5th Edition: "D&D Saga"

I love that someone made a poll (of sorts) and is tracking prefered options, but in the poll you only get to choose from the creator's choices. I think it is a valuable source of information, but I want a system that is very much like Saga and that choice is no where in the poll. I'm hoping I'm not the only one and that perhaps we can get more support for that idea.

If you agree, post what you like.

If you don't agree, just please ignore the thread and move on. I don't want a flame war, just an idea of how many others want D&D Saga.

I love the talents, talent trees, and multiclassing. The skills are simplified but functional. A character concept can easily emerge from the creation method and still match the concept and be functional. I realize that some classes may become "multiclassed" instead of having their own class. (Paladin could easily be a cleric/fighter with picks from each, likely with a Paladin talent tree in cleric.)

I really love the flexibility and level of customization in Saga. I hate when everyone sits down and asks "what are you", not "who are you", but "what are you". Can't blame them though, every class defined the character more than the character defined the character.
I entirely agree. This perfectly describes my feelings for saga edition.

I've been saying this since the 5e rumors started. At the very least I think SWSE is a great platform, or starting point from which to design the new game.


 One big idea I have, because I hate that your role is determined by your class, is that different talent trees in the classes represent different roles in the group. So you fighter can pick talents from the striker, leader, defender, or controller trees exclusively, or you can pick from them all.


 Just one of the ideas I’ve thought of, there are many more.

I would like having D&D Saga; it is my favorite d20 version.

The math needs to be rejiggered and there needs to be a clearer distinction between what talents represent and what feats represent. 
The biggest complaint I've heard about Saga, from my sometimes saga group, is that Force powers are broken beyond belief. These issues would need to be fixed for spellcasters, before I can really get behind D+D Saga.
The biggest complaint I've heard about Saga, from my sometimes saga group, is that Force powers are broken beyond belief.

Not overly.
What Saga does well, is go ahead and let the Jedi and Heavy Weapons Guys do all the killing, while other characters get to be 'fixers' and mr. moneybags.

The biggest complaint I've heard about Saga, from my sometimes saga group, is that Force powers are broken beyond belief.

Not overly.
What Saga does well, is go ahead and let the Jedi and Heavy Weapons Guys do all the killing, while other characters get to be 'fixers' and mr. moneybags.




You are completely not disagreeing with him.

Saga was balanced worse than any edition of D&D I have played (2E and on), to the point where I am absolutely shocked to consistently see posters on this board claiming it was a good system.
The difference between madness and genius is determined only by degrees of success.
Keep the talents and free multiclassing. Those were the best parts of Saga.
Wishlist: -Alternate ability bonuses for pre-PHB3 races -Lots more superior implements or an official customization rule -Monk multiclass feat that grants Unarmed Combatant
Every system has balance issues, very few systems will ever be well balanced because people can find breaks and exploits. What Saga did well was allow people to play whatever they wanted in the SW universe and have it be functional for that role. A diplomat can talk and convice very well, and be OK at combat. A combat monster wasn't the best at talking, but was ok. Any character that focused into one small facet to an extreme was phenominal in that area, but very weak at almost everything else compared to other characters.

I, and likely many others, focus on the positives of the system. You have variety, choices, characters that are functional across the board, and people can be diverse even if they have the same class. I like that my character, who isn't a pilot can still pilot a ship in normal situations, try to pilot through combat if needed, and gets a little better at everything as I level up. Sure, he'll never be the Duros pilot, but at least it's not......."Someone has to be the pilot", or "Do we have a cleric", questions during character creation.

As for force powers, yes, that would need to be tweaked to work for D&D type of spellcasting. I agree that force powers may seem over powered, but remember that it takes a feat to get a few that are encounter powers, takes another feat every time you want more, and often a third feat (skill focus) to be able to use the more powerful ones. If I put three feats in a combat tree I'd get a pretty good payoff from that too. Not saying they are perfectly balanced, but they aren't freebee's either.

I agree no system, not even Saga, is perfect. In my opinion it is far better than any edition of D&D, I know you disagree. I believe that we likely have different play styles and our groups are very different since we have such different opinions. I prefer Saga because it works well for my expectaions and play style as I expect your favored system does for you. Hope we can just agree to disagree. Wink
The biggest complaint I've heard about Saga, from my sometimes saga group, is that Force powers are broken beyond belief. These issues would need to be fixed for spellcasters, before I can really get behind D+D Saga.



The biggest reason force powers are broken is the math whereby a 1st level jedi can can easily beat any defenses for the level she encounters.  Port over the 4e math engine and a huge portion of the broken-ness is fixed.

