What would your 5th edition look like.

41 posts / 0 new
Last post
I'm not saying 5th edition is coming soon, just curious what direction people would like to see design go in.

I've got a fairly extensive list:

Allow for a standardized class chassis, but accomodate simpler builds from the beginning of the game.  Spread the simple and complex builds across both martial and magical classes (don't make all Martial classes the less complex and all magic using classes the more complex ones).

Alter power resource management.  You get unlimited uses of at-will level powers, X uses per encounter of other more potent powers and possibly Y uses of your big powers per day.  You use these to activate any power of the appropriate type you know, to improvise powers you don't know and to activate environmental powers that have equivalent effect.  Magic items offer new powers that are activated with the same pool of actions as the players other actions.

Be explicit that part of a power can be about ceding narrative control to a player in a specific way.  (i.e. come and get it's pulling is the player deciding the monsters reaction to his bravado). 

Remove attack and skill progression.  Replace them with a modifier that is based on the character's level minus the target's level.  Ability scores no longer need to advance with level and +X items can be eliminated. 

Change the to hit system so that most current misses are instead glancing blows.  A 1 is a miss, less than the defense is a glancing blow, and as it currently stands defense or better is a hit and a natural 20 a critical hit.  A glancing blow has a limited effect that is informed by the classes role.  For example, controller AoEs might deal half damage on a glancing blow while their single target glancing blows deal minimum damage and inflict a more limited status.  Allow players to recharge their encounter power uses on a natural 1. 

Replace action points with allowing players to use encounter and daily powers to buy up and down the spectrum of hits.  Roll a nat 20 and you don't need to drop this enemy fast, you can hit normally and recharge an encounter power.  Roll a glancing blow and you need to hit hard, spend a daily power use to make it a crit.

Create more granularity in status effects.  The game could use more control that doesn't cause missed turns or effective missed turns.  Statuses could include inability to use daily or encounter effects, forced delays of action and the like.  Define a spectrum of statuses so that a new page 42 also defines which types of statuses are appropriate for which levels and action types (at will/encoutner/daily).

Create a more robust skill usage framework while normalizing the math with combat math. Trained skills roll twice and use the better result.  Allow freeer mapping of ability score to skill.  Racial background and other skill bonuses instead offer circumstantial rerolls.  Separate combat feats from skill traits and allow advancement in both areas without having to choose one over the other.  As an option allow traits that grant players limited narrative control. 

Create a default where a many combats have a skill challenge to avoid, with failure resulting in combat (this can be sneaking past the enemy, bluffing, luring the enemy into a trap, gaining allies etc).  Better define skill encounters as having a chance of failure, rewards for success and consequences that aren't story blocking for failure.

Remove the magic item economy from the game.  Make treasure useful for driving story. 

I'm sure I have more, but that's a good start for 5th ed for me?

What would you do for 5th edition?  Why would you do it?
There are three main things that would be at the for front for the new edition.
  • No Dailies/Vacian Casting.
    The new edition will go with Encounters and introduce Recharge powers (like the monsters have) There will also be some mechanics that will change powers in some way, like Stances and Psionic like Augments.
  • Power Sources will be locked into the classes.
    Keeping Power Sources around, they must be locked with the classes that have them. I hope Essentials has at least taught this lesson, mixing power sources makes the concept of Power Sources worthless.
  • Builds will have different Roles.
    Having Roles be Build specific instead of tying it to a class will introduce some freedom with power choices and have a better focus on concepts instead of making a class just for this or that Role. Most likely, each class will be limited to two (or three if there are more than four roles) and Multiclassing will allow for some great combinations.


I would also hope that the Tiers (Heroic/Paragon/Epic) is elemenated. I understand the need for a level cap (Though I do think there is a way to have Epic gameplay beyond level 20/30) but the Tiers are just not something that D&D needs. I would think the term Prestige would be re-introduced, and be the way to multiclass instead of having Gesalt build or a spattering of powers. (I am still confused on if one levels in another class in Paragon Tier after taking the three feats)

Some lesser changes is the Skills ditching the Trained VS. Sucked SaGa mechanic, Magical Items having prices according to use (Weapons, Armor, Rings, Potions and so on), though it will still be by level, and the parcel system completely revamped to allow any type of treasure allocation, not just dirt poor adventurers with wish lists.
Terms you should know...
Show
Kit Build - A class build that is self sustaining and has mechanical differences than the normal scale. Started in Essentials. Most are call their own terms, though the Base Class should be said in front of their own terms (Like Assassin/Executioner) Power Points - A mechanic that was wedged into the PHB3 classes (with the exception of the Monk) from the previous editions. This time, they are used to augment At Wills to be Encounters, thus eliminating the need to choose powers past 4th level. Mage Builds - Kit builds that are schools of magic for the Wizard. A call back to the previous editions powering up of the wizard. (Wizard/Necromancer, for example) Unlike the previous kit builds, Wizards simply lose their Scribe Rituals feature and most likely still can choose powers from any build, unlike the Kit Builds. Parcel System - A treasure distribution method that keeps adventurers poor while forcing/advising the DM to get wish lists from players. The version 2.0 rolls for treasure instead of making a list, and is incomplete because of the lack of clarity about magic item rarity.
ha ha
56902498 wrote:
They will Essentialize the Essentials classes, otherwise known as Essentials2. The new sub-sub-classes will be: * Magician. A subsubclass of Mage, the magician has two implements, wand and hat, one familiar (rabbit) and series of basic tricks. * Crook. A subsubclass of Thief, the Crook can only use a shiv, which allows him to use his only power... Shank. * Angry Vicar, a subsubclass of warpriest, the angry vicar has two attacks -- Shame and Lecture. * Hitter. A subsubclass of Slayer, the Hitter hits things. * Gatherer. A subsubclass of Hunter, it doesn't actually do anything, but pick up the stuff other players might leave behind. Future Essentials2 classes include the Security Guard (Sentinel2), the Hexknife (Hexblade2), the Webelos (Scout2), the Gallant (Cavalier2) and the Goofus (Knight2). These will all be detailed in the box set called Heroes of the Futile Marketing. (Though what they should really release tomorrow is the Essentialized version of the Witchalok!)
My list isn't very long. 4E does most things well as it is.

