D&D Next Q&A: Rage, Transitioning Character & Weapon Dice

In this week's D&D Next Q&A, Rodney talks about barbarian rage, transitioning characters from basic to standard and weapon dice!

Trevor Kidd Community Manager

I'm liking more and more the relationship between Basic and Standard.  That they're the same game, only presented differently.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
I'm liking more and more the relationship between Basic and Standard.  That they're the same game, only presented differently.



Exactly.  It's basically starting off with a pre-gen character, and then being told "now you get to make your own choices."  The rules are the same, it's just the level of choice you have.  Which is fantastic.

Re: daily rages, makes sense, and it's a good point that in a fight that only lasts 3-4 rounds, raging is a bit overkill to do every time.  It also explains why the Barbarian gets so many per-level abilities compared to a fighter, because their main schtick is more limited.

1 Was the barbarian's rage mechanic always a per-day mechanic in internal playtesting? Could it be an encounter-based resource?

We wanted a barbarian going into a rage to feel like a big moment—like flicking on a light switch of awesomeness. To make it feel like that, the mechanical effect needed to be big and powerful, and as such it wasn’t something we wanted you to be doing infinitely—at least, not at low levels. The other side of that coin is that encounters in D&D Next aren’t usually intended to last that long, so basing anything—rage or beyond—on the encounter is a tricky proposition, because it can easily slide into being so frequent that it almost becomes at-will.



So the Barbarian con only rage as many times as once per battle by level 9? that's pretty much at-will. Yeah, this is one of those places where they need some requirement for the rage to kick in like bloodied, or a chance every time they get hit or hit an enemy or something interesting like that. Otherwise its just a daily martial resource that half the fan base will rail against and the other half won't like because its not unique.


WotC: C+


2 Will "basic" version characters be upgradeable to "standard" version midway through a campaign?

Yes, that is the goal. We want the transition between basic and standard D&D to be as seamless as possible for players and Dungeon Masters alike; this means a DM who starts with the basic rules should also be able to transition to playing a more standard or advanced game if he or she chooses. Our hope is that if you start at the basic game and crave more customizability, you dig into the standard game and find that you simply have more choices and options for your character at that point, with no “conversion” required.



Nice idea, I wonder who thought of it first? Oh wait that would be me in my free game Aetherianica. Don't belive me, go check it out for yourself.


WotC: F (keep your eyes on your own work).


3Will weapon damage dice be functionally the same as martial damage dice?

In some ways, yes; our goal is to use weapon dice as a part of the standard progression for martial-type characters. We’re also experimenting with some different presentations to make it clearer how they work. Additionally, we’re playtesting some mechanics for the fighter (and potentially the rogue) that let them do the things that maneuvers/skill tricks do now, without requiring you to pay for them with your damage dice.



Ok, so not only do they get massive damage, they will get free maneuvers? Yeah, So still going for Fighters are best at Fighting rather than Fighters are best at weapon and armor usage.


WotC: C (Please review how basic math works).

"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
The whole fun thing about MDD is the ability to trade damage for tricks. If there is no trade, then it's pretty boring.

Of course, boring may be the goal...

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

I assume that the logic is this:


They want to make the MDD use the weapon die rather than d6s.

If you just make them all into [W] the damage gets even greater than it is now - and they want to rein in the damage, not increase it.

So they have to have fewer dice to play with.

Taking away some of the dice limits their options for maneuvers etc.

So they have to have maneuvers, etc. which do not require the martial damage dice or they end up having too few options.

Personally - I like the idea I tossed up somewhere along the line:  MDD use d6s - but for every point of strength bonus you can change one MDD to a [W] die instead.  So high strength characters have an incentive to use big weapons - but they aren't all automatically [W] dice, all the time.  (It also helps out the low [W] dagger fighters, etc.  as their d6s aren't automatically all turned into d4s).

Carl
I wouldn't mind the loss of dice-for-effect trades on all maneuvers if, perhaps, it was maintained as an option on most (or even just some) maneuvers.