Other than that, it is the same process of comparing spell effect after spell effect to other portions of the game which is going to happen no matter what the next edition will look like.
Saga has, more-or-less, a concept of Noncombat Classes.  D&D usually does not.
I agree that I would like to see D&DN be like Saga in the design of the classes.  One class of each power source, with different talent trees.  Specialized classes like the Paladin, Monk, or Bard would be Prestige Classes.  

Rather than have spells be dependant on feats, I'd like to see them be taken using the talent tree system witihn the Arcane power source class.  Saga really didn't have a "magic using class" as the Jedi was really closer to a fighter than a mage.  Instead, the "spells" of the game were available to any class with the appropriate feats.  Making spells dependant on talent trees would mean that the arcane power source class wouldn't have as many class features as a martial class, but magic-users really only tend to have spellcasting a class feature anyway.  Furthermore, the spells themselves would need to scale with level rather than a spell along the lines of Force Lightning with its 8d6 damage available at first level.  Finally, attacks with spells would need to depend on a 4E style attack roll rather than a skill check.

Speaking of skills, the skill system would probably need to mirrior 3.5's in the need for skill points in order to keep that base happy, but a module allowing for a Saga/4E style of system for skills would be awesome.  Maybe only class skills would get the +1/2 level bonus.

In all, I really do hope D&DN has options for those of us who like Saga's style of game but want to play D&D with the system.
I don't know if Monk, Paladin or Bard would be Prestige Classes persay. I'd say they'd be more like talent trees within the base classes, well.. then again maybe paladin as a sort of half and half of fighter and cleric... I could see both methods working now that you mention it. Except I just see monk more or less as a fighter tree that lets you fight unarmed.

*Shifts back and forth* To be honest, I thought how 4th ed handled powers was just fine. Except Dailies... those just need to be tweaked somehow. Cause too many players either just spam them or are paranoid about them. Also they need to do what they did with psionics to each of the power sources.

Do we really need to bring the 3.5 system for skills back? I mean... they just were so annoying to keep tabs with especially if you're a rogue. Cause you never had enough skill points to do what all you needed to do in certain games.

Though on the whole, I'd love it if DnD 5th ed had a Saga like system built into it. 
The two biggest problems I have in this idea:

There will be no single version of DDN. There will be modular rules where you get to cherry pick. Will SAGE-type themes fit in there somewhere? Not unlikely! I'm sure 5e will look to what worked and fixed problems in other games.

There is already a SAGA-type D&D game; it's a private venture called "Legends". I can post a link if you need it, but it's not hard to find.

Supporting an edition you like does not make you an edition warrior. Demanding that everybody else support your edition makes you an edition warrior.

Why do I like 13th Age? Because I like D&D: http://magbonch.wordpress.com/2013/10/16/first-impressions-13th-age/

AzoriusGuildmage- "I think that you simply spent so long playing it, especially in your formative years with the hobby, that you've long since rationalized or houseruled away its oddities, and set it in your mind as the standard for what is and isn't reasonable in an rpg."

+1 from me. The user who mentioned that force powers would need to be tweaked to mirror spells is fine or they could just give spellcasters a table lie they did in 3.5. A Saga based D&D would also be modular enough for 5th ed. It desn't have to be a 100% converiosn of Saga but WoTC could do worse than look elsewhere IMHO.

 Fear is the Mind Killer

 Fear is the Mind Killer  

I never played SAGA. How much a departure is it from d20 Modern?

Gold is for the mistress, silver for the maid

Copper for the craftsman, cunning at his trade.

"Good!" said the Baron, sitting in his hall,

"But Iron -- Cold Iron -- is master of them all." -Kipling

 

Miss d20 Modern? Take a look at Dias Ex Machina Game's UltraModern 4e!

 

57019168 wrote:
I am a hero, not a chump.

It is very similar to d20 modern in the respect that classes are based upon having talent trees.  It really is an incremental step in between d20 modern and 4e.  Lots of the persnickity d20 rules were simplified and streamlined.  Defenses became static like 4e.  Force powers (spells) are per encounter abilities.  It retains base attack bonus and prestige classes.  d20-style multiclassing is heavily encouraged.
 
The biggest problem is that Saga is not even close to being balanced at all.  The math is completely wonky.  Some talents are virtually worthless while others are nigh godlike.  Some force powers are virtually worthless while others are nigh godlike.  Evasion is so important that every single character will multiclass into scout at some point to get it.