- Stick with the inherent bonus system and can the +X magic items altogether.
- Drop the remaining traces of the Vancian system (daily powers).
- Introduce something like WoD's virtue and vice system. Something to help define PCs' motivations.
- Drop the parcel system.
- Introduce good mechanics for underwater/flying/3-dimensional battle.
- Give more concise examples for using the various mechanics (skills, combat, etc.) in the core books.
- The possibility of buying the products as .pdfs.
- Published adventures that don't require as much additional work to make interesting.
- Play up the fact that D&D is first and foremost a roleplaying game...not a mini combat simulator.
- Get rid of "living" campaigns for sanctioned play. Nothing kills a setting faster than making it "living".
My list isn't very long. 4E does most things well as it is.

- Stick with the inherent bonus system and can the +X magic items altogether.
- Drop the remaining traces of the Vancian system (daily powers).
- Introduce something like WoD's virtue and vice system. Something to help define PCs' motivations.
- Drop the parcel system.
- Introduce good mechanics for underwater/flying/3-dimensional battle.
- Give more concise examples for using the various mechanics (skills, combat, etc.) in the core books.
- The possibility of buying the products as .pdfs.
- Published adventures that don't require as much additional work to make interesting.
- Play up the fact that D&D is first and foremost a roleplaying game...not a mini combat simulator.
- Get rid of "living" campaigns for sanctioned play. Nothing kills a setting faster than making it "living".



Couldn't disagree more on the living campaigns. LFR is my only outlet for playing D&D, and that is done online. There are no local groups here, and no FLGS within 50 miles. If anything, I want to see more living campaigns in 5e. Would give me a chance to play more.
If you can play LFR online, you can play any other setting/style online.
Thanks to the VT, about a dozen different other types of virtual tables, the cloud, various chat-room utilities, and about a hundred other online capabailities, it's never been easier to play D&D online. You don't need the ham-fisted, poorly-ran, half-baked adventures of a living setting to play D&D online.

i would like to see 5e have no restraint with respect to errata and revisions.
If you can play LFR online, you can play any other setting/style online.
Thanks to the VT, about a dozen different other types of virtual tables, the cloud, various chat-room utilities, and about a hundred other online capabailities, it's never been easier to play D&D online. You don't need the ham-fisted, poorly-ran, half-baked adventures of a living setting to play D&D online.




Well, it basically comes down to getting emails from DM's asking if anyone wants a game that night. Then people sign up, and play through the module. Not quite that easy without organized play. Having the living campaign allows you to play with the same character over and over again, but with different people. I like that.

It's nice having the ability to pick up and decide to run a game on a whim, and have everything prepared for you. The modules are even fully converted over to the VTT. 
1.  Enforce weapon fluffing:  Weapons will have following categories:  Off-Hand, One-Handed, Two-Handed, Polearm, Double.  EVERY off-hand will be a d4, every one-hand will be a d6, every polearm 1d8, every two-handed will be a d10, and doubles will be d6/d4.  I'm SICK of being in a situation where, mechanically, I should be taking a +3 proficiency d8 weapon in order to make sure I hit, instead of taking the weapon that I really want to have, but that is mechanically a +2 proficiency d6.  The rules would allow everyone to pick the weapon they want to have, be it a Greatsword or a Boat Oar, and won't have to suffer mechanically.  You would just pick if your weapon is a Heavy Blade, Mace, or other properties.  So, if you want your Cleric of the Raven Queen to use a Massive Scythe, you call it a Heavy Blade 1d8 Polearm (if you want reach) or a 1d10 Two-Handed Heavy Blade, and be done with it.  No more of this "the kukri is superior to a dagger" or "Boat Oars aren't listed on the equipment table, so you can't wield one as a weapon."

2.  Get rid of weapon proficiencies and non-weapon category descriptors: I feel that any class should be able to use any weapon they choose fits their character's concept.  As such, I find it silly when, say, a Cleric of Kord wouldn't know how to use Martial weapons.  Allow any class to pick any weapon, which is easy when #1 is introduced, because there is no difference mechanically between having a Longsword or a Scythe (both are one-handed weapons that dead 1d6 damage and are Heavy Blades).  Get rid of the proficiency bullcrap.  Proficiencies just kind of force players to meta-game and take the weapons that give them the best to-hit.  Also, get rid of crap like "brutal 1" or "high-crit".  Let those be feats players take or something.  As it stands, there are over 50 weapons listed in the game, and about 40 of them are trap options because there is something that does more damage with a higher proficiency bonus/brutal.

3.   Realize that some feats can be so good that they're practically mandatory:  Expertise feats.  Nobody goes past level 15 without them.

4.  Get rid of ability score-driven attack bonuses:  Your level in your class should determine your attack bonus.  This would allow people to get rid of the "MainStat/DumpStat" mentality, and could allow people to create characters that are impossible to do currently (Intelligent Fighter comes to mind).

5.  Get rid of class skill lists:  If someone wants to play a Fighter that is trained in Arcana, History, and Religion, they should be able to.  I agree with each class getting a skill that they are automagically trained in, but being forced to choose from only a few options prevents player choice/character concepts from being fufilled in a meaningful way.  Also, I think that every class should be allowed to have four skills trained.  There shouldn't be a variance from between 3 and 6 skills depending on class.
aside:  I wouldn't mind having the smaller skill list of 4e with the ability to have skill points like 3.5.

6.  Online support: The 5e character builder better have Houserule support.  I'm pissed enough as it is that we had it and lost it in 4e.

To be quite honest, though, my 5e would like like 4e with those revisions.
Salla, on minions: I typically use them as encounter filler. 'I didn't quite fill out the XP budget, not enough room left for a decent near-level monster ... sprinkle in a few minions'. Kind of like monster styrofoam packing peanuts.
Are you guys sure you don't just want to play GURPS, because you've all pretty much described GURPS.
My ideal 5e would have a copyright date of 2024. 

Want to see the best of 4e included in 5e?  Join the Old Guard of 4e.

5e really needs something like Wrecan's SARN-FU to support "Theatre of the Mind."

"You want The Tooth?  You can't handle The Tooth!"  - Dahlver-Nar.

"If magic is unrestrained in the campaign, D&D quickly degenerates into a weird wizard show where players get bored quickly"  - E. Gary Gygax

 

 

Oops, looks like this request tried to create an infinite loop. We do not allow such things here. We are a professional website!

Who cares?

