Do we need new mechanics for 5E or focus on the old

There is alot of debate goin on about flavorful limitations on powers and abilities. In Older editions fighter-types could use there powers for an unlimited time. They never get tired as long as they have hitpoints they keep going. 4E went too Far in the other direction, giving fighters daily limitations on smack you in the face type moves. So far Next seems to be leaning towards the older edition type of fighter.

So just a Show of hands, yes or No who would want to see some sort of Stamina or Combo system that would be completely new to give the fighter types access to cool special moves that can do more than just damage, trip, knockback, defend the party or themselves. But not let them do it all the time.
We need to make D&D Next simple. Whatever system is in place needs to be simple and easily understood, and not have a lot of memory issues. 
Even 4E is simple, new players have an easy time with it. I think of Pathfinder Barbarians who get rounds of Rage per day. That is simple. Even easier to use than 3E rage times per day. If martial classes got so many stamina points per day. Or better yet I think per encounter would make more sense. We could have a nice simple system that lets fighters go above and beyond just hit them in the face if you wanted that. Or if you just want hit them in the face stamina could just let you do that more often.
Even 4E is simple, new players have an easy time with it. I think of Pathfinder Barbarians who get rounds of Rage per day. That is simple. Even easier to use than 3E rage times per day. If martial classes got so many stamina points per day. Or better yet I think per encounter would make more sense. We could have a nice simple system that lets fighters go above and beyond just hit them in the face if you wanted that. Or if you just want hit them in the face stamina could just let you do that more often.

I would like vey much a system centered on stamina points for martial classes and mana points for magic, and possibility of recover points with short rests. This system could easily balance classes and give a more realistic flavor.
No more vancian. No "edition war" for me, thank'you.
I personally think they where on the right track with the Power/Abilties.  This really is about as simple as you can get, my only issue with it was how it was used (Dailies and Encounters in particular).  It felt arbitrarily designed to support a balanced rule system but made absolutly no sense in the narrative even as a rationalized abstraction.  It was quite silly that a warrior could only do certain special moves once per day for some reason, being basicly Vanican magic for martial classes.  I also felt that the powers where too supernatural and often the tactical effects where again to unrealistic even as an abstraction.  Mind you Im not talking about simulation here, but just a believable narrative that didn't feel like some sort of Gamma world "freaky" world where everything and everyone was magical.

I think they need some basic resource management for abilities.  For example Fatigue or Endurance that is spent and regained during combat, with bigger more powerful abilities costing more fatigue/endurance or what have.  Basically what they did in WFRP.  This would have the same effect but rather than being some wierd abstract function (Daily/Encounter) its based on some aspect of the character that can be part of the decesion makign process of buildign your character.. aka do I take more constitution so I have more endurance, or do I go for strength to get more damage, or do I go for Dexterity to be more accurate.. Something that comes from the character rather than from an abstract rulesystem. 

I have the same beef with Action Points... its this kind of intangible, rationalized abstraction that really has nothing to do with the character, its just like a "mechanical" gizmo.  We actually redefined it as luck in my game just to give it some semblance of it being based on something.

This is actually one of the things that urks me about the system, they just made too many abstractions that had nothing to do with characters, reality or basis from some tangible aspect that can explain it.  Much of the system lays in these completetly obscure abstractions that give the worlds narrative a kind of wierd unrealistic feel to it (again not talking about simulation here).  A game worlds reality has to be explainable, it doesn't have to be "a function of the rules", but the rules have to have some tangible way for players to wrap their heads around it rather than just being their for "balance" sake.  Action Points, Healing Surges, the whole Daily/Weekly/Bi-Monthly power usage thing... none of it has any real basis in anything its just a really hard to swallow obscure abstraction that exists in a vacum. 

"Edition wars like all debates exist because people like debates"

http://www.gamersdungeon.net/

isent a "stamina system" just another term for encounter powers? 

take powerstrike for example, your arm cant swing that hard every attack, but maybe you wont put everything you got into your first few swings. it is more or less what your describing.

but sure i could go for giving martial classes some encounter resources, anything to get away from the dull MBA MBA MBA MBA MBA MBA system 
isent a "stamina system" just another term for encounter powers? 

take powerstrike for example, your arm cant swing that hard every attack, but maybe you wont put everything you got into your first few swings. it is more or less what your describing.

but sure i could go for giving martial classes some encounter resources, anything to get away from the dull MBA MBA MBA MBA MBA MBA system 



Its not the same thing because an "Encounter" power has nothing to do with player choice.  All characters in the game world are limited to using certain abilities once per Encounter.. some once per day irregardless of how they build their character, what choices they make it combat... it exists in a vacumm.

