Author Topic: D&D 5e: For real this time?  (Read 352014 times)

Offline Wilb

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 285
  • Elder Lurker
    • View Profile
Re: D&D 5e: For real this time?
« Reply #540 on: December 06, 2012, 07:04:07 PM »
I hope they don`t try to use this packet to AEDUfy the Vance, limiting his prepared spells to 2 per level while expanding on the spells per day table...

The best they could do is give a small but considerable amount, like 1+1/5 levels plus INT mod per spell level. A good amount but not exactly spontaneous casting of the whole spellbook.

Bring em strange casters, the pally and the ranger! Alignment limitations included, but optional as stated (to keep the settings fluff as intact as possible).
« Last Edit: December 06, 2012, 07:08:28 PM by Wilb »
Lovely Zoma...

Offline Necrosnoop110

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ***
  • Posts: 989
  • I'm new!
    • View Profile
Re: D&D 5e: For real this time?
« Reply #541 on: December 07, 2012, 06:34:01 PM »
Quote
The fighter is in good shape. We're likely going to give the fighter a special parry mechanic that doesn't use expertise dice but works much the same way. If anything, the fighter might be a little too good. The feedback pegs the fighter as the most powerful class.
Source: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20121203

Thoughts?


Peace,
Necro

PS - Sorry if someone addressed this already, I haven't be following the thread 100%
« Last Edit: December 08, 2012, 09:43:28 AM by Necrosnoop110 »

Offline veekie

  • Spinner of Fortunes
  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5423
  • Chaos Dice
    • View Profile
Re: D&D 5e: For real this time?
« Reply #542 on: December 09, 2012, 11:57:20 PM »
More importantly
Quote

The biggest piece of feedback we received was that the rogue came across as a lame fighter. This was a key test to see how much tolerance people have for varied combat strength across classes. There's some give, but it looks like people want to avoid dramatic differences.

Frankly, that's not surprising, but now is the best time for us to challenge our assumptions before we lock things down.
Calling it a test eh. Either the game is MUCH further from completion than I thought, or they're just covering their ass.
Everything is edible. Just that there are things only edible once per lifetime.
It's a god-eat-god world.

Procrastination is the thief of time; Year after year it steals, till all are fled,
And to the mercies of a moment leaves; The vast concerns of an eternal scene.

Offline Libertad

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3618
    • View Profile
    • My Fantasy and Gaming Blog
Re: D&D 5e: For real this time?
« Reply #543 on: December 10, 2012, 01:34:57 AM »
Stuff like this killed most of the enthusiasm I had for D&D Next, and I've mellowed out on Pathfinder books (most of the stuff I can get for free online for my games).  Probably explains why my primary interests are now out of print 3rd Edition Campaign Settings and old school Retro Clones.

Offline Unbeliever

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2288
  • gentleman gamer
    • View Profile
Re: D&D 5e: For real this time?
« Reply #544 on: December 10, 2012, 04:30:05 PM »
I also like the idea of dramatic differences among character builds.  Although I prefer them to be an affirmative choice rather than a default setting.  If it's a default setting that's probably a bad idea.  It's one of the things D&D (3E) has going for it compared to say Mutants and Masterminds.

Offline Libertad

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3618
    • View Profile
    • My Fantasy and Gaming Blog
Re: D&D 5e: For real this time?
« Reply #545 on: December 10, 2012, 04:32:18 PM »
I disagree about the Mutants & Masterminds bit.  The sheer customization of Powers allows for an incredible variety of character builds.  But this is straying off-topic.

Offline Eldritch_Lord

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 173
  • Master of Magic
    • View Profile
Re: D&D 5e: For real this time?
« Reply #546 on: December 10, 2012, 05:51:10 PM »
More importantly
Quote

The biggest piece of feedback we received was that the rogue came across as a lame fighter. This was a key test to see how much tolerance people have for varied combat strength across classes. There's some give, but it looks like people want to avoid dramatic differences.

Frankly, that's not surprising, but now is the best time for us to challenge our assumptions before we lock things down.
Calling it a test eh. Either the game is MUCH further from completion than I thought, or they're just covering their ass.

If the Ivory Tower Game Design article is anything to go by, I wouldn't rule out that they're just covering their collective ass.  However, they've said they're targeting a 2014 release (and remember, 4e was basically written in 2 years as well), and between that and the amount of changes between playtest packets, I'm inclined to say that it's just really really early in the process right now.

