulation without concentration required. Minimal healing.
1d) Primal: Used by Druids and Rangers. Has it's own spell list. More Battlefield Control without concentration required.
4) Subclasses are also tied to a specific magic type, such as Arcane Tricksters and Eldritch Knights being Arcane, while a Primal Rager might be a Barbarian with Primal Spellcasting.
3) Some spells may be class-specific, even if they're from the same source another class uses.
4) Healing uses the target's Hit Dice Size, rather than a value set by the spell.
5) Sensible, but somewhat varied, component rules.
5a) Arcane uses V/S/M. Verbal can be heard within earshot at normal volume. Focus can replace cheap material and be used for somatic gestures. Focus is a Wand, Staff, Orb, or Deck of Cards.​
5b) Divine uses Prayer and Focus. The prayer is quiet, audible only within 5ft, but the Focus must be presented visibly. Focus is a Holy Symbol.​
5c) Occult uses Chanting or Music and Sacrifices. Chanting and Music cannot be hidden and are audible within earshot at normal volume. Sacrifices are material components made into representations of people or things, but may also include Hit Points, Hit Dice, or even small animal sacrifices depending on the spell.​
5d) Primal uses Calls, Focuses, and Sacrifices. Calls are animal noises, nature sounds, or guttural cries. Focuses are typically staves, mistletoe, shillelaghs, or carved animal and elemental symbols on stone, wood, or bone.​


Major Environmental Changes:
1) Exploration Gameification through something like the A5e Journey System.
2) Social Gameification through something like the A5e Journey System.
3) Downtime Options as a core function.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

M_Natas

Explorer
By reading this thread, you are agreeing to an unbreakable NDA. If you admit to knowing this thread exists, I will know and come to your house and shave your eyebrows off.

So, WotC finally comes to their senses and asks you to be in charge of the new PHB, to go on sale in [REDACTED]. The new PHB should be compatible with the other non-PHB 5E books, but otherwise, you're free to go nuts.

What do you change? Do you eliminate darkvision for most races? Do you revamp the ranger and monk? Do you replace all the halfling art?

What do you do?
I would start a new edition of the PHB with a section on actually how to play the game.
Character Creation, Gear and Stuff would all come later, but people need to know how to play. The PHB at the moment is only good, if somebody is teaching you how to play, but it is not good for anybody who is a beginner and wants to learn the game by reading the book which is supposed to be a manual.
 


grimslade

Doddering Old Git
I would run an extended playtest with transparent iterations and clear goals for changes. D&DNext was a good way to really show off what D&D could be. I am still mining stuff that was dropped off development.
A couple of wish list items:
  • Race becomes lineage Stat bonus moved to class
  • Multiclass rules limited a bit; no one level dips
  • Complete redesign of the sorcerer No more junior wizard Innate caster using primal elements No spell slots
 


Oofta

Title? I don't need no stinkin' title.
Now taking this as a very biased an unscientific observation, I think it's fair to say the vast majority of people here don't appear to like 5e in it's current format. The changes are old chestnut (race/lineage, class list and design, alignment) and seem to fall into the "reverse this change to how it was done prior" or the "they didn't go far enough with the changes" boats. I'm not sure if that says more about the game or the community here at ENworld...
Nothing is ever going to be perfect, but 5E is still growing by double digits. So I disagree that "the vast majority" of people don't like 5E. Take a look at some of the responses and there are a few minor commonalities that I see pop up like how we handle race/culture and backgrounds. But other than that? If you distilled the ideas down into workable rules and hashed out some minor differences I think you'd still see a half dozen different incompatible games.

The ideas aren't bad or wrong in any way, but different people have different ideas on what "better" looks like. It likely would be better, for them. If I tried to do a new edition? It would probably work out as well as the Homermobile.
homer GIF
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Okay I’ll do a whole post later but the quick and dirty is; first I’d try to hire Tanya DePass, Dave B Walters, Gabe Hicks, Daniel Kwan, Brennan Lee Mulligan, and Molly Ostertag, to help me write it.

Then I’d bring back low-light vision and sub it in for dark vision in like 90% of cases.

Next, Wild Shape, Beast Companion, Find Familiar, would all get scaling semi-generic statblock options.

Druid gets more Wild Shapes, and can use them for different things in the base class. Like casting summon Beast without spending a spell slot. Also it’s less limited, especially for Moon Druids. And I’d add a subclass with an animal companion.

I’d change the halfling art to be less bobbleheaded, gnomes to have normal head shapes, and increase the diversity of art.

Races don’t get ability score increases anymore. Most races are fine, but a few get additional features to round them out in the absence of ASIs. Mountain Dwarf gets powerful build.

Add Goliath, Orc (Eberron style), and maybe Tabaxi.