Like any edition, you'll tear through it, use the parts you like and ignore the parts you don't.  I  find the concept of "asking" for an edition to do something to be odd: if you already know exactly what you want, why are you waiting for someone else to validate your desire when you can easily do it without their permission?
Heavy Rocks
My ideal 5e would have a copyright date of 2024. 



I agree with this. I haven't finished learning 4th yet!

Hi everyone!


Definitely agree. 4th edition is my favourite edition and one of my favourite RPG ever...I want more 4th edition stuff on the run, a more focused core-setting and...the end of the essentials. ;)


BYE


KK


 


 


 


My ideal 5e would have a copyright date of 2024. 




I agree with this. I haven't finished learning 4th yet!





 

Much like current 4e.

Main differences:
all classes ever built by first party would be built along the same basic chasis: At will, Encounter, Daily, Utility

Psionic at-wills would scale at epic tier, so an unaugmented level 21 power would be doing more damage than an unaugmented level 1 at-will.  all other things equal.

Shadow powersource would have actual classes, not a smattering of powers and a single, mediocre-at-best, "class."

Same for the Elemental Powersource.

No split main stat classes.  Clerics would be WIS, Paladins STR, Warlocks split into 2 distinct classes.
Ahh, so THIS is where I can add a sig. Remember: Killing an ancient God inside of a pyramid IS a Special Occasion, and thus, ladies should be dipping into their Special Occasions underwear drawer.
5th edition for real?

Ok, get rid of classes entirely.

Powers would be dependant upon power source, skill level, attributes and feat selection.

Use the percentile dice for skills.

Embrace the gaming aspect of the game and don't shy away from it's wargaming roots. I don't play a game to hear someone read me a story.
Anything that sounds like a patch to 4th edition should be a patch for 4th edition. I'd rather have an official 4.5 than 5th edition looking mostly like 4th. I think an edition change is only warranted when the game is entirely different. 
I love 4e so I wouldn't change much.

I'd get rid of all +n weapons, armor, necklaces, feats, levels. It's an illusion and one that leads to bad monster/character math and slowdown at the table. At most I'd have you choose a weapon specialization and you'd be more accurate while using what you specialize in but every character would be granted this at level 1 without a feat or buy in and might be granted free specializations for Race/Class/Theme. You'd also get a Negative or Positive to hit if it was above or below your level. This really simplifies monster building. I know it's unorthodox for RPGs on Paper and Video Games, we really love our +1 Swords and +1s at each level but everything we fight at the next level has them to so it's a treadmill we always stay at the same to hit basically and besides to hit is based off a d20 at 1st level and a d20 at 30th. So your AC for a Paladin is 23 at level 1 and as long as you have your armor and shield it'll be 23 to level 30. You make your gains through powers, equipment and feats and not +1s that actually don't matter.

That's my big gripe and here is my little one.

Rituals would have no casting cost besides time if a Wizard has chalk he can do a Ritual he's purchased, I hate components and we don't use them at my table.
Combat wise


  • I never used the parcel system as I found it odd. (personally I stick to random loot, and let players make the stuff they want - or use specific quests for those items)

  • Make martial feel different then magic.


Non-combat wise


  • Bigger list of mundain items. Though it sounds stupidly simple, things like 'candles', 'crowbar', etc ... It gives those who like micromanagement what they want. As DM it gives inspiration to give junk, and it gives McGyver a chance to shine (so how will we trap a dragon? well, we could shards of glass (of a flask) so we hear it comming, and use the rope for a standard trap.)

  • More flavor text (try mixing the good of World Of Darkness books (but don't inherent the difficulty to find a rule)



Qube's block builder: if you want to create blocks for powers, items and monsters for this forum, but don't know html
Signature in a box
For years, I've lived a double life. In the day, I do my job - I ride the bus, roll up my sleeves with the hoi-polloi. But at night, I live a life of exhilaration, of missed heartbeats and adrenalin. And, if the truth be known a life of dubious virtue. I won't deny it - I've been engaged in violence, even indulged in it. I've maimed and killed adversaries, and not merely in self-defence. I've exhibited disregard for life, limb and property, and savoured every moment. You may not think it, to look of me but I have commanded armies, and conquered worlds. And though in achieving these things I've set morality aside, I have no regrets. For though I've led a double life, at least I can say - I've lived.

3.jpg
D&D Home Page - What Monster Are You? - Stone Gaint

Scipio: And Chihuahuas have definitely improved in the "attacking ankles, yapping, and being generally annoying" environment. Me: OK, am I the only who sees an analogy between forum trolls & Chihuahuas?
Some of my work:
XDMC 19 (silver): A full fledged assassins guild (with stats, skill challenges, ...)link XDMC 14 (Bronze): a one shot campaign for beginning DMs/players. link XDMC 16: Paragon path: the Epitome: being better then all then any one else. link (note: this is balanced) XDMC 25: The Gelatinous Cube mount Guide To Disreality: a collection of houserules - Introduction & table of content
My ego in a box
who am I kidding? my ego would never fit in a box

Would it count for my response if I just posted a link to Wrecan's "Long Division" series?

Mine would look like 4e... shrug with a couple tweaks - though I would prefer something which brought balance and cool team play to non=combat the way roles do for combat. 
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

i would like to see 5e have no restraint with respect to errata and revisions.

I'd like to see that in 4E.
1.  Enforce weapon fluffing:  Weapons will have following categories:  Off-Hand, One-Handed, Two-Handed, Polearm, Double.  EVERY off-hand will be a d4, every one-hand will be a d6, every polearm 1d8, every two-handed will be a d10, and doubles will be d6/d4.  I'm SICK of being in a situation where, mechanically, I should be taking a +3 proficiency d8 weapon in order to make sure I hit, instead of taking the weapon that...


Can't say I agree.  I like the weapons feeling different.  The only element I'm really looking for along these lines is that weapons should be reasonably balanced. 

2.  Get rid of weapon proficiencies and non-weapon category descriptors: I feel that any class should be able to use any weapon they choose fits their character's concept.  As such, I find it silly when, say, a Cleric of Kord wouldn't know how to use Martial weapons.  Allow any class to pick any weapon, which is easy when #1 is introduced, because there is no difference mechanically between having a Longsword or a Scythe (both are one-handed weapons that dead 1d6 damage and are Heavy Blades).  Get rid of the proficiency bullcrap.  Proficiencies just kind of force players to meta-game and take the weapons that give them the best to-hit.  Also, get rid of crap like "brutal 1" or "high-crit".  Let those be feats players take or something.  As it stands, there are over 50 weapons listed in the game, and about 40 of them are trap options because there is something that does more damage with a higher proficiency bonus/brutal.