Offline Unbeliever

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2288
  • gentleman gamer
    • View Profile
Re: D&D 5e: For real this time?
« Reply #547 on: December 10, 2012, 07:45:25 PM »
I disagree about the Mutants & Masterminds bit.  The sheer customization of Powers allows for an incredible variety of character builds.  But this is straying off-topic.
I'm not a topic Nazi.  I have played a lot of M&M, and made many, many characters (got to be over 100).  The system is amazingly flexible and intricate, allowing you to do a lot of things and create a lot of subtle differences.  It's one of the few systems where you can have 3 characters with essentially the same power set, say Superman, Black Adam, and Wonder Woman, and have them be interestingly mechanically-distinct. 

But, the PL system does mute the differences between builds.  This is, to be fair, its intended function.  You will notice that characters have less separation, or the separation comes in particular set of ways (e.g., Impervious defenses), than it does in D&D.  You won't have the potential large differences in AC or the Paladin's ability to scoff at saving throws.  This is more the case with the 3rd edition of the game, where characters are encouraged to have more balanced defenses. 
« Last Edit: December 10, 2012, 07:48:11 PM by Unbeliever »

Offline Keldar

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1032
  • What's this button do?
    • View Profile
Re: D&D 5e: For real this time?
« Reply #548 on: December 27, 2012, 04:14:46 AM »
If anyone still cares, the next Next packet is out.  Up to 20th level now.  I have yet to peruse.
(click to show/hide)

Offline JohnnyMayHymn

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 762
  • Former Lord of the Kitchen Sink
    • View Profile
Re: D&D 5e: For real this time?
« Reply #549 on: January 30, 2013, 01:56:18 AM »
Yet another playtest is out.  They must have been waiting for the boards to be back online.

Barbarian 1-20.

Where is the druid, DoTC?
The Emperor
Can you find the Wumpus?

Offline Keldar

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1032
  • What's this button do?
    • View Profile
Re: D&D 5e: For real this time?
« Reply #550 on: January 30, 2013, 10:10:52 PM »
They've really hung a ton on people liking the whole Martial Die mechanic.  There is one whole class that doesn't use it; the Wizard.

Offline linklord231

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3352
  • The dice are trying to kill me
    • View Profile
Re: D&D 5e: For real this time?
« Reply #551 on: January 30, 2013, 11:37:06 PM »
They've really hung a ton on people liking the whole Martial Die mechanic.  There is one whole class that doesn't use it; the Wizard.

Wait, Clerics use it now too?
I'm not arguing, I'm explaining why I'm right.

Offline Garryl

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4515
    • View Profile
Re: D&D 5e: For real this time?
« Reply #552 on: January 31, 2013, 12:15:33 AM »
They've really hung a ton on people liking the whole Martial Die mechanic.  There is one whole class that doesn't use it; the Wizard.

That seems a little overboard, if it's the case. It's a good subsystem (enables player choice, scaling effects, varied abilities, and a consistent unified mechanic), but having too many classes use it would really kill the system's diversity (like 4E's at will/encounter/daily/utility paradigm). It could also marginalize the mechanic's worth for class that rely on it when compared to classes that have it and another subsystem to combine with. That said, I'm downloading the playtest now to take a look.

Edit: Wow, yeah, every class but Wizards. Clerics pick it up at level 6.

Edit 2: It seems that most classes get a sort of stunted progression after level 10. You don't get much in the way of new features and existing ones stop or dramatically slow their progression. Wizards get higher level spells, but not more slots (just 1 slot of each spell level from 6 through 9).
« Last Edit: January 31, 2013, 12:22:10 AM by Garryl »

Offline Bauglir

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 629
  • Constrained
    • View Profile
Re: D&D 5e: For real this time?
« Reply #553 on: January 31, 2013, 12:52:18 AM »
Edit 2: It seems that most classes get a sort of stunted progression after level 10. You don't get much in the way of new features and existing ones stop or dramatically slow their progression. Wizards get higher level spells, but not more slots (just 1 slot of each spell level from 6 through 9).
This bodes ill for the possibility of simple multiclassing.

Offline Amechra

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4560
  • Thread Necromancy a specialty
    • View Profile
Re: D&D 5e: For real this time?
« Reply #554 on: January 31, 2013, 01:43:58 AM »
Actually, wouldn't it incentivize it?

After all, if you aren't getting much from your main class, its best if you grabbed stuff from other places.


Or it could just be WotC being bad at writing high level abilities again.
"There is happiness for those who accept their fate, there is glory for those that defy it."

"Now that everyone's so happy, this is probably a good time to tell you I ate your parents."

Offline linklord231

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3352
  • The dice are trying to kill me
    • View Profile
Re: D&D 5e: For real this time?
« Reply #555 on: January 31, 2013, 04:00:43 AM »
Actually, wouldn't it incentivize it?