Gnomes all get animal speech, and I’d try to make rock gnomes more satisfying, because I do see room for gnomes that aren’t tinkers so I don’t want to just combine them into one thing and say “no gnomes subraces”.

Some other changes I'd make:

Fighters would gain an optional variant feature that replaces extra extra attacks with legendary actions. PRobably call them Heroic Action. The list of things you could do with them would be similar to the extra action from Haste, and you can do them after any turn in initiative.

I'd add a Fighting style that simply allows the fighter to make their weapon damage magical and of an elemental type, and deal proficiency damage once per turn to a creature within 10ft of them or a target they hit when they hit with an attack. This allows a gish or arcane archer from level 1, and works with the attack action, which all fighting styles should obviously do.

Replace Indomitable with a Legendary Resistance.

Monk would gain rename Ki to Focus, and the class would be renamed Mystic.

1/2 your total Focus can be regained by spending 1 minute in meditation, during which time you must maintain concentration. You can do this prof mod per day.

Add Mightly Blow to Focus Abilities. Bonus action when you hit, cost 1 Focus, you deal extra damage equal to 3 of your Martial Arts Die. Can spend additional FOcus, gaining 1 die for each additional focus spent.

Make Deflect Arrows into Deflect Attacks. In melee you can make an unarmed attack by spending 1 Focus. You can also choose to spend 1 Focus to gain THP equal to the damage you negated, after the attack is resolved. You can't do both.

Add a feat of strength type ability to the Focus Abilities.

4 Elements Monk gets an overhaul, gaining elemental stances that give access to at-will and limited abilities. Focus abilities cost 1 Focus per spell level, rather than 1+1/spell level. More of these abilities are bonus actions or part of an attack action, so less competition with base class features.

Artificer becomes a PHB class. I add in Infusions that grant higher level spellcasting than 5th. Each such infusion is an item that lets you cast that specific spell 1/day. You also gain 1 more Infusion than is currently the case, at level 5.

Weapons and armor get a review, finesse is more common, including bows (allowing you to use strength), and a light glaive type weapon. Introduce heavy shields which have a strength requirement and give partial cover against AoEs on top of +2 AC.

Captain class introduced. Uses Morale as a limited resource, has a "presence" aura that passively impacts initiative and has active benefits as you level. Not all subclasses are "leader" oriented, but instead act as a sort of "paragon" or "exemplar". Ability to share proficiencies, help other PCs and NPC allies learn stuff faster, each subclass has a type of organization that they have greater and easier access to than others do.

Perhaps at high levels both the Captain, Paladin, and the Fighter gain the ability to gain hirelings to perform mundane tasks for them, and do jobs like completing downtime activities for the group while the group adventures. This might instead be a whole system of it's own.

Cleric gets overhauled so that the base class is vastly more a priest, and the vampire hunter war-priest thing lives in subclass options.

Paladin gets less healing, gains some inspiration abilities, and all paladins gain the ability to "turn" regular folks and make them reconsider their life choices.

Ranger gains extra spells prepared from their choice of terrain, and gain Deft Explorer as a basic class feature. Favored Enemy is left mostly alone except that you also gain the ability to make a Bane, which is essentialy a poison that does stuff like shutting down common monster abilities, making all attacks against the creature count as magical until it saves, makes flight clumsy and slow, makes spellcasting harder, etc. You'd get a basic one for free, and then at least one related to your favored enemy choice.
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
I thought the exact same thing back with 3e and then wotc gave us the train wreck that was 4e. Hopefully they have learned their lesson.
I was extremely greateful that they ditched the design ethos of 3e, because IMO it is hands down the worst edition of DnD, and one of the worst RPGs I've ever been coerced into playing by my friends.

But I don't think they're going to do a 180 on their desire to make DnD a game that anyone can sit down and know how to play, because it's been the same game for decades. They know that is how they keep PHB sales high.

They're not going to split the fanbase again for no reason.
 

That depends how it was done - whether it was mediocre or awesome. To move to a half-caster bards would absolutely need to be on the magical level of artificers with their music. I think with a good enough designer this could be done but I don't think I could personally do it. If they aren't that evocative and strong it wouldn't work.
There was a half-caster bard in the playtest, and it was godawful. No to half-caster bards.
Yeah as Gladius says, I've never seen a half-caster Bard not in official material, not in unofficial material, that wasn't complete and utter trash of the most crummy kind of a mechanical level, and usually not at all fun to play either (I say this as someone who has played multiple Bards in every edition from 2E to 5E, as well as various other D&D-related games).

Could it be done? Yeah, probably, with a sufficiently genius designer, who can manage to work out how to make up for losing god knows how many incredibly powerful spells. Is it remotely likely to happen? Noooooo. I've never seen anyone manage it.