I generally like weapons to do different things.  So mainly I'm happy with this element.  Further I'm somewhat uncomfortable with making it so that you need to pick up all these features with feats meaning anyone who even considers not pumping every feat into being better at combat is just doing it wrong. 


3.   Realize that some feats can be so good that they're practically mandatory:  Expertise feats.  Nobody goes past level 15 without them.


Yeah...I agree.  Manditory feats are not at all ideal.

4.  Get rid of ability score-driven attack bonuses:  Your level in your class should determine your attack bonus.  This would allow people to get rid of the "MainStat/DumpStat" mentality, and could allow people to create characters that are impossible to do currently (Intelligent Fighter comes to mind).


I go back and dorth on this one.  I like the stats to effect your character but it does seem to drive min maxing a little to much.  That said if your DM does a lot of out of combat stuff in his game then this aspect balances out much better currently because maxing out a stat means giving up on some skill points.

5.  Get rid of class skill lists:  If someone wants to play a Fighter that is trained in Arcana, History, and Religion, they should be able to.  I agree with each class getting a skill that they are automagically trained in, but being forced to choose from only a few options prevents player choice/character concepts from being fufilled in a meaningful way.  Also, I think that every class should be allowed to have four skills trained.  There shouldn't be a variance from between 3 and 6 skills depending on class.
aside:  I wouldn't mind having the smaller skill list of 4e with the ability to have skill points like 3.5.


I somewhat agree but have noticed that most classes are more or less 'forced' to pick a physical, social and knowledge type skill.  This really helps with allowing the DM to have diverse none combat adventures.  Letting the players choose has historically seen them choose to climb and leap and prace for almost all their skills leaving just one character who who can talk and another who can think and resulting in most of the party sitting around getting board when the adventure is about solving fantasy murder mysteries and such. 

In effect 'forcing' the players to make characters that can participate in the three main types of noncombat activities (social scenes, physical scenes and research scenes) means that can always play if the adventure is less combat orientated while giving players choice in this regard seems to see them usually design characters that are completely deficient in two of the three and absolutely unable to function or participate when the adventure is not about the scene they happen to be good at.

6.  Online support: The 5e character builder better have Houserule support.  I'm pissed enough as it is that we had it and lost it in 4e.

To be quite honest, though, my 5e would like like 4e with those revisions.


They should really just do this for 4E never mind waiting for 5th.

Anything that sounds like a patch to 4th edition should be a patch for 4th edition. I'd rather have an official 4.5 than 5th edition looking mostly like 4th. I think an edition change is only warranted when the game is entirely different. 

I'm pretty much on board with this.  I'd be happy to wait a couple of years and then get a good upgrade to 4E.  Heck I'd be happy if some of the more obvious fixes where just done right know.

That said the only real problems I have are that the Skill System has been allowed to get out of hand with it being to easy for character X to have more then +12 then character Y in a skill and I feel anything past +8 starts to damage the game itself.

Death saves don't really seem to be a functioning mechanic as far as I can tell...Players that are down don't usually get to the 'tension' rolls where blowing a save means they die - the fight seems to always resolve one way or another before then. 

The result seems to either be inevitability - the players and the DM figure out that one side will win for sure and if its the players side then they won't loose any members as they are not in danger.

Or the DM chooses to play hard ball and attacks downed characters which certianly kills them but makes the game insane lethal. 

In effect it right now feels to me that we are choosing between a version of the game that seems just too easy and a cersion that is too hard. 

I'd like to see XP put on a parcel system.  In other words te adventure hands out packets of XP for progressing in the adventure by whatever metric the DM chooses to use.  So maybe its a murder mystery and packets are handed out when key clues are figures out and acted on.  Maybe its more traditional and XP is given for defeating monsters but it can be whatever teh DM wants it to be instead of having things hooked into monster killing (or bypassing) sine that forces the designers of adventures to include these types of encounters in the adventure in order to make it possible to progress in levels. 

Bypassing monsters was a step forward in terms of the game but I'd like to see it so that having them be in the adventure at all is optional and up to the adventures designer.  Maybe instead the adventure rewards the players for convincing the Princess that While Purple is a really fine colour and all boring old white would actually be a good choice for her wedding gown.

I'd leave some kind of a parcel system in place in order to give some idea as to what we should be looking for in terms of XP per significant encounter - a base line to work with in terms of understanding how many encounters are needed tp level up. 
I'd like to see XP put on a parcel system.  In other words te adventure hands out packets of XP for progressing in the adventure by whatever metric the DM chooses to use.  So maybe its a murder mystery and packets are handed out when key clues are figures out and acted on.  Maybe its more traditional and XP is given for defeating monsters but it can be whatever teh DM wants it to be instead of having things hooked into monster killing (or bypassing) sine that forces the designers of adventures to include these types of encounters in the adventure in order to make it possible to progress in levels.



There's already rules in the DMG for awarding XP and it includes beating a Skill Challenge (which is most of the "convincing" and "intrigue" and "finding the killer") as well as rules for awarding XP to completing objectives. You can go from 1st to 30th level without ever using an attack power, all by the rules.
Epic Dungeon Master

Want to give your players a kingdom of their own? I made a 4e rule system to make it happen!

Your Kingdom awaits!
Update 5th Sep 2011: Added a sample kingdom, as well as sample of play.
I'd like to see XP put on a parcel system.  In other words te adventure hands out packets of XP for progressing in the adventure by whatever metric the DM chooses to use.  So maybe its a murder mystery and packets are handed out when key clues are figures out and acted on.  Maybe its more traditional and XP is given for defeating monsters but it can be whatever teh DM wants it to be instead of having things hooked into monster killing (or bypassing) sine that forces the designers of adventures to include these types of encounters in the adventure in order to make it possible to progress in levels.



There's already rules in the DMG for awarding XP and it includes beating a Skill Challenge (which is most of the "convincing" and "intrigue" and "finding the killer") as well as rules for awarding XP to completing objectives. You can go from 1st to 30th level without ever using an attack power, all by the rules.



The problem with the Skill challenge XP mechanic is that it hands out less XP for the Skill Challenges that are smaller...and yet at the actual game table things like 3 before 12 are both really hard to pull off and really hard to adjudicate.  As a rule the smaller Skill Challenges play far better then the larger ones but you'd need an absolute ton of them to make up for lost combats.