After all, if you aren't getting much from your main class, its best if you grabbed stuff from other places.


Or it could just be WotC being bad at writing high level abilities again.

Depends on what abilities you are getting, I guess.  Like in 3.5, martial and skillmonkey builds tend to dip around a lot because their high level abilities aren't that great.  Casters on the other hand don't multiclass hardly at all (excluding PrC's) because delaying their high level spells is such a big deal. 

Edit:  I worry that they've kind of latched on to this extra die mechanic in a way that's a bit too similar to what happened with 4E.  They stumbled upon a system that makes certain classes more interesting, and now they're forcing everything to fit the system.  That will only bite them in the butt.
« Last Edit: January 31, 2013, 04:06:32 AM by linklord231 »
I'm not arguing, I'm explaining why I'm right.

Offline Bauglir

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 629
  • Constrained
    • View Profile
Re: D&D 5e: For real this time?
« Reply #556 on: February 01, 2013, 02:06:58 AM »
Actually, wouldn't it incentivize it?

After all, if you aren't getting much from your main class, its best if you grabbed stuff from other places.


Or it could just be WotC being bad at writing high level abilities again.
Emphasis on "simple". In particular, if numbers aren't a simple linear function of level in a class, they'll be quick to realize they can't have you just sum them across your classes, which is what made it so simple in 3E. There's no way in hell they'll trust the players to do square roots or logarithms or whatever they base their progressions on (if they base it on anything numerical, as opposed to "by feel"), which means they'll either have an absurdly elaborate system of table lookups, or else you'll have fixed points in your progression where you can multiclass, a la 4E. Either way, classes become significantly less modular and the system becomes less likely of being capable of representing your character idea.

They could easily miss it if gains accelerated as level increased (they sure did with spellcasting in 3E), but I would bet US dollars to Zimbabwe dollars that they'll zoom in on anything that makes multiclassing fundamentally and strictly better than singleclassing, and rule against it.

I think they may be running up against the fundamental limitations of the d20 as a system, unfortunately, and you can't ditch it as the basis of your RNG without losing what's pretty much the only mechanical constant that defines D&D. You can't support open-ended character growth in pure numbers without an RNG that grows to match, and you can't write an open-ended progression of new abilities at all. At some point, if you hard-capped numbers, you'd have to essentially write Epic Spellcasting again. So all you can do is slow growth down as you grow, in the hopes that nobody will ever actually play to the point where the system breaks down.

An alternative might be to redefine what a given result on a d20 means by what your level is (so that a 10 for a level 1 Fighter is a solid blow and a 10 for a level 20 Fighter is cutting down an entire battlefield of ordinary soldiers with a single swing), but that would require such a fundamental overhaul of the system that I can't even begin to imagine what it would look like, and it'd have a lot of DM Fiat problems.

Big ol stream-of-consciousness post is rambly.

Offline DonQuixote

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2946
  • What is sickness to the body of a knight errant?
    • View Profile
    • The Spellshaping Codices (Homebrew Board)
Re: D&D 5e: For real this time?
« Reply #557 on: February 03, 2013, 07:48:56 AM »
I've been losing faith in D&D Next, and this packet does nothing to restore it.  I'll wait and see, but I'm not holding my breath for anything at this point.
“Hast thou not felt in forest gloom, as gloaming falls on dark-some dells, when comes a whisper, hum and hiss; savage growling sounds a-near, dazzling flashes around thee flicker, whirring waxes and fills thine ears: has thou not felt then grisly horrors that grip thee and hold thee?”

Offline linklord231

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3352
  • The dice are trying to kill me
    • View Profile
Re: D&D 5e: For real this time?
« Reply #558 on: February 03, 2013, 02:17:57 PM »
I've been losing faith in D&D Next, and this packet does nothing to restore it.  I'll wait and see, but I'm not holding my breath for anything at this point.

Agreed.  When the first packet came out, I was pretty interested, but my enthusiasm has been steadily declining as they introduce more and more 4e design elements. 
I'm not arguing, I'm explaining why I'm right.

Offline Garryl

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4515
    • View Profile
Re: D&D 5e: For real this time?
« Reply #559 on: February 03, 2013, 04:43:32 PM »
I've been losing faith in D&D Next, and this packet does nothing to restore it.  I'll wait and see, but I'm not holding my breath for anything at this point.

Agreed.  When the first packet came out, I was pretty interested, but my enthusiasm has been steadily declining as they introduce more and more 4e design elements. 

What 4E design elements? I'm not familiar with the depths of 4E (only the generalities) and I've done little more than skim the playtest packets. I haven't even looked at the higher level spells in the new packet, just levels 1-5 from the previous iterations.