And what's interesting to me is, the people keen on the idea of a half-caster Bard? Almost universally don't like or long-term play Bards. They're just offended by the concept of full-caster Bards, aesthetically. They liked it when the Bard has to be this passive loser-guy in 3.XE and Pathfinder, singing for the benefit of everyone else, not upsetting the Wizard by casting better spells than him. To hell with that! I started in 2E. The 2E Bard might technically seem like a half-caster, but in practical terms, no, because of XP. I was literally casting 5th-level spells before the Elven Fighter/Mage in my party was, back in 2E, and not far behind the actual full-on Mage.

I mean to be fair, only one Bard sucked, and that was the 3.XE Bard. 2E you levelled like a rocket and had access to a really good selection of stuff re: fighting, sneaking, and spelling, with music and lore to complete the package. 3.XE, you were just terrible. This awful character who had been shoved into this support-hole, but who wasn't a full caster like the "support" Cleric (who also had a much higher AC, better HP, better spell access, same BAB, and was just missing some janky music abilities, which his spells could outperform anyway, for the most part). At least you had spells and thanks to LFQW you weren't the worst character in the party. 4E Bard was extremely solid, fun, and well-themed. 5E Bard is a powerhouse like all the 5E full casters and is great fun to play.
 

overgeeked

B/X Known World
Make player-facing rolls the default. This greatly reduces the amount of bored check-out time players have to deal with between their turns. So players would roll an "AC save" along with their other saves, and the players would roll attacks against the monsters' stats instead of monsters rolling saves.

Split ancestry and culture. Make most cultures like backgrounds where they give you a couple of skill profs and tools along with a small feature. Make most cultures universal but include some unique ones.

Eliminate the short rest as a power-recharge mechanic and readjust short-rest dependent classes accordingly.

Give martials a much needed boost.

Incorporate the optional class features from Tasha's.

Make the bard a half caster, round up, like the artificer.

Rework confusing, broken, and game breaking spells. Spells like sleep, forcecage, and wish come to mind.

Out-of-bounds fixes. Bring back 4E monster design, encounter design, and the bloodied condition. Also a return to the points-of-light default setting and the World Axis cosmology.

Remove the assumptions of 6-7 combats per day and a four-character party from the design. To me, those fixes alone would solve the majority of 5E's mechanical problems. Along with fixing LFQW, of course.

With those mostly minor fixes I think 5E would likely be the hands down best edition of D&D.
 
Last edited:


Steampunkette

Shaper of Worlds
Yeah as Gladius says, I've never seen a half-caster Bard not in official material, not in unofficial material, that wasn't complete and utter trash of the most crummy kind of a mechanical level, and usually not at all fun to play either (I say this as someone who has played multiple Bards in every edition from 2E to 5E, as well as various other D&D-related games).

Could it be done? Yeah, probably, with a sufficiently genius designer, who can manage to work out how to make up for losing god knows how many incredibly powerful spells. Is it remotely likely to happen? Noooooo. I've never seen anyone manage it.

And what's interesting to me is, the people keen on the idea of a half-caster Bard? Almost universally don't like or long-term play Bards. They're just offended by the concept of full-caster Bards, aesthetically. They liked it when the Bard has to be this passive loser-guy in 3.XE and Pathfinder, singing for the benefit of everyone else, not upsetting the Wizard by casting better spells than him. To hell with that! I started in 2E. The 2E Bard might technically seem like a half-caster, but in practical terms, no, because of XP. I was literally casting 5th-level spells before the Elven Fighter/Mage in my party was, back in 2E, and not far behind the actual full-on Mage.

I mean to be fair, only one Bard sucked, and that was the 3.XE Bard. 2E you levelled like a rocket and had access to a really good selection of stuff re: fighting, sneaking, and spelling, with music and lore to complete the package. 3.XE, you were just terrible. This awful character who had been shoved into this support-hole, but who wasn't a full caster like the "support" Cleric (who also had a much higher AC, better HP, better spell access, same BAB, and was just missing some janky music abilities, which his spells could outperform anyway, for the most part). At least you had spells and thanks to LFQW you weren't the worst character in the party. 4E Bard was extremely solid, fun, and well-themed. 5E Bard is a powerhouse like all the 5E full casters and is great fun to play.
Oo... that is another thought. Making different types of magic -mean- different things.

So... Half-Caster Bard would suck. But what if Bard and Warlock style Occult spells capped out at "5th Level" but 5th level was closer to 8th/9th level for a Wizard? Or a Cleric doing the same thing with 7th level spells.

Different Scales for different classes, so some "Lag" at certain levels and "Jump" at others, so there's more room for other class features and defining traits. So a Wizard gets a constant granular increase in spell power, while the Bard's spell power increases in fits and spurts but there's a greater quantity of bard class abilities between the levels they'd otherwise get spell slots if they had 9 levels of spells.