The objective award system is basically the same deal.  Combined they add up to little more then a single combat.  In effect using the 'official' XP system still pretty much forces free lancers to make adventures that are either combat heavy or about bypassing combat (or a combination) while there is nothing wrong with either of these types of encounters forcing the game to 'officially' be about them closes doors to making adventures that are significantly lighter in terms of these elements.

4E is a fantastic system for combat light adventures but the way XP is rewarded has resulted in the belief among many that its only a combat simulator and I think that this is in part because the XP system works against making adventures that are not themselves about combat.  So, while it may be technically possible to pull off getting a level while never engaging or even avoiding a fight its actually really difficult and would likely need to have between two and three times as many encounters in the adventure to make up for the XP not being gained...especially true when we consider that Skill Challenges are an all or nothing affair - succeed or get no XP at all - officially at least - here I'd rather have it be an XP 'parcel' for just participating success or no success but think that the adventure designer should choose whether to go with my view of always getting XP or with a method that only rewards success.  


 

essentially 4e but with the following changes;



  • eliminate action points. instead have it like in 3e, where you could make a second attack (or equivalent) by forgoing your move action. maybe this second attack would be limited to a basic or at-will.

  • keep the essentials layout, but with a wider range of powers, like in the PHB's. maybe on some levels would allow you to choose between a new power or a static bonus or ability.

  • get rid of masterwork armor. i never liked it in the first place. it should just be worked directly into the item's bonus.

  • have the option to run the game without miniatures. essentially convert distances from squares to feet, like in 3e.

  • integrate themes into the core game. I like the customization that they give beyond your class and race.

  • racial variants. 4e (and 3e) races have a feeling of being too identical to each other. there ought to be ways to modify the races to fit your character and playing style better.

  • balance levels so multiclassing like in 3e is possible. also get rid of hybrid characters and multiclass feats.

  • integrate skill powers into the core game.

  • shift the focus away from pure combat. don't force players to choose attack powers at most levels. maybe at each level you could choose a combat or non combat feature.


I'm sure that I could come up with more ideas but these are the main things that I would like changed.
essentially 4e but with the following changes;



  • eliminate action points. instead have it like in 3e, where you could make a second attack (or equivalent) by forgoing your move action. maybe this second attack would be limited to a basic or at-will.

  • keep the essentials layout, but with a wider range of powers, like in the PHB's. maybe on some levels would allow you to choose between a new power or a static bonus or ability.

  • get rid of masterwork armor. i never liked it in the first place. it should just be worked directly into the item's bonus.  Already done.

  • have the option to run the game without miniatures. essentially convert distances from squares to feet, like in 3e.  1 square = 5 feet and has been since game came out.

  • integrate themes into the core game. I like the customization that they give beyond your class and race.

  • racial variants. 4e (and 3e) races have a feeling of being too identical to each other. there ought to be ways to modify the races to fit your character and playing style better.

  • balance levels so multiclassing like in 3e is possible. also get rid of hybrid characters and multiclass feats.

  • integrate skill powers into the core game.

  • shift the focus away from pure combat. don't force players to choose attack powers at most levels. maybe at each level you could choose a combat or non combat feature.


I'm sure that I could come up with more ideas but these are the main things that I would like changed.

Fixed some things for you.

Salla, on minions: I typically use them as encounter filler. 'I didn't quite fill out the XP budget, not enough room left for a decent near-level monster ... sprinkle in a few minions'. Kind of like monster styrofoam packing peanuts.
essentially 4e but with the following changes;



  • eliminate action points. instead have it like in 3e, where you could make a second attack (or equivalent) by forgoing your move action. maybe this second attack would be limited to a basic or at-will.

  • keep the essentials layout, but with a wider range of powers, like in the PHB's. maybe on some levels would allow you to choose between a new power or a static bonus or ability.

  • get rid of masterwork armor. i never liked it in the first place. it should just be worked directly into the item's bonus.  Already done.

  • have the option to run the game without miniatures. essentially convert distances from squares to feet, like in 3e.  1 square = 5 feet and has been since game came out.

  • integrate themes into the core game. I like the customization that they give beyond your class and race.

  • racial variants. 4e (and 3e) races have a feeling of being too identical to each other. there ought to be ways to modify the races to fit your character and playing style better.

  • balance levels so multiclassing like in 3e is possible. also get rid of hybrid characters and multiclass feats.

  • integrate skill powers into the core game.

  • shift the focus away from pure combat. don't force players to choose attack powers at most levels. maybe at each level you could choose a combat or non combat feature.


I'm sure that I could come up with more ideas but these are the main things that I would like changed.

Fixed some things for you.


I know about the 1 Square = 5 feet thing, I just want them to notate distance in feet rather than squares so the game doesn't force you to utilize a grid amd miniatures.
I would like to see powers level as the PC levels. My Warden made great use of Form of Winter's Herald, in Heroric level for example, but I HAD to exchange it out because at P3 it just is not powerful enough. IMO, a PC should be able to stick with a power that works for their class and build. Allowing it to level would do this.

Ditch the d20 as a means for task resolution in favor of a bell-curve 3d6.

Rule one isn’t “The DM is always right.” Rule one is: Everyone should be having fun at the table. Plans for 5e: Kill the d20, and replace it with a bell curve for task resolution.
essentially 4e but with the following changes;



  • eliminate action points. instead have it like in 3e, where you could make a second attack (or equivalent) by forgoing your move action. maybe this second attack would be limited to a basic or at-will.

  • keep the essentials layout, but with a wider range of powers, like in the PHB's. maybe on some levels would allow you to choose between a new power or a static bonus or ability.

  • get rid of masterwork armor. i never liked it in the first place. it should just be worked directly into the item's bonus.  Already done.

  • have the option to run the game without miniatures. essentially convert distances from squares to feet, like in 3e.  1 square = 5 feet and has been since game came out.

  • integrate themes into the core game. I like the customization that they give beyond your class and race.

  • racial variants. 4e (and 3e) races have a feeling of being too identical to each other. there ought to be ways to modify the races to fit your character and playing style better.

  • balance levels so multiclassing like in 3e is possible. also get rid of hybrid characters and multiclass feats.

  • integrate skill powers into the core game.

  • shift the focus away from pure combat. don't force players to choose attack powers at most levels. maybe at each level you could choose a combat or non combat feature.