So you'd have "Normal maneuver effect" and then "If you spend 1 die, get this; If you spend 2 dice, get this."
Feedback Disclaimer
Yes, I am expressing my opinions (even complaints - le gasp!) about the current iteration of the play-test that we actually have in front of us. No, I'm not going to wait for you to tell me when it's okay to start expressing my concerns (unless you are WotC). (And no, my comments on this forum are not of the same tone or quality as my actual survey feedback.)
A Psion for Next (Playable Draft) A Barbarian for Next (Brainstorming Still)
Q&A Haiku Time!

Encounter rages?
Next encounters are too short
Please don't be angry.

Basic v. Standard?
Upgrading Basic PCs
Should be quite seamless.

Weapon damage dice?
Like martial damage dice
But with more awsome!
I wouldn't mind the loss of dice-for-effect trades on all maneuvers if, perhaps, it was maintained as an option on most (or even just some) maneuvers.

So you'd have "Normal maneuver effect" and then "If you spend 1 die, get this; If you spend 2 dice, get this."



I like this.

Carl
This is the kind of mechanic that the Barbarian needs to solve the rage problem.


2e Viking Breserker

 To achieve a berserk state, the berserker must spend one round working himself into a frenzy, biting his shield, howling, et cetera.  At the end of the round, the berserker must make a save v. death to reach the berserk state; otherwise, he may continue for up to ten rounds, saving at the end of each round.  If he has not reached the berserk state before this, at the end of the tenth round of working, the berserk state is reached automatically.


  The berserk state automatically increases Strength by 2 points, or one "category" if 18, up to a maximum of 19; all strength effects including weight allowance, hit and damage bonuses, doors, bars & gates apply.  The berserker also gains 2 hp per level added to the total hp during the frenzy, which are used before normal hp.  AC also improves, base AC improving by 1 class per level to a best AC of 0.  Armor class bonuses such as shield, magic, and dexterity still apply (achieving a better AC), but armor negates this benefit.  The berserk state also confers a +2 bonus on saves v. charms and mind-based attacks.  However, once the berserk state is reached, the character must enter melee immediately.  He may choose his opponent, but if he holds back from battle for more than two rounds he loses the berserk state.  Once an opponent is chosen, the berserker will not change opponents until the opponent is slain or flees beyond the berserker's ability to pursue.  If the character retreats, he loses the berserk state immediately, including all benefits gained.  The state will end whenever the berserker wishes it to, or at the end of number of rounds equal to the character's constitution.


  At the end of the berserk fury, the character must save v. death to avoid exhaustion.  Exhaustion is manifested by strength five points below normal until the character has the opportunity to rest; it returns at the rate of one point per turn of rest.  During this time of reduced strength, the character cannot become berserk again.


 


I wouldn't mind the loss of dice-for-effect trades on all maneuvers if, perhaps, it was maintained as an option on most (or even just some) maneuvers.

So you'd have "Normal maneuver effect" and then "If you spend 1 die, get this; If you spend 2 dice, get this."



That makes sense.  Kind of like wizard spells that can be cast at multiple levels, i.e. Magic Missle.  If you use the basic "free" version, you get Effect.  Or you can spend limited resources to get Effect+.
@dmgorgon:

Up to ten rounds to enter a rage?!  What's the point of saving to enter a rage, particularly since playtest combats tend to run three to five rounds?  

Also, can we please stop asking people to alter their Ability scores mid-combat?  

For the 2e Rage effect, let's translate it into playtest terms as follows:
When in a rage you gain the following benefits:


  • You receive a +1 bonus to Strength-based ability checks, attacks and saving throws, and to damage rolls with melee and thrown weapons.  

  • If you are unarmored, you gain a bonus to your AC equal to your level (to a maximum AC of 20)

  • You have advantage on saving throws against charm effects


The rage has the following drawbacks:


  • If you don't use your action to make a melee or thrown weapon attack against an enemy you attacked in your previous turn, you must make a Constitution save DC 15 to maintain the rage.  However, if the enemy you attacked in your previous turn is dead or incapacitated, you must instead attack a different enemy or make a Constitution save DC 15 to maintain the rage.

