Thumbs up and thumbs down

6 posts / 0 new
Last post

Like:
• Surprise = -20 initiative
• Switching weapons, retrieving potions etc = free actions
• Advantage/disadvantage
• Ethereal combines insubstantial & phasing
• The idea of ringmail
• Masterwork weapons
• You can’t buy or sell magic items
• You can still buy healing potions
• Minor spells
• Backgrounds
• Themes
• Feats seem much more useful. Hoping we never see feats with prereqs like: pixie, barbarian, must worship Pelor
• Channel divinity
• Kind of really like the commoner background and the ‘trade’ background feature. Really nice for people who like such things


Dislike:
• Modes of movement too fiddly. I can see why some prefer gridless combat, but going back to measuring in feet vs. squares seems fiddly now that I am used to the other
• No slowed condition? Hoping they would fix i.e. ‘a slowed creature cannot run or charge’
• No charging?
• Heavy armor as others have said
• Spell AoE types - thought 4E was elegant, guess its hard to apply to gridless combat
• I’ve never liked the 'I’m 7th level but I can only cast 4th level spells' syndrome. It’s so unintuitive. I liked that in 4E your level = available power level.
• Not a huge fan of vancian magic but I don’t hate it
• Would have preferred to keep fort/ref/will as defenses
• Monster stat blocks; maybe it’s just the presentation but at least they are brief.
• Didn’t like roles for PCs but I wished they had been kept for monsters- provides for more variation


Hmm:
• Hit die as healing surges seems ok
• Intoxicated is an amusing condition but did we really need it?
• Prone: why -2 to attack and not just disadvantage on attacks (unless using crossbow)?
• Thrown weapon max ranges seem really long?
• What’s the difference between greatsword and greataxe? Are there still proficiency bonuses?
• Schools of magic still exist- are/will there be mechanics to enhance this?

On the topic of feet vs squares, I can understand why some people would prefer squares, but I always felt hexes were better, so I'm glad I can take feet and use them to make hexes, and people who actually like squares can just use feet to make squares. It's a solution that serves everyone.
On the topic of feet vs squares, I can understand why some people would prefer squares, but I always felt hexes were better, so I'm glad I can take feet and use them to make hexes, and people who actually like squares can just use feet to make squares. It's a solution that serves everyone.

Great point, hadn't thought of that. Now I can use the back side of my Chessex battle mat! I've officially changed my stance. I now prefer the expressions in feet. Thanks!

As for ft. vs squares, I don't get why they don't just do both. It's pretty easy to list people's speed as 30 ft. (6 squares). Then everyone is happy.

1 square = 5' = 1", it doesent really matter. This mechanich goes back to the tactacal game roots of D&D. Like WAY back. As for using the hex, why not. Well look at flanking, how would it be drawn? Grids made layout easier since we used graph paper back in the day. 
MY DM COMMITMENT To insure that those who participate in any game that I adjudicate are having fun, staying engaged, maintaining focus, contributing to the story and becoming legendary. "The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules." Gary Gygax Thanks for that Gary, so now stop playing RAW games. Member of the Progressive Front of Grognardia Suicide Squad
Prior to 4E I described things in meters, fudging that 5 feet was close enough to 1meter as far as I cared.  That worked really well for my group, and when 4E introduced squares it wasn't even a change for us.

@Lharn 

I would assume charging and slow will show up later on in the testing

can you explain what the issue with
"• Heavy armor as others have said"

Spell shapes, I actually prefer having shapes that describe it, burst/blast were so often confused in my group, it's nice to have an immediate mental image from "sphere" or "cylinder" or "line" although i'd probably rather the latter be "beam"

I would actually prefer to have them have awesome names for the spell levels based on how progression works.

0 Cantrip, 1 Minor, 2 Major, 

I doubt AC will ever be renamed in dnd, but I would have been happy with it just being "Defense" since I liked that term in 4E.  I think the saves streamline things nicely for this edition

What didn't you like about the stat blocks?  I was wishing the spells would have brief descriptions so I didn't have to check the beastiary/spell-list mid-fight

Agreed on the roles for monsters, or even just sample names to call them by weapon used.  I liked the term skullcleaver, and would like to see the names used consistently throughout the encounter description.
Please collect and update the DND Next Community Wiki Page with your ideas and suggestions!
Take a look at my clarified ability scores And also my Houserules relevent to DNDNext