I'm sure that I could come up with more ideas but these are the main things that I would like changed.

Fixed some things for you.


I know about the 1 Square = 5 feet thing, I just want them to notate distance in feet rather than squares so the game doesn't force you to utilize a grid amd miniatures.

Huh?

Dude, what you're saying doesn't make sense to me.  For all intents and purposes, it IS already doing that.  I'm afraid I don't get what you're trying to say.  If one square is five feet, then it is doing what you're asking for.

To me, it's like your problem is the fact that you have to do conversions.  I'd like to think that I'm misinterpreting you, because it seems silly to complain that the standard format favors a grid instead of 5 feet increments.

And the game doesn't "force" you to use miniatures; many people find it EASIER to use a grid and miniatures for sake of rules clarity/fireball avoidance, but that has been the case for as long as wizards have had the ability to cast fireball.  I've played in a miniature/gridless 4e game, and while I didnt' prefer it (I kept getting confused by whether or not stuff was within melee range of my fighter and how many trolls were next to me), the game was still functional and enjoyable.
Salla, on minions: I typically use them as encounter filler. 'I didn't quite fill out the XP budget, not enough room left for a decent near-level monster ... sprinkle in a few minions'. Kind of like monster styrofoam packing peanuts.
I know about the 1 Square = 5 feet thing, I just want them to notate distance in feet rather than squares so the game doesn't force you to utilize a grid amd miniatures.

Multiplying numbers by 5 is 1st grade math, so I am pretty sure you can handle it.

Reflavoring: the change of flavor without changing any mechanical part of the game, no matter how small, in order to fit the mechanics to an otherwise unsupported concept. Retexturing: the change of flavor (with at most minor mechanical adaptations) in order to effortlessly create support for a concept without inventing anything new. Houseruling: the change, either minor or major, of the mechanics in order to better reflect a certain aspect of the game, including adapting the rules to fit an otherwise unsupported concept. Homebrewing: the complete invention of something new that fits within the system in order to reflect an unsupported concept. Default module =/= Core mechanic.
I would encourage people who are responding with corrections and reasons why others' vision for the game aren't necessary or valid instead put there efforts into presenting their vision for where the game should go.
I would encourage people who are responding with corrections and reasons why others' vision for the game aren't necessary or valid instead put there efforts into presenting their vision for where the game should go.

Well said.
My 2cp:

-I would like to see more powers available at lower levels
-more utility powers
-daily powers replaced with something else, maybe powers where you can use one of ALL your daily powers once per encounter
-I'd like to see class abilities implemented in their features and their selection of powers, but not in the powers their selves to increase portability of powers between classes
-I'd like to see more portability of powers between classes, class-specific powers are nice, but it's made it so that under-served classes get almost nothing to work with, we have skill powers, I'd like to see other powers related to role, power source, equipment, or whatever, so that there is a little more movement between classes
-three way hybrids, please! (nostalgia for 1st edition multi-classing)
-make all weapons equaly good, remove weapon proficiencies
-same goes for armour, heavier armour has penalties to compensate for it's superiority
 
-three way hybrids, please! (nostalgia for 1st edition multi-classing) 


err thats why you can hybrid and mc at the same time, be sure to use a human  ;p for that extra at-will - if you really glutton paragon multiclass.
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

I know about the 1 Square = 5 feet thing, I just want them to notate distance in feet rather than squares so the game doesn't force you to utilize a grid amd miniatures.

Multiplying numbers by 5 is 1st grade math, so I am pretty sure you can handle it.





I keep thinking that the 1 sq = 5 feet is a 3.5 thing. I have only seen squares in 4th edition.
Terms you should know...
Show
Kit Build - A class build that is self sustaining and has mechanical differences than the normal scale. Started in Essentials. Most are call their own terms, though the Base Class should be said in front of their own terms (Like Assassin/Executioner) Power Points - A mechanic that was wedged into the PHB3 classes (with the exception of the Monk) from the previous editions. This time, they are used to augment At Wills to be Encounters, thus eliminating the need to choose powers past 4th level. Mage Builds - Kit builds that are schools of magic for the Wizard. A call back to the previous editions powering up of the wizard. (Wizard/Necromancer, for example) Unlike the previous kit builds, Wizards simply lose their Scribe Rituals feature and most likely still can choose powers from any build, unlike the Kit Builds. Parcel System - A treasure distribution method that keeps adventurers poor while forcing/advising the DM to get wish lists from players. The version 2.0 rolls for treasure instead of making a list, and is incomplete because of the lack of clarity about magic item rarity.
ha ha
56902498 wrote:
They will Essentialize the Essentials classes, otherwise known as Essentials2. The new sub-sub-classes will be: * Magician. A subsubclass of Mage, the magician has two implements, wand and hat, one familiar (rabbit) and series of basic tricks. * Crook. A subsubclass of Thief, the Crook can only use a shiv, which allows him to use his only power... Shank. * Angry Vicar, a subsubclass of warpriest, the angry vicar has two attacks -- Shame and Lecture. * Hitter. A subsubclass of Slayer, the Hitter hits things. * Gatherer. A subsubclass of Hunter, it doesn't actually do anything, but pick up the stuff other players might leave behind. Future Essentials2 classes include the Security Guard (Sentinel2), the Hexknife (Hexblade2), the Webelos (Scout2), the Gallant (Cavalier2) and the Goofus (Knight2). These will all be detailed in the box set called Heroes of the Futile Marketing. (Though what they should really release tomorrow is the Essentialized version of the Witchalok!)
 
-three way hybrids, please! (nostalgia for 1st edition multi-classing) 


err thats why you can hybrid and mc at the same time, be sure to use a human  ;p for that extra at-will - if you really glutton paragon multiclass.



Oh yes...I keep forgetting you can do that, because it sucks so badly as an options. If it were up to me, you would pay a price up front, and then could pick any combination of features from your classes that you like, but because some classes has so much of their power wrapped up in their powers (like wizard dailies, or barbarian powers including their striker damage bonus), they have to make it cost a feat just to take one power. And paragon multiclass is garbage.
I'm going to be honest here - I think most of the complaints around this game are somewhat hilarious. Being that it's a framework that can be home-brewed anyway you like (unless you're looking to get into tournament play) - it's a game of limitless options and configurations, in any edition. I will never understand some of the rule debates that happen here. There's always going to be opinions about optimization vs. flavour, balance vs. unbalance, and ways to find loopholes and ways to close them. I enjoy some of the drill-downs that happen, but it's important to keep in mind it's just a game. I think I remember reading one complaint trying to compare what 3.5's are going through with 4th, and how there's no more new materials for it - who cares? If you've played through every campaign setting, explored every possible pre-written adventure and acquired every possible relic and destroyed every god - build your own. My 3.5 group, before I joined, has pretty much done it all. So I get the benefit of that by playing in custom realms and altered versions of official settings that are ripe with imagination that these guys have come up with based on their experience. Put your knowledge to good use and CREATE!