  • The rage ends when you have no additional enemies to attack.

  • You can also end the rage with an action.

  • When the rage ends, make a Constitution save DC 15 or have disadvantage as to all attack rolls, ability checks, and saving throws until after a short rest.



@dmgorgon:

Up to ten rounds to enter a rage?!  What's the point of saving to enter a rage, particularly since playtest combats tend to run three to five rounds?  

Also, can we please stop asking people to alter their Ability scores mid-combat?  

For the 2e Rage effect, let's translate it into playtest terms as follows:
When in a rage you gain the following benefits:


  • You receive a +1 bonus to Strength-based ability checks, attacks and saving throws, and to damage rolls with melee and thrown weapons.  

  • If you are unarmored, you gain a bonus to your AC equal to your level (to a maximum AC of 20)

  • You have advantage on saving throws against charm effects


The rage has the following drawbacks:


  • If you don't use your action to make a melee or thrown weapon attack against an enemy you attacked in your previous turn, you must make a Constitution save DC 15 to maintain the rage.  However, if the enemy you attacked in your previous turn is dead or incapacitated, you must instead attack a different enemy or make a Constitution save DC 15 to maintain the rage.

  • The rage ends when you have no additional enemies to attack.

  • You can also end the rage with an action.

  • When the rage ends, make a Constitution save DC 15 or have disadvantage as to all attack rolls, ability checks, and saving throws until after a short rest.






What triggers the rage though? that's the important part we are discussing...Smile
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
1) That is what I've been saying.

2) That is what I've being saying

3) I've predicted this.

MDD and WDD would be very variant in dice size. So WDD would get fewer dice. But then flexibility is weakened. So I can see maneuvers granting more power for free, maneuver effects being combined (bull rush+Knockdown), or increase in power exponentially (one die does this. Two dice does 3 times this)

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

The whole fun thing about MDD is the ability to trade damage for tricks. If there is no trade, then it's pretty boring. Of course, boring may be the goal...



You know what could be cool...if expertise was an encounter resource. Then damage could be balanced around the mostly at will fighter who has a few expertise points.

The fighter spends expertise to perferm "ubercool maneuvers". One might be simply straight +1[W] damage. Another allows you to make a sweeping strike against each adjacent creature. Still another might allow you to push a foe back or knock it prone.

Basically, this allows for the cool choices of "do I want more damage or a cool effect right now?" and "should I save my expertise for when I'm surrounded to perform a sweeping strike or do I use it now to try and knock this guy off a cliff?"
   
While I'm not as sure now, I initially read the response about manouevers being disconnected from WDD as an opt-in thing, like from a feat.  IE, trip normally costs 1 DD lets say, but with the improved trip feat, it can be done as part of any action?

The other possibility is one that I've seen mentioned before.  Essentially, all manouevers are standard combat actions, likely requiring an opposed check.  What getting the manouever does is allows you to skip the check entirely, and/or use it as part of an attack,  but pay for the privelage with Damage Dice.  That seems a good compromise to the 'Why can't my Wizard/Paladin/Cleric trip people crowd, while still giving fighters a nice perk.
Susan Summerson from the Hell breaks loose Flavorful Voting Game http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29076567/Hell_breaking_loose:_an_Avacyn_Restored_voting_game?pg=1 Click here for more Forum Games:
Show
Susan Summerson also appeared in the Innistrad Mafia Game http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/28609371/Innistrad_Mafia?pg=1 Writer of Nally Bear from The Gathering Flavorful Voting Game: http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/28846821/The_Gathering:_M12_flavorful_voting_game?pg=1 Writer of Phyrex the Myr from Phyrexia Reborn: http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/27993097/Phyrexia_Reborn:_A_Flavorful_Voting_Game?pg=1 Writer of Tinker the Myr from Legacy of Karn: http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/26647005/Karns_Legacy_(A_flavorful_voting_game) Writer of Crusader Tolkana, who has appeared in: Eldrazi Awaken: http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/24071149/Eldrazi_Awaken:_A_flavorful_voting_game?pg=1 Colors of Magic: http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/25352501/Colors_of_Magic:_a_flavor_game?pg=1 Guildwars III: http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/26082093/Guildwars_III:_Shattered_Pact_(A_flavorful_voting_game)?pg=1 Writer of Isaic from Treasures of Zendikar http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/22819881/Treasures_of_Zendikar?post_id=402182877#402182877
Rage needs to be usable outside of combat. If I want to invoke a rage to bash down a metal door or jump across a wide ravine, that should be supported mechanically.

