D&D 5E Your Favorite 5E Next Amalgam Rules

[hbarsquared]

Now that the Playtests are *over* I'm looking to start a 5E campaign! Several ideas have been running through my head, everything from the Caves of Chaos packet, to a revised Temple of Elemental Evil, to the Sunless Citadel.

What I'm curious about, though, is if you were to pick and choose your favorite rules, or rules applications, from among all the playtests, what would they be? How would they interact? Would combining the different rules effect the outcome?

For example, I really liked the Generalist Wizard option from a few packets ago, and would like to include something similar as an option. Or possibly, also, incorporate the "warlord-y" path options of the fighter as a full Fighter Style option.

So, what would you combine?

 

[Li Shenron]

I've been thinking about this for a while. It could be kind of a plan B if 5e changes a lot before release, and becomes something I don't like anymore.

Truth is, I liked many things across packets, some of which remained and some others are gone, but putting them together is not going to work, they are just not compatible.

For instance, I liked the first iteration of Fighter Styles. I liked smaller feats. I liked Rogue tricks based on the skill dice. I liked the Wizard when it was fully vancian. I liked subclasses when they were more important (tho their reduction is a problem only for a few classes). Of all these examples, only the fully vancian Wizard could be put back into the game on top of the current packet with minimal adjustment, the others are too much work.

But that said, my favourite features are actually still there! The current version of backgrounds is my favourite. I am intrigued by the proficiency rules. Magic items have never been better. Exploration rules are a fantastic addition. Classes are great, and my nitpicks are rather about some specific abilities, but not a big deal.

My "perfect amalgam" would actually be just taking the current packet and make some changes that have never actually been there: make a totally different human race, change the ST of half of the spells so that they are more balanced across the 6 scores, remove all the +s from magic weapons, and make all subclasses start at 3rd level. Then it would be basically perfect for me!

 

[Viking Bastard]

I think Advantage/Disadvantage is here to stay for my D&D game for the unforeseeable future, regardless of whether I'll play 5e or not.

 

[delericho]

I think Advantage/Disadvantage is here to stay for my D&D game for the unforeseeable future, regardless of whether I'll play 5e or not.

Likewise.

 

[Kinak]

Agreed on advantage/disadvantage, although it works much better in games without multiple attacks. I'm running high-level Pathfinder right now and advantage on attack rolls would be a mess.

I'd try to get the sorcerer and warlock back in their, first priority, but the game's drifted quite a ways since then, so it may require some conversion.

Cheers!
Kinak

 

[Viking Bastard]

Agreed on advantage/disadvantage, although it works much better in games without multiple attacks. I'm running high-level Pathfinder right now and advantage on attack rolls would be a mess.

Can you elaborate as to why you think so?

 

[Blackbrrd]

Can you elaborate as to why you think so?

I can't answer for Pathfinder, but for 4e. In 4e you roll an attack roll for each enemy that gets in the area of say a fireball spell. If that's ten enemies I have to roll 20 dice instead of 10. A bit of a hazzle.

 

[Kinak]

Can you elaborate as to why you think so?

Sure thing.

It's just because it's adding more to keep track of in combat. If you have, say, three attacks, you already need to keep track of which is which (because descending BAB values). But with advantage, you need to roll two for each attack and keep track of those properly as well. You're moving from three dice in order to six dice in pairs.

You can do some clever things on the player side like color-coding your attacks (first attack is two red d20s and red damage dice, second attack is... etc.). But it ends up making combat calculations last even longer.

For reference, my group right now just got to 14th level. They have a paladin who vital strikes most of the time (does math on paper, considering switching to an app that does the math), a rogue who often makes two attacks (uses a full-featured dice roller that totals damage), and an archer who is usually making four or more attacks (does math on paper). The cleric's made less than ten attacks the entire campaign, so he's fine.

By having multiple players handling their actions at the same time, I can get through combats quite quickly (15 minutes - 1 hour). But any additional complexity I add to the math and number-tracking will go straight into that time.

I still use advantage/disadvantage for skill checks and saves. I wish I could use it for stuff like cover, because I loathe miss chance.

Cheers!
Kinak

 

[Plaguescarred]

I'd incorporate Martial Maneuvers and Skills not tied to ability scores to the last packet.

 

[Viking Bastard]

Sure thing.

It's just because it's adding more to keep track of in combat. If you have, say, three attacks, you already need to keep track of which is which (because descending BAB values). But with advantage, you need to roll two for each attack and keep track of those properly as well. You're moving from three dice in order to six dice in pairs.

Ah, I see.

I was assuming some math-something-something-probabilities-math, but that's pretty straightforward.