I started, officially, in 4th edition. I managed to find my way into a 3.5 group - and I love them both. I don't think one is superior to the other, based on the individual merits of each game. I now run a 4th, and play in 3.5, usually once a month each. 

4th edition is much easier to play for beginners. It's a little more freeing in some circumstances, and a little more railroading in others. I've had this discussion with players of both 3.5 and 4th - it's setup for a video game generation that relates to them. And frankly, I think the power cards are neat. My 4th group is a bunch of people that just want to have a bit of inexpensive fun in a social setting, and have really gotten into this game because it's easy to follow.

3.5 on the other hand is almost a sandbox of options once you start to include errata and imagination, but the rules can be unwieldy and confusing - especially when you're living by the letter of the law, and not the spirit of having a good time. Personally, after having played both, I enjoy 3.5 more. But I see the benefit of both. I know the players I have in 4th would have given up after a session of 3.5 - it's just too much all at once. But give them a couple of years, and they might want to try it. Or maybe I'll just alter the rules in 4th to play to some of the things I like in 3.5 - like auto hit spells and 20/20 kills. 

I know jack squat about 1e, 2e or Essentials, or much about any other RPG (there are a ton of them out there.) Some of the things the OP and first few posters put in there don't seem like balancing solutions btw - it seems like people getting frustrated by the rules and looking for ways to make things easier, not necessarily more fun. 

And 5e? When it eventually comes to bear, heres what I envision:

I envision a scalable game framework. As I see it, you can take a lesson from the internet and start with an algorithm. Then break it out into separate levels of play:

D&D: Encounters
What a great way to get some D&D into a busy lifestyle. I'd make this the basis of tournament play, with two levels: Beginners (4e rules) and Advanced (3.5e rules). Quick and dirty. Great concept. Have no idea how it works in real life, but it seems like a great play for store owners to get people into the store, run them through games and sell more junk. I've never played, but I might give it a try. 

D&D (Beginner)
Here, I'd take the 4e rules and clean them up a bit. Keep it easy to learn and fun to play, quick pace. I'd probably bring back auto-hit on magic, and balance the feat systems (I like the idea of feats for combat and feats for skills as separate chains - more combat feats for strikers/defenders, more skill feats for controllers/leaders, etc). I'd also bring in the 20/20 instant kill. It's a great field leveler. As my group says "The Dice Never Lie". 

D&D (Advanced)
Give us a translation matrix so that we can take all the beginner stuff and translate it to to 3.5 style rules. More hits per attack, that kind of thing. But balance out the sandbox a bit with some clearly defined roles and class balancing. (I love playing clerics. They're awesome no matter how you play'em). I'd love if there was more defined roles for classes in 3.5. The reason I'd put the matrix in for Advanced players is because I think we like leafing through books to figure out if the spell we cast has spell save DC or attempting to add up our bonuses for the haste we got from our bard, plus our magical sword that works against orcs, along with our favored enemy bonus...yadda yadda yadda. We like the random math. I don't think It'd be any skin of our nose.

It'd be relatively easy to create flavour that fits any of these levels and offer mechanical differences to appease any level of play. 

This also gives you the room to introduce a card game based on that stuff, and link it to video games. If everything is based on a set algorithm for cost, power and how it works together, you'll probably end up with a system that's easy to scale for anyone - beginners all the way up to the oldest veterans. And it means that once you've played through a 5e campaign on 'easy', you can play though it slightly differently on 'hard'. 

The ONLY thing I'd want to see done differently is the books.

Give me one book for PHB. One book for DMG. Give me one Monster Manual. Give me One Spell Compendium. Having to figure out if the monster I want is in 1, 2 or 3 gets a bit tedious. 

Just my two cents. 


 
Personality
I am Blue/White
I am Blue/White
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I'm both orderly and rational. I value control, information, and order. I love structure and hierarchy, and will actively use whatever power or knowledge I have to maintain it. At best, I am lawful and insightful; at worst, I am bureaucratic and tyrannical.
In my book, 4E did pretty much everything right.


These are the things I'd like to see improved from 4E:

  1. Delete the concept of ALIGNMENT. Kill it with fire! At least, as far as mechanics are concerned. In 4E, it's only used for Divine characters and their deities (IIRC). Well, D&D lore has a "set of rules", a "dogma" for each deity. Use that as a mean to flavour Divine characters, decide which deity they should follow, and define their tasks, as well as making it the criteria to follow to decide whether a Paladin has Fallen or not.

  2. Fix all the mechanics regarding sneaking in shadows and sneak attacking from concealment. They were unclear first, and overly complicated after the necessary errata. It could be simpler.

  3. Remove or fix the skill challenges: right now, they aren't working for the fans. Expand on the Rituals. Dedicate a lot more of attention to the NON-COMBAT part of the game (maybe the one and biggest flaw of 4E, compared to 3.5) and give more options.

  4. Give all races equal attention (feats and support material, no freakin' "Monster Manual PC races"), and give races that are staples of fantasy (goblins and orcs, for example) the attention they deserve. Don't favour obscure, nonsensical races over fantasy mainstream ones. Promote setting-specific races (Minotaur and Irda for Dragonlance, Drow and Genasi for Forgotten Realms, Warforged and Changeling for Eberron, Mul and Thri-Kreen for Dark Sun, etc...).

  5.  Dedicate more care to sub-races and use a single, unified method of dealing with them (the Genasi method would be my first choice, the FR Elves method my second choice). Turn some (setting-specific or not) races into sub-races of the mainstream ones that are most similar to them: Half-Giants as a Goliath sub-race, Duergar as a Dwarf sub-race, Kender as a Halfling sub-race, etc... Add setting-specific (to avoid lawsuit) Human sub-races: Solamnian, Que-Shu, Calishite, Illuskan, Cyran, Karrnathi, etc... Maybe give sub-races a minor ability boost (+1... or +1/-1, if we want to bring that back).