If there was some kind of endurance system you could for example use a certain powerful ability twice if you where willing to exhaust yourself.  I would imagine their would be actions you can take like "Moment of Rest" that would allow you to regain endurance, potions you could drink that give you endurance back, spells that refresh characters endurance.  There would be some coehision in the effect where players aren't arbitrarily governed by rules, but rather govern their resources and make decesions both during character building and during play.  Do I take a higher con? Do I take many lower endurance powers, or a couple of big ones.  Do I take feats that let me regain my endurance?  Do I spend my hard earned gold on Endurance potions.  Use a weapon that takes less endurance (but does less damage) or a bigger weapon that takes more endurance but does more damage?

You want it to be "managed" somehow, rather than just a hard line.

"Edition wars like all debates exist because people like debates"

http://www.gamersdungeon.net/

Shh, silence, please! Don't you know that "encounter powers" is a taboo?!
No more vancian. No "edition war" for me, thank'you.
4e actually had a system where a class had a limited amount of stamina each encounter that could be divided up however in order to do more impressive things until you had no stamina left, but they gave it to the Psionic classes and called the stamina power points. So there's already some precedent there. If you make stamina a daily resource instead of an encounter resource, that's 3.5 Psionics.
Dwarves invented beer so they could toast to their axes. Dwarves invented axes to kill people and take their beer. Swanmay Syndrome: Despite the percentages given in the Monster Manual, in reality 100% of groups of swans contain a Swanmay, because otherwise the DM would not have put any swans in the game.
and yes, D&DNext should go and try new game mechanics, instead of going back to old mechanics that were removed for obvious reason.  When i heard of D&DNext i was excited to see something new...instead i only saw something that looks more like monte cook's draft of 3rd edition...and i was actually expecting Mearls to discard everything Cook's contributed on Next and try to advance...go to the Next Edition of D&D with new game mechanics...sadly it's all the oposite...
Even 4E is simple, new players have an easy time with it. I think of Pathfinder Barbarians who get rounds of Rage per day. That is simple. Even easier to use than 3E rage times per day. If martial classes got so many stamina points per day. Or better yet I think per encounter would make more sense. We could have a nice simple system that lets fighters go above and beyond just hit them in the face if you wanted that. Or if you just want hit them in the face stamina could just let you do that more often.


Don't mistake ease of use for ease of mastery.

If I offer someone $11 next year for every $10 he gives me today (not an actual offer, sorry) then he can grasp what that basically is. BUT he can't necessarily compare it to everything else he can do with that money. Is that better than a savings account? A certificate of deposit? A savings bond? Does he have enough money to invest in a fund? What about real estate? What about buying into a business as a silent partner? What about going after equity in a business he can contribute to? 10% annual interest without compounding is very simple, but only if you completely divorce it from the proper context.

Decisions in D&D are a lot like this. "OK, this ability does X for Y rounds. That's a bonus!" Sure, but how does it interact with other bonuses? What are you forsaking to get it? What happens when you use it for a few rounds then stop? What happens if you use it all before encounter N? How many feats is it worth? How many levels is it worth taking in the class that grants this ability? How does it interact with items? With spells? What about potions? Is UMD in the game? Suddenly a seemingly simple ability is mired in uncertainty.

3E and 4E are both incredibly complex systems. A few items or spells here and there are complex all by themselves (e.g. Polymorph in 3E) but more than that the sheer freedom of both systems makes it very hard for anyone to know what a choice actually means outside of a severely limited context.

truth/humor
Ed_Warlord, on what it takes to make a thread work: I think for it to be really constructive, everyone would have to be honest with each other, and with themselves.

 

iserith: The game doesn't profess to be "just like our world." What it is just like is the world of Dungeons & Dragons. Any semblance to reality is purely coincidental.

 

Areleth: How does this help the problems we have with Fighters? Do you think that every time I thought I was playing D&D what I was actually doing was slamming my head in a car door and that if you just explain how to play without doing that then I'll finally enjoy the game?

