Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Blue" data-source="post: 7811845" data-attributes="member: 20564">Trying to channel my inner 2011.  It would be sad actually, because a bunch of things I like from D&D I wouldn't have thought of at all, like Advantage or bounded accuracy, or wouldn't have thought to add to an edition of D&D, like inspiration or other narrative mechanics.Bringing back PF players into the fold would have been very important at that point.So if I was coming up with 5e, my pain points with the previous two editions:both- too many books. Is there any way to change that business model. (This may have led me to 5e's slow release schedule.)both - fight speed. more streamlining.3.x - using PC rules to make monsters was far to much prep time. Use 4e's exception based solution.3.x - quadradic wizards, linear fighters. Fairly massive rework there.3.x - needing to work out your character ahead of time to meet PrC requirements.4e - about mid paragon characters had too many unique powers that all needed to be evaluated based on minute details of a changing tactical plan (how many squares are they from each other now?) which led to option paralysis and slowdown. Standardize powers more for a class, and have boost currency that allow them to do more that can be spent on what you want.4e - not enough mechanical focus on other pillars of playI would have actually come up with upcasting, since it was around way back in the Wheel of Time RPG and I really liked that idea.I probably would have gone back to earlier editions where ability mods had charts instead of every two, but gone the other way - reduced returns as you got to the extremes so it still meant something but it was legitimate to become more well rounded via ability score boosting. Also if using charts I could break up the mods and make it that every one had something different. Maybe going from a 15 to 16 DEX increased the modifier to DEX used with skills.I probably would not have thought of the ASI or feat divide, which is another thing I'd be sad to have missed.Along those lines, more use for all six ability scores for all classes.Skills would be separate from ability scores. 5e has a variation for this, I would have it cooked in and it would have changed my list of skills a lot. Like a Fitness skill that could be used with STR for things like lifting and jumping, DEX for things like acrobatics, CON for endurance, INT for theoretical, WIS for eating healthy (okay, just made that up to have a wis option), CHR for showing off.I would have put into the playtest a doubling down on HPs including confidence, fatigue and the like and included things about losing them in social conflicts and the like. But with an eye towards might be a bridge too far for some players, so listed to the feedback.Have levels go down to like -2. People who want to play "level 0 characters" would be supported by the rules, but more importantly those levels would be spent on your racial and background options. So an elf PC might have 1 racial level and two background levels (to represent a long life), a different elf PC might have spend 2 racial levels and had more "elf-y" stuff but less skills-monkey boosts. Starting at -2 is to keep the D&D "1st level", though in another game I'd redefine the starting level instead. A big part of this is also to allow more powerful races, like half-giants.Strong rules for starting above 1st level.Oh, but 3.x ECL rules assumed that a monster HD = a level, whcih was just WRONG.Books written informally, with lots of sidebars about tweaking rules, variants, and why a rule was built as it was, to make it very hackable. Intention would be to hack it for various settings that came out.Kept 4e's Reflex/Fort/Will instead of going back to saves. The one taking the action rolls for both attacks and spells.Kept touch AC. Dex would always add to AC - but medium and heavy armors would reduce effective Dex. So your touch AC is down, your skills where you are adding DEX are lower, etc.Would not have psionics in the base.Would not have thought to unify casting to one chart that multiclassing would improve. Split casters was a problem, but sicne I would be gunshy of multiclassing and casters from min/maxing on earlier editions I probably would have a different solution that wouldn't be as elegant.Multiple attacks would be declared and rolled at the same time, with a penalty based on how many attacks you were making. So you rolled them all at once, which was a lot faster.More martial/mundane things that can be boosted as well, and lots of maneuvers to take advantage of opportunities.  That EVERYONE can do - some just have bonuses (not permission). Probably would have kept the concept of stances from 4e.</blockquote>

Verification