D&D Next Basic Ruleset is out!

[Raineh Daze]

Guys, this has gotten silly, mostly because Physics got involved before a sensible reading of the rules did.

"You create an instantaneous, harmless sensory effect, such as a shower of sparks, a puff of wind, faint musical notes, or an odd odor."

I'm pretty sure you're not allowed to make an instantaneous deadly sonic attack using a cantrip.

Someone completely misquoted the ability to me then. -_-

EDIT: Yeah, looking it up, literally none of the words they quoted are present, even in the other bullets.

... so, wait, you were criticising the system without looking at the very thing you were criticising?

[Childe]

The rest of my complaints are things I've looked at directly. That one was quoted to me, and I took issue with it.

[Prime32]

Cantrips have my attention. They're at-will, scale by character level rather than class level, and you can pick some up with a one-level dip or even a race. While building a martial type who relies on cantrips doesn't seem feasible within the Basic rules, it could become a powerful option depending on future materials (e.g. if there's a way to deliver sneak attack through spells then Shocking Grasp gives you auto-sneak against anyone with metal armour).

[MeanFightingGuy]

I just browsed through the first couple of chapters and it seemed to me that DnDnxt was little more than a slightly dumbed down ("dumbed down" even if accounting for fewer races and classes because of the beta-status of the handbook) of DnD3e (don't know about 4e, since I only have a cursory knowledge of that version).

So I'll ask the "professionals" here: Are there some real, fundamental changes to all of the preceding editions that warrant a new one?

[8wGremlin]

Mountain Dwarf wizards cast medium armour with no penalty.
Cantrips are at will, never run out.
Fire bolt (a cantrip) 1d10 scaling damage at 5th level (2d10), 11th level (3d10), and 17th level (4d10).

[linklord231]

There's no Arcane Spell Failure or equivalent?

[Nunkuruji]

Thoughts so far...

-I like the new concentration system. It seems to be used in a lot of place to tone down mega buffing and to limit the potential of things like Dominate. It seems like it may keep classes in their role, rather than allowing spellcasters to outright replace fighters at higher levels, etc. so long as those sorts of buff spells continue to be placed under duration: concentration. Can still pre-buff a proper spell to concentrate on when scouting goes successfully.
-Not sure why a Wizard would not take 2 levels of Fighter. Action surge and armor proficiency seem to be a lot greater benefit than Ability Score Improvement and Signature Spell. Actions still win, presumably. ASF% is replaced with just whether you are proficient or not.
-Similarly, the Rogue is probably better off with 2 levels of Fighter, and even perhaps a level of Wizard for at will cantrips to ranged sneak attack with.
-Better attack options, rather than need for pounce to full round
-No need to feat up the attack options, so the Fighters extra attacks can often be used more tactically (grapple, bull rush, etc).
-Some IP proofing built into Fighter & Rogue, ok.
-Dead levels / boring class features. Simply not as entertaining as ToB, at least not from reading.
-Heh, Divine Intervention is quite an interesting longshot, 10-19% chance perhaps, holding on to for BBEG, or maybe for True Res.
-I think I like the ditched caster level for spell improvements based on slot used.
-I think there's some interesting setups in the Fighter/Rogue/Wizard multiclass space, but not so much in the Cleric space.
-On one hand, I appreciate a lot of the simplification as it will speed up higher levels of play, which in my experience gets bogged down at a physical table. However, I'll also miss that higher level of complexity when applied to pbp or just mmx theory in general.
-No stat prereq for max level of spell cast, or did I miss it? Gishes don't necessarily have to care about their casting stat?
-Short & Long rest does a bit to alleviate the 5 minute adventuring day. In the basic rules there doesn't seem to be an auto safe sleep, Rope Trick, etc. Though once you gank an item from a location, Teleport is reliable.
-Still need to see the full core books and what feats look like.

[Agita]

There's no Arcane Spell Failure or equivalent?

Sort of. You can't cast period in armor you aren't proficient with, but if you're proficient you can cast no matter what armor it is.

Thoughts so far...