  6. Give all classes equal attention (feats and support material).

  7. Define "builds" further into (non-optional) sub-classes (without removing the shared power pool among different builds/sub-races, and at the same time making some of the powers build/sub-class specific). Give each class a single power source. While it's ok to keep the "dark flavoured" and "elemental flavoured" builds (example: Necromancer and Sha'ir for Wizard), there is no need to keep the Darkness and Elemental power sources in the game. "Elemental flavoured" Sorcerers should just be Elementalists, a sub-class of the (Arcane) Sorcerer; "Dark flavoured" Paladins should just be Blackguards, a sub-class of the (Divine) Paladin. It's not like all other power sources haven't been using and abusing the elements and the darkness concepts so far. Add a Fallen sub-class for the Paladin (that the player can start with) and two or three sub-classes for the Clerics who worship elemental spirits (Dark Sun), a dead deity, or a concept.

  8. Make overlapping classes into sub-classes (the same way we make minor, overlapping races into sub-races) of the most mainstream ones. The (overlooked and devoid of supporting material) Runepriest can be a sub-class of the Cleric (same role, same power source, and... unlike, say, Sorcerers and Warlocks... similar name, similar concept and little differences overall). The Seeker can be a (striker/controller) sub-class of the Ranger, giving the player the chance to play both the 3.5 "druidic magic" Ranger (i.e.: the Seeker) and the 4E "without magic effects" Ranger (most, if not all, of the other sub-classes). In light of that, give the players the chance to have both the 3.5 "without magic effects" Barbarian and the 4E "spirit magic" Barbarian, as different sub-classes. With that in mind, give both the Ranger and the Barbarian the Primal power source, even though some versions of the Barbarian and Ranger might look much more druidic/shamanic and others might be devoid of "special effects".

  9. Fix the multi-classing system. Hybrids are extremely good, but in case somebody wants to start multi-classing half-way through their carreer (a legitimate desire, in terms of fluff), give them a viable option to do so. Fix or remove the useless Hybrid Paragon and Multi-Class Paragon. Fix the way the Bard dabbles: multi-classing ten times by taking ten feats is lumbering and unpractical. Keep and emphasize the Half-Elf's tendency for dabbling.

  10. Make a Saboteur class (Martial Controller), with these builds/sub-classes: Intimidator, controller version of the Inspiring Warlord... or Martial version of the Telephatic Psion if you prefer; Trapper, expert with traps and explosives, similar to the Tinkerer Artificer (although that's an Arcane Leader); Entangler, similar to the Retiarius, expert with entangling weapons like nets, whips or bolas. ...And any other additional twist you can come up with.

  11. Remove the "exotic weapon expertise multi-classing" and make the exotic weapons easier and more fun to use.

  12. Introduce firearms and support feats and material to go with them. Add a sub-class dedicated to their use for Artificer and maybe Ranger.

  13. Either remove "themes" (which would be a shame), or make them not optional and expand on them A LOT more. Make both setting-specific and non-setting-specific themes. Make Birthright's "Blooded" a theme. Make Forgotten Realms' "Spellscarred" and "Harper" as themes. Etc...

  14. Fix the way vampires are handled in the game, and give ONE, single way to make a Vampire character (either race, class, theme or feat progression can be good... as long as it's not all four at the same time).

  15. Publish these 8 settings and make none of them the "main" one. Greyhawk, Mystara, Dragonlance, Eberron, Forgotten Realms, Dark Sun, Birthright and Points of Light (which has already became a full-fledged setting, with additional material and with the novels, despite the initial intention of using it as a mere "basic draft"). Additionally, Rich Burlew's and Nathan Toomey's Fantasy Setting Search finalists, while totally unknown to all of us, could be interesting as the 9th and 10th choice (especially since Rich Burlew has gained a lot of fandom for his webcomic, The Order of the Stick). The (magically disappeared) material from Maztica, Oriental Adventures an Al-Qadim should be brought back, either as part of Forgotten Realms, mixed into the "generic" D&D stuff, or as something new.

  16. Other than introducing the setting's fluff (extremely important!), and adding character options (classes, sub-classes, races, sub-races, weapons, feats,  Paragon Paths, etc...), every single setting should have an optional mechanic (not an optional character option!) in it. Birthright could governate the "ruling" part of the game (only for Epic characters, or at least Paragon, or however they will be called); Dragonlance could governate the Dragon riding and the Dragon dueling; etc...

  17. Just like Greyhawk, Dragonlance and Forgotten Realms share a common cosmology and similar deities, this should be expanded to all other settings. Basically, all the D&D worlds/planets should simply be put inside a common void of space (inspired to the Spelljammer setting), and from there you can give to ALL of them the 4E cosmology with Shadowfell, Feywild, etc... (I don't see why change again), or alternatively the Great Wheel, or something different. The deities that appear in different settings (or the deities that are similar but with different names, or the deities that have the same name but differ slightly) should be "merged" into one, and explained as different aspects of the same deity. This doesnt' mean that all deities should be everywhere. Vecna should continue being absent from Dragonlance just like the Silver Flame should continue being an Eberron only thing, and Dark Sun should keep being devoid of gods.

  18. Allow for digital download of Manuals (PDF) and make them compatible and congruent with Dragon magazine's PDF expanded material.

  19. Don't you dare taking away the Character Builder (most useful tool D&D ever gave me, and the main reason why I payed subscription to D&D Insider) from me and make it an "online only" thing. Yes, I can still use it when I'm online, but it doesn't work as well, it doesn't look as well, and it's not practical for my D&D sessions. Also, allowing for some houseruling would be nice (if the RULES of the game allow for several ways to roll character abilities, I don't understand why all of my characters have to have a "houseruled" flag only because they don't have pre-set ability stats).

  20. Don't you dare CHILDIFY the 5th Edition with something as lame as Essentials. Additional powers, feats, weapons and other material are good. A dumbed down version of the game with less options is not.

Mine is pretty simple. I would like 5e to allow relatively simple conversion of my 3.5 characters (9 years worth of PCs and NPCs) to 5th Ed.  I'd like to be able to take the NPCs who are a half-celestial human barbarian2/cleric1/fighter4/ranger2/lightning warrior of Thor 15 and a drow sorcerer12/metamagic master 15 and have them, regardless of mechanics, able to do pretty much the same things they can do now.