What if rage has a measurement ("rage points" per se), and each action/event you do that is affected by rage spends X points. You attack with rage, spend X. You use rage to lower damage taken, spend a point. Some actions might require more than 1 point. It's similar to MDD, but the management is a bit different. Perhaps landing a killing blow (or a crit) on a non-minion grants a bonus rage point.

Magic Dual Color Test
I am White/Green
I am White/Green
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I am both orderly and instinctive. I value community and group identity, defining myself by the social group I am a part of. At best, I'm selfless and strong-willed; at worst, I'm unoriginal and sheepish.
1. Sounds like they are aiming for the right range, I don't want a Barbarian that just rages every fight, that turns it into a flat damage boost. I don't have an opinion if the current system works or not. Need to test the Barbarian more.
2. This was obviously the goal all along but some people didn't believe it and more think it will be very hard to actually make work.
3. Obviously they are going to have to do some tweaking here. There are problems switching from MDD to [W] that require adjustments in other parts of the game to keep it balanced. [W] dice are bigger so they need to hand out fewer to keep the same damage rate, and they already said Fighters probably need another round of damage reduction. Plus, if [W] dice get more then 3 or so it puts too much pressure on Fighters to use weapons with the biggest dice. If characters only get a few dice to work with, maneuvers become more expensive to actually use, so some of the weaker manuvers need to be cheaper or more powerful or useable without using up [W] dice. There is also a big problem with Parry suddenly working better with a great axe then an parrying blade.
I say tie number of rages a day to MDD; after every rage the Barbarian's MDD is reduced by one until his next extended rest. This maintains the rages as a daily resource mechanic, but ties it to the verisimilitude of the over exertion being incredibly draining.
I say tie number of rages a day to MDD; after every rage the Barbarian's MDD is reduced by one until his next extended rest. This maintains the rages as a daily resource mechanic, but ties it to the verisimilitude of the over exertion being incredibly draining.

I like it.

Magic Dual Color Test
I am White/Green
I am White/Green
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I am both orderly and instinctive. I value community and group identity, defining myself by the social group I am a part of. At best, I'm selfless and strong-willed; at worst, I'm unoriginal and sheepish.
I say tie number of rages a day to MDD; after every rage the Barbarian's MDD is reduced by one until his next extended rest. This maintains the rages as a daily resource mechanic, but ties it to the verisimilitude of the over exertion being incredibly draining.

I like it.




That - or they spend Hit Dice. 

Carl

1 I support rage as a daily mechanic for the reasons laid out.  

2 I like how smooth the transition between basic and standard D&D is outh to be. I want PC starting with the basic game to make the shift to standard D&D without having to do any conversion and this can only be achieved if basic rely on pregenerated or preselected options mostly.

3 I like how weapon damage dice will favor bigger [W] weapons like two-handed or heavy weapons so its more competitive with other fighting styles. I am also curious about the new fighter mechanic in testing that let them use maneuvers without using any martial damage dice.

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter

I'm a Rage-aholic, I can't live wihtout rage-ahol!

- Homer Simpson

@CarlT I prefer MDD over HD because then the player the has to balance effectivness now vs effectiveness later. With HD they just have to judge longevity, but more likely when they run out of HD they'll just have the party stop for the day.
Weapon Damage Dice, I knew it.

Maybe trade some of those bad-boys for extra attacks. 
@dmgorgon:

Up to ten rounds to enter a rage?!  What's the point of saving to enter a rage, particularly since playtest combats tend to run three to five rounds?  