 

TD: That's why they put me on the front of every book. This is the dungeon, and I am the dragon. A word of warning though: I'm totally not a level appropriate encounter.

isent a "stamina system" just another term for encounter powers? 

take powerstrike for example, your arm cant swing that hard every attack, but maybe you wont put everything you got into your first few swings. it is more or less what your describing.

but sure i could go for giving martial classes some encounter resources, anything to get away from the dull MBA MBA MBA MBA MBA MBA system 



wel a stamina system could also be somthing more like the folowing.

the top 50% of Hp is described as eing luck, endurence 9 stamina) in the Hp section of the playtest.
So maye you coud have fighters that ca spend HP to do special attacks as long as they remain above 50% Hp.
 irregardless 


You know that's not a word, right? It's gibberish; meaningless.


  It felt arbitrarily designed to support a balanced rule system but made absolutly no sense in the narrative even as a rationalized abstraction.  It was quite silly that a warrior could only do certain special moves once per day for some reason, being basicly Vanican magic for martial classes.

You're thinking about it backwards. 

Don't think of it as the Fighter only being able to execute his perfect strike once per day. He's going to try to use it as often as he can, but circumstances have to be exactly right for it to work, which only happens about one out of every fiveish battles.

At-Will exploits are safe. They're simple, reliable attacks that don't expose the Fighter to unacceptable risk and don't require perfect setup or timing. Encounter exploits are a bit riskier--you have to time them better, or wait for your opponent to leave the right opening in order for them to work. Daily exploits require that everything come together; your position and stance, your timing, the gap in your opponent's defenses, enough elbow room, enough space to launch the attack, etc. Try as you might, it's just not possible to get everything to "click" for that masterstroke very often.

Remember: flavor and mechanics interface, but one does not dictate the other. What happens in-world should be explainable in-game, and what happens in-game should be explainable in-world, but they need not be mirrors of one another.


 
So just a Show of hands, yes or No who would want to see some sort of Stamina or Combo system that would be completely new to give the fighter types access to cool special moves that can do more than just damage, trip, knockback, defend the party or themselves. But not let them do it all the time.

I think all classes need to have a selection of basic options appropriate to their function available to them at all times, as often as needed, in addition to the generic capabilities that all characters possess (such as making attacks). Even if a character has expended all of his consumable resources, his set of basic options still allows him to perform his job. Once that is in place, layering resource-management subsystems in to give characters additional capability and flexibility is good, if those subsystems are intuitive, intraclass and interclass balanced, thematically appropriate, and mechanically appropriate. 
You know that's not a word, right? It's gibberish; meaningless.



Its a colloquialism, grab a dictionary, look that one up.

You're thinking about it backwards



No I got it right, what you did is what I expected someone to eventually do, give a very long winded, elaborate rationalization for it.  I can rationalize anything into a fantasy game world.  Ultimatly it boils down to what level of realism (not simulation) you want in your game world.  If you think pigs should fly and speak french, you can add that to your game world and come up with a rationalization on how it came to be.  To me however even a fantasy game world has to have some level of natural assumption and basis of consistancy about how things work.  If you go overboard, it breaks the suspension of disbelief but more so it becomes bizzare and unwieldy to role-play in.  For example I expect that when I come accross something called an apple in the game world, that its an apple as I know it on earth and not a orange.  Its not that an apple in your game world can't be called an orange, but it just makes it confusing to intentionally throw a wrench in some presumptions going into a game and its not nescessary, if you want top make up a fruit, makeup a name for it so we can identify that "this is the fantasy part" and not some arbitrary attempt to confuse people.  Daily powers fall into that category, its a rosy description of what was basically a mechanical way to balance the game.  It was designed first, explained later.  There was little effort really to give it a sense of logic or realism, it has no basis in reality (I don't by that whole, it takes 24 hours exactly to time an attack at a particular moment across several fights, really you buy that?) its basically a very foreign abstracted rationalization for the mechanic.. an apple is an orange, now believe it damn it!  Its just like Vanican magic.  You read a book and than upon casting the spell you forget about it... now beleive it!  this is reality!... Ya sure we can "play the mechanic that way", but I'll always think its a silly notion because sometimes silly is just that, silly.