-I like the new concentration system. It seems to be used in a lot of place to tone down mega buffing and to limit the potential of things like Dominate. It seems like it may keep classes in their role, rather than allowing spellcasters to outright replace fighters at higher levels, etc. so long as those sorts of buff spells continue to be placed under duration: concentration. Can still pre-buff a proper spell to concentrate on when scouting goes successfully.

Agreed. It seems like a good idea on paper, so long as they stick to their guns.

-Not sure why a Wizard would not take 2 levels of Fighter. Action surge and armor proficiency seem to be a lot greater benefit than Ability Score Improvement and Signature Spell. Actions still win, presumably. ASF% is replaced with just whether you are proficient or not.
-Similarly, the Rogue is probably better off with 2 levels of Fighter, and even perhaps a level of Wizard for at will cantrips to ranged sneak attack with.

Maybe. We don't have the multiclassing rules yet, but stat prerequisites and not getting all of your additional class's proficiencies was mentioned. A wizard looking to dip fighter might be required to invest in Strength and might or might not get that heavy armor casting.
As for a rogue dipping wizard, being a high elf might be more efficient as you get a cantrip for free. Attack rolls with them use your casting stat rather than Dexterity, however, and perhaps more importantly they may not actually count for Sneak Attack as they're not weapons and SA actually specifies weapon attacks.

-No stat prereq for max level of spell cast, or did I miss it? Gishes don't necessarily have to care about their casting stat?

I don't think you missed it. Casting stat may still be important if you want to use spells with attack rolls or DCs, but a self-buff gish will indeed be able to work with a low casting stat (though still only one concentration buff at a time).

-Still need to see the full core books and what feats look like.

This is the operative caveat in general, yeah.

(A minor flavor note: I like that the book explicitly states level 1 adventurers are newbies, rather than pretending you're badasses right off the bat. It's not much, but it might help some fandom conceptions. Or not. Low level squishiness also makes more sense.)

My current impression is neutral to cautiously optimistic. The pessimist in me can't wait to be disappointed.

[Childe]

Guys, this has gotten silly, mostly because Physics got involved before a sensible reading of the rules did.

"You create an instantaneous, harmless sensory effect, such as a shower of sparks, a puff of wind, faint musical notes, or an odd odor."

I'm pretty sure you're not allowed to make an instantaneous deadly sonic attack using a cantrip.

Someone completely misquoted the ability to me then. -_-

EDIT: Yeah, looking it up, literally none of the words they quoted are present, even in the other bullets.

... so, wait, you were criticising the system without looking at the very thing you were criticising?

So update on this, it's actually the Thaumaturgy cantrip. It's the Cleric's version of Prestidigitation basically. So it wasn't a misquote but a misattribution. Too lazy to put the bullet back into my original post, but my disappointment with 5e is back to where it was.

[X-Codes]

...Ok, yeah, that checks out.  5e is taking a bit too much after 3.5e it seems.

[VennDygrem]

A quick note on multiclassing: as of the last playtest version (and a quick note in the Basic Rules document, pg. 56), multiclassing requires a certain stat prerequisite, usually either 15 in one stat or 13 in two stats (unless it's been changed; This was before a slight alteration in the expected point buy allotment, though racial stat mods were also adjusted in the change so it may be a moot point - you can still optionally roll your stats, etc).

So, a Wizard looking to multiclass fighter would likely need a 15+ in Strength, while you need to keep up your Intelligence to maintain a decent attack bonus and Save DCs on your spells. Is it possible to work with this? Yes. Is it likely to come up often? Not so much. There's no maximum stat required for reaching a certain spell level, but if you're multiclassing too much, you won't actually learn any high level spells so it is, again, a moot point.

Multiclassing also delays getting abilities such as the Fighter (and other combat-focused classes)'s Extra Attack feature. Mixing a casting class and a non-casting class will hinder the spells known and spells per day you gain access to. Mixing multiple casting classes may not hinder your number of spells per day much (depending on which classes you dip into), but will hinder the highest level spells you know (spells per day are determined by the mix of classes you've got, and are pulled from a joint 'multiclass table'). Usually if you want to be a fighter with magic, it would make more sense to use some of your bonus feats to dabble in spellcasting feats (though I've read there's a planned 'gish' Fighter path, so take that for what you will). If you want to be a Wizard casting in Heavy Armor, it may be better to take a feat, and so on. Feats represent a much larger benefit and much more training on the character's part, though it's in trade for not advancing your ability scores.