The real beauty is that it is rather a fusion of a class based system with a class-less system.  For thoses that like strong class archetypes and having everyone stay in their niche, Saga really isn't the system for them.  For those that like to mix and match to make their own special creation while still having some class structure to guide things, it is spectacular.

SWSE had good ideas, but there were some major balance problems.

First off, the only Force power that scaled well with level and did consistent damage was Move Object. The rest stopped off somewhere around DC 20 or so. Move Object was the only one that could be scaled up to DC 40+.

It also desperately needed Skill Points instead of its wonky Skill Training system. Sure you "could" fly a ship without being trained in Pilot, but you'd crash almost instantly if you rolled below a 17 on a d20 if any Pilot checks were required. Having to sacrifice a Feat for another trained skill hurt even worse. Jedi were particularly hindered because, unlike spellcasters in 3.x, there wasn't a Force ability that could cover for everything.

Now, that having been said, a better formula would've been (CL + Ability Mod + Skill Points Invested) rather than (CL + Ability Mod + (5 if trained, otherwise 0)). Give everyone ((Int Mod or 1, whichever is greater) * 2) or so Skill Points per level. That would help justify some of those awful high Skill Challenge DCs.

Talents were good, but easy multiclassing made some Talent + Feat pairing too beardy. Particularly Trick Step + Dastardly Strike + Riflemaster + some of the Ambusher talents from the Soldier class in a high- Dex build that could one- shot someone with a good damage roll. 6d12 damage, ignoring the target's Dex bonus, anyone?

Ironically, though, Trick Step was almost a must-have talent because defenses were absurdly easy to stack. There were only a few ways to stack hit buffs (weapon upgrades gave +3, I think, plus Trick Step and Weapon Focus), while there were a bajillion ways to stack defenses without even putting on a suit of armor. I think average accuracy in SWSE is somewhere around 15%. That'll need serious buffing if we want to base 5e off it; I'd say about 60% or so.

And one other personal issue. For the love of Pete, don't restrict the more flavorful books to absurdly small print runs! I'm still looking for a copy of Knights of the Old Republic, which had such a small print run as to be going for several hundred dollars on Amazon, if you can find it at all.
When I heard 4e was coming out, I too hoped it would be akin to Saga. Alas, I was woefully disappointed. Although Saga was far from perfect, it seemed like the next logical evolution of 3e. But 4e, seemed like an entirely different game.


That being said, after looking at the playtest materials, I no longer want to see D&D go in "Saga-esque" direction. Although I enjoyed Saga more than 3e (and far more 4e),  I can see how 5e could easily go in a direction that is even closer to the type of game I want to play.

Just my two cents. 
The biggest complaint I've heard about Saga, from my sometimes saga group, is that Force powers are broken beyond belief.

Not overly.
What Saga does well, is go ahead and let the Jedi and Heavy Weapons Guys do all the killing, while other characters get to be 'fixers' and mr. moneybags.




You are completely not disagreeing with him.

Saga was balanced worse than any edition of D&D I have played (2E and on), to the point where I am absolutely shocked to consistently see posters on this board claiming it was a good system.



It was a good system for playing Starwars.
The biggest complaint I've heard about Saga, from my sometimes saga group, is that Force powers are broken beyond belief.

Not overly.
What Saga does well, is go ahead and let the Jedi and Heavy Weapons Guys do all the killing, while other characters get to be 'fixers' and mr. moneybags.




You are completely not disagreeing with him.

Saga was balanced worse than any edition of D&D I have played (2E and on), to the point where I am absolutely shocked to consistently see posters on this board claiming it was a good system.



It was a good system for playing Starwars.



There have been better. Saga ties to many abilites weirdly to level that really shouldn't. The Noble for example had the give me my level x 1000 credits every level talent, narratively this was a nightmare as people could take any amount of time between in game months to hours to level depending on the plot.  
In my games players have always been Exceptional individuals, not Exceptions to the internal logic of the game world.
The biggest complaint I've heard about Saga, from my sometimes saga group, is that Force powers are broken beyond belief.

Not overly.
What Saga does well, is go ahead and let the Jedi and Heavy Weapons Guys do all the killing, while other characters get to be 'fixers' and mr. moneybags.






Thats the problem whith some people. They think every single class must be great in combat, combat and only combat is used as reference for how good, or fun a character is. There are many aspects of the game that sould be highlighted other than
Just combat, and i know many people that have characters that to avoid combat situations as much as they can. Its just a character concept, thare is a lot of stuff beiond combat, so arguing classes arent balanced combat wise is kind of the wrong idew imo.

About Saga i preety much like it, i agree DnD shoul take what is best avout it.