All Im saying is that, we should have a better system, that one was hard to swallow and Im not buying it.

I understand what your saying about flavour, I mean of course its a creative process but lets be real here, I don't think any reasonable person thinks that Encounter and Daily powers was some sort of creative endevour to give the game world some narrative spice.  It was a mathmatical way to control how often players use powers in the course of tactical combat, the flavour was something added later to explain this bizzare mechanic.



"Edition wars like all debates exist because people like debates"

http://www.gamersdungeon.net/

ok.... so you have system to do special moves a limited number of times per encounter....... (BUT THEY ARE NOT ENCOUNTER POWERS) this is so much diffrent and special!!!!

really? it is litterly the same mechanic, even if you have a list of things that the fighter can do, and have to spend stamina points to do, he is still going to be using abilities that are basicly encounter powers, dress it up all you want, claim your own genius and origional thought, but its not a new mechanic and your just arguing semantics.

 
I love encounter powers. Far more than daily. I think Stamina Points or ToB style maneuvers should be part of the core fighter. Give those who want something simple power strike as the default Stamina use power. The essentials slayer was very easy to use and very effective (although rather boring). That would be a good model for the core fighter and stamina points could easily turn this simple fighter more complex.
Stamina?  That makes me think it's gonna run out.  So you take the advantage of old school fighters away from them?

I think all day old school fighters really only need to more damage.  If a wizard can cast fireball and do all that damage to a big group, then let the fighter do that damage to everyone in the group one swing at a time. 

Damage is the fighter fix.  Damage and toughness.  Fighter save, they don't die.  When they hit the wizard with their axe, the wizard dies from pure HP blizzardry. 


If Next went completely from Daily to Encounter mechanics, that would be something cool.  But it's not gonna happen.
Stamina would be the extra damage effect. The fighter has great damage all the time but a few times per fight he can spend stamina to do even more.
So when they run out of stamina, they cry that they want to set up camp for the night? 

I prefer giving the fighter more dice and when they roll high they do more damage.
So when they run out of stamina, they cry that they want to set up camp for the night? 

I prefer giving the fighter more dice and when they roll high they do more damage.



No, you take a rest to get your Stamina back. It's like going for a jog or playing an intense sport. You get tired, you stop, grab something to drink and rest for a few minutes and you're fine.
"Death smiles at us all. All a man can do is smile back."
Seems like most are in favor of new mechanics. Lets face it in order to have cool special moves they need to have a limiting factor or you get a character that becomes a one trick pony. And most limiting facotors in previous editions have always been per day, rage, per day, smite be day, spells per day, lay on hands per day.

Now the question is how far to take a Stamina System. Would it be fighter only, or could each martial class get stamina and gain different benefits from it. Stamina would fuel barbaian rage, give fighters tactical strikes, add mobility to the ranger and rogue. Or would you rather see a rage system for barbaian, combo system for rogue, Quarry system for ranger. In order to make everything unique and interesting.

I do know it would be a pain to make a new unique system for every class. It also makes multi-classing less viable as unique systems do not mesh well with each other. it is why multi-class spell casters stopeed being useful in 3E.
In my humble opinion, the 'coolest' special move will always be the one I think of on the spot, that fits the circumstances of the story and the spectacular scene that my imagination and the DM's description have assembled.  Nothing else can even begin to compete.

You can mechanically pass out generic guidelines to work by ('disruptive combat maneuvers', 'defensive combat maneuvers', etc), but no matter how hard you try you aren't going to come up with something that will always fit the situation and be a special, unique 'power'.  Even something as basic as Cleave has situations where 'attack multiple enemies in a single stroke' fits, but the cold, staid mechanical description of Cleave itself will not.

"Lightning...it flashes bright, then fades away.  It can't protect, it can only destroy."


 
Don't think of it as the Fighter only being able to execute his perfect strike once per day. He's going to try to use it as often as he can, but circumstances have to be exactly right for it to work, which only happens about one out of every fiveish battles.

At-Will exploits are safe. They're simple, reliable attacks that don't expose the Fighter to unacceptable risk and don't require perfect setup or timing. Encounter exploits are a bit riskier--you have to time them better, or wait for your opponent to leave the right opening in order for them to work. Daily exploits require that everything come together; your position and stance, your timing, the gap in your opponent's defenses, enough elbow room, enough space to launch the attack, etc. Try as you might, it's just not possible to get everything to "click" for that masterstroke very often.