There will be some classes with powerful and interesting abilities that may make dipping attractive, though in general you're giving up advancement toward higher level features in favor of the lower level ones. The fun things usually take at least two or three levels in a class to get.

[IlPazzo]

There will be some classes with powerful and interesting abilities that may make dipping attractive, though in general you're giving up advancement toward higher level features in favor of the lower level ones. The fun things usually take at least two or three levels in a class to get.

Two levels of fighter to get an extra action per turn will be the common dip for almost any optimized character. Action economy is way stronger than a few extra spell slots, or a little higher spellcasting stat (well, they are still capped at 20 before buffs, so a multiclass will likely catch up on that).
I can't see how that is not going to be true, unless they move the fighter's extra action to higher levels.

[awaken_D_M_golem]

Yeah the more you squeeze Action economy,
the stronger the few loopholes become.

Hope they don't hyper-reflexively Nerf that stuff,
rather bring everybody else up to it.

[Amechra]

I am... optimistic. I might get the guy who thinks Pathfinder Barbarians are too much bookkeeping to play. 

The Fighter actually looks kinda neat, depending on what they do with the Martial Archetypes.

And Thieves' Cant is back in! Yes!

Michael Jackson's glove and batteries confirmed as items.

Combat looks streamlined; AoOs seem to be taking after 4e, which is a good thing. You are capped to one Bonus action per turn, so they nip a lot of action economy abuse in the bud right there.

And hitting 0 HP is actually... kinda interesting. A summary:

1. Upon hitting 0 HP, you are Unconscious.
2. At the beginning of your turn, make a Death save.
3. If you succeed on 3, you stabilize.
4. If you fail 3, you die.
5. Rolls of 1 are two failures, rolls of 20 are two successes.

It also looks like it's going to be really hard to one-shot players (To kill anything in one go, you need to deal damage equal to their Current HP plus their Max HP.) That might help with low-level survival.

Most of what I've seen for "core" rules has been simple yet robust.

[Amechra]

This needs a new post.

Fighters are ungodly when under the effects of Haste. Haste gives you an extra action that can be used in a limited manner; Fighters get extra attacks per Attack Action.

You can get 5 attacks per round at 5th level, which scales up to 9 attacks by 20th level.

For comparison... most people cap out at 3. If they are two-weapon fighters. And are Hasted.

[X-Codes]

This needs a new post.

Fighters are ungodly when under the effects of Haste. Haste gives you an extra action that can be used in a limited manner; Fighters get extra attacks per Attack Action.

You can get 5 attacks per round at 5th level, which scales up to 9 attacks by 20th level.

For comparison... most people cap out at 3. If they are two-weapon fighters. And are Hasted.

That's a super old-school thing, and almost certainly a good idea.

[Amechra]

I'm reminded of starting off in 1e.

[Arz]

Other than more attacks, I don't really see how fighters are keeping up damage-wise with rogues. Rogues are looking very solid since SA is easier to achieve and doubles on crits, plus they can do stuff outside of combat and have free action options.

[Prime32]

This needs a new post.

Fighters are ungodly when under the effects of Haste. Haste gives you an extra action that can be used in a limited manner; Fighters get extra attacks per Attack Action.

You can get 5 attacks per round at 5th level, which scales up to 9 attacks by 20th level.

For comparison... most people cap out at 3. If they are two-weapon fighters. And are Hasted.

No, take another look:

[...] it gains an additional action on each of its turns. That action can only be used to take the Attack (one weapon attack only), Dash, Disengage, Hide or Use an Object action.

Relatedly there's basically no reason for rogues to go TWF, since it clashes with Cunning Action and doesn't grant extra sneak attacks. Also I don't see anything about two-handed weapons adding 1.5x your ability modifier to damage, so they'll almost always be using a Finesse einhander for more SAD. There's no drawback to a sword-and-board rogue, but we'll have to wait for the feats and multiclassing rules to see how easy it is for them to pick up shield proficiency.

[Raineh Daze]

Does that translate to 'attack with one weapon only' or 'one attack only'? Ambiguous wording,  ho!