Could be an interesting direction to take spellcasters to make them more varied than they currently are.

Comparative using Wizard spell levels/power as baseline:
Wizard: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Cleric: 1 2 4 5 6 7 9
Bard: 1 3 5 7 9

... not sure this makes sense.
 


Scribe

Hero
If it was me?

Alignment Matters.
Lineage Matters (ASI Increase unique to Lineage)
Sub Classes.
Sub Lineage.
Increase in Background and Culture having a mechanical impact.
Reinforce 'D&D-isms'

Establish the current fact that Alignment on a Lineage is a quick recommendation not the unchanging law.

Tasha's is an option.

Cleave to the original premise that 5e is inward looking, and D&D for all who have, and could later, play it.

Oh, and long live The Great Wheel. :D
 

Sacrosanct

Legend
Publisher
some third party company is out there waiting for the day wotc makes a radically new edition of the game that doesn’t resemble d&d.
We can call the game that company releases, "Pathdetector".

for me? The biggest change I'd do is include a passage that says, "Every time someone starts yet another new discussion about what needs to be changed in the edition following this one, we will ensure that that suggestion never makes it in." ;)
 

Aldarc

Legend
I would run an extended playtest with transparent iterations and clear goals for changes. D&DNext was a good way to really show off what D&D could be. I am still mining stuff that was dropped off development.
A couple of wish list items:
  • Race becomes lineage Stat bonus moved to class
  • Multiclass rules limited a bit; no one level dips
  • Complete redesign of the sorcerer No more junior wizard Innate caster using primal elements No spell slots
Moving stat bonuses to Background and Lineage to reflect your training is a pretty solid choice.

Seal Of Approval Thumbs Up GIF
 

There's a lot of quibbles that I have regarding class features, but few of them are fatal. Worst case scenario, just give the character an awesome magic item.

I think stat bonuses should move out of race/lineage/ancestry into class and background. I'd like each race to have a "power" similar to 4E's approach to race. That's really fun stuff.

Also agree that "culture" could help differentiate races more.

And I like the idea of making backgrounds beefier with (for example) weapon proficiencies.

On the DM side, I'd like more support for a lot of subsystems like travel, social encounters, high level wealth sinks, etc. Level Up is doing the Lord's work in this area.

Monsters are a little dull. Higher level monsters don't hit hard enough. Spell lists on monsters typically provide a lot of suboptimal choices that make it hard to discern the combat loop for said monster. I would have liked to see minions/mobs to provide a bit more variety in the types of battles.

All of that said, 5E is really good, and I'm not sure it gets enough credit for how elegant the core of the system is.
 

We can call the game that company releases, "Pathdetector".

for me? The biggest change I'd do is include a passage that says, "Every time someone starts yet another new discussion about what needs to be changed in the edition following this one, we will ensure that that suggestion never makes it in." ;)
The next edition would be one page consisting of nothing but profanity by following that rule.
There's a lot of quibbles that I have regarding class features, but few of them are fatal. Worst case scenario, just give the character an awesome magic item.

I think stat bonuses should move out of race/lineage/ancestry into class and background. I'd like each race to have a "power" similar to 4E's approach to race. That's really fun stuff.

Also agree that "culture" could help differentiate races more.

And I like the idea of making backgrounds beefier with (for example) weapon proficiencies.

On the DM side, I'd like more support for a lot of subsystems like travel, social encounters, high level wealth sinks, etc. Level Up is doing the Lord's work in this area.

Monsters are a little dull. Higher level monsters don't hit hard enough. Spell lists on monsters typically provide a lot of suboptimal choices that make it hard to discern the combat loop for said monster. I would have liked to see minions/mobs to provide a bit more variety in the types of battles.

All of that said, 5E is really good, and I'm not sure it gets enough credit for how elegant the core of the system is.
6e would be most likely really similar in a lot of areas to 5e
 

Remathilis

Legend
Nothing is ever going to be perfect, but 5E is still growing by double digits. So I disagree that "the vast majority" of people don't like 5E. Take a look at some of the responses and there are a few minor commonalities that I see pop up like how we handle race/culture and backgrounds. But other than that? If you distilled the ideas down into workable rules and hashed out some minor differences I think you'd still see a half dozen different incompatible games.

The ideas aren't bad or wrong in any way, but different people have different ideas on what "better" looks like. It likely would be better, for them. If I tried to do a new edition? It would probably work out as well as the Homermobile.
homer GIF
True, but nature of the changes are less "I would fix the ranger's favored enemy" and more "I would change the ranger a spell-less wildness warrior" or "we don't even need a ranger class at all" level of changes, which to me suggested that people want a 6e that is again more different than similar to 5e.

Maybe it's the nature of the speculation thread, but its a good thing the next edition isn't being designed by committee.
 


An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top