Hmm.  Still played like my 4e fighter had morphed into a spellcaster.... 

As long as they don't rely on metagaming like "you wait for the perfect moment to use the power, but you can really use it whenever you want" explanation, I don't really care. As long as cool fighter abilities have an in-character handle, I'm down.
ok.... so you have system to do special moves a limited number of times per encounter....... (BUT THEY ARE NOT ENCOUNTER POWERS) this is so much diffrent and special!!!!

really? it is litterly the same mechanic, even if you have a list of things that the fighter can do, and have to spend stamina points to do, he is still going to be using abilities that are basicly encounter powers, dress it up all you want, claim your own genius and origional thought, but its not a new mechanic and your just arguing semantics.

 




Encounter powers in the 4e sense are a power you can only use once, then it's gone until you rest, even if you can still use other abilities.

In a stamina system, you could use your Power Strike or whatever 3 or 4 times in an encounter, but doing so will exhaust you so if the fight lasts longer than that your output will drop off sharply. On the other hand if you could tell the fight was going to last that long, you might use your stamina more conservatively, using more efficient but less powerful attacks. Or you might use free attacks and save your big guns for opportune moments when that enemy is starting to get low, and you can't kill them with a basic but with your best power you can take them out.

Basically a stamina system gets rid of the weirdness of AEDU, but introduces resource management and interesting choices to the Fighter. It also opens up possibility to give more powerful options that would be unbalanced if made at will, but are perfectly fine if they can't be spammed all day every day.
ok.... so you have system to do special moves a limited number of times per encounter....... (BUT THEY ARE NOT ENCOUNTER POWERS) this is so much diffrent and special!!!!

really? it is litterly the same mechanic, even if you have a list of things that the fighter can do, and have to spend stamina points to do, he is still going to be using abilities that are basicly encounter powers, dress it up all you want, claim your own genius and origional thought, but its not a new mechanic and your just arguing semantics.

 




Encounter powers in the 4e sense are a power you can only use once, then it's gone until you rest, even if you can still use other abilities.

In a stamina system, you could use your Power Strike or whatever 3 or 4 times in an encounter, but doing so will exhaust you so if the fight lasts longer than that your output will drop off sharply. On the other hand if you could tell the fight was going to last that long, you might use your stamina more conservatively, using more efficient but less powerful attacks. Or you might use free attacks and save your big guns for opportune moments when that enemy is starting to get low, and you can't kill them with a basic but with your best power you can take them out.

Basically a stamina system gets rid of the weirdness of AEDU, but introduces resource management and interesting choices to the Fighter. It also opens up possibility to give more powerful options that would be unbalanced if made at will, but are perfectly fine if they can't be spammed all day every day.





I like the stamina system the way you describe it. It gets a bit complex, but would be a nice mechanic for 5e.

As for the tread question, I woud like to see new mechanics, working from the current game, being aware of its past, but looking for the best posible solutions ypu can have today. Its rather disapointing going back to old solutions just for the sake of tradition, if we have better solutions now.
Yes. I would like to see new mechanics for everything, with inspiration drawn from the past.

I want Attack combos for Fighters. (IMO the easiest and sexiest of ideas. Stamina sounds like more of the same). If you want ideas for setting them up, how about: When you hit AC +5, or when you hit an enemy threatened by an ally, or if you hit and haven't moved yet this turn, or you hit with both attacks using your fighter's surge. Laughing See I quickly came up with four triggers for combos. Easy to learn and fun to play. Do damage and knock people down. The only resource a fighter should need to worry about is HP.

I want Clerics that don't suck. The jury is still out on D&D Next, but I'm hopeful.

I want Rogues that can do a lot more than stab you in the back. I like what I'm seeing, but this one will depend on how balanced bounded accuracy ends up being.

I want Wizards who prepare spells and carry spellbooks. I will modify any "plain vanilla" Vancian model WotC gives us. I will keep the spirit of the idea, but will REJECT and REPLACE anything that simply rehashes 3.5 spellcasting. We have evolved the capability to do better. Please WotC, strive to do better. I don't want wizards with mana points (thats Psionics in D&D).
Sign In to post comments