Also, can we please stop asking people to alter their Ability scores mid-combat?  

For the 2e Rage effect, let's translate it into playtest terms as follows:
When in a rage you gain the following benefits:


  • You receive a +1 bonus to Strength-based ability checks, attacks and saving throws, and to damage rolls with melee and thrown weapons.  

  • If you are unarmored, you gain a bonus to your AC equal to your level (to a maximum AC of 20)

  • You have advantage on saving throws against charm effects


The rage has the following drawbacks:


  • If you don't use your action to make a melee or thrown weapon attack against an enemy you attacked in your previous turn, you must make a Constitution save DC 15 to maintain the rage.  However, if the enemy you attacked in your previous turn is dead or incapacitated, you must instead attack a different enemy or make a Constitution save DC 15 to maintain the rage.

  • The rage ends when you have no additional enemies to attack.

  • You can also end the rage with an action.

  • When the rage ends, make a Constitution save DC 15 or have disadvantage as to all attack rolls, ability checks, and saving throws until after a short rest.






Yes, obviously that style of mechanic (from the 2e Viking Breserker) would need to be translated to D&D Next.   In that case it wouldn't increase ability scores or require that many rounds.    I like the idea of spending time to enter rage.  I also like a condition to be applied on the character after he comes out of rage.  

What you end up with is a rage mechanic that can be used a few times per day, but not one encounter after the next without resting first.    


I like the idea of spending time to enter rage.


Why?  What does it add?  (I'm being serious.  If I knew the benefit of this, I could come up with productive suiggestions.)

What you end up with is a rage mechanic that can be used a few times per day, but not one encounter after the next without resting first.


I don't see how the 2e rage rules do that.  There seems to be no limit on the number of rages.  As long as you get a chance to catch your breath, the barbarian can rage-rest-rage-rest all day.  The only difference is that the 2e barbarian has to sit around for 50 minutes (a turn was ten minutes in 2e), instead of 10 minutes in my translation.
I am completely for daily rages. I would trade quality for quantity of powers any day of the week. This especially applies to powers like rage which are supposed to represent a significant change to your character.
My two copper.


3 I like how weapon damage dice will favor bigger [W] weapons like two-handed or heavy weapons so its more competitive with other fighting styles. I am also curious about the new fighter mechanic in testing that let them use maneuvers without using any martial damage dice.



This I am also curious about. I am unsure whether this means that they will be a maneuver that they can use for free on top of the MDD or whether they will be linking these 'free' maneuvers in with Combat Surge and Ace in the Hole - making these more powerful and avaliable at earlier levels.

I don't know... Unless a maneuver was extremely situational, I couldn't see them offering it for free. It would just seem a bit powerful then...


Anyway, looking forward to seeing it!


The other two parts of the questions were just common sense to me with our current understanding of the rules and the way that the Basic/Standard/Advanced fit together.     
Low damage weapons will be a chump choice.  Enjoy getting punished for your charater concept.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

The last answer makes it sound like we can basically bid adieu to the whole "fighters get their own schtick" maneuver/XD system. It sounds like they're moving towards making "skill tricks" and "maneuvers" basically class-specific feats. "Skill tricks" are already basically there, since in most cases "spending your skill die" has little meaning and you don't even have to be trained in a specific skill to use any "trick." 

This does make me a bit sad, because I liked the idea and initial implementation of extra dice as a per-round resource for fighters.  But if it's not working, I guess I'd rather they just simplify than try to keep the Combat Superiority system patched together. (Like, it seems fairly obvious that MDD are leaning towards just becoming bonus damage on all weapon attacks, which at the very least is something I can just build into the basic attack damage on my character sheet and not have to track each turn.)

One plea: I hope that this new system doesn't preclude fighters using multiple maneuvers per round in interesting combinations. 
They will have to decide how easy it is to break a barbarian rage to determine if more frequent use is required. I had a vision of different types of rages to match differfent types of barbarian, and therefore it would not be a one size fits all rage. 
You know? The only thing that bothers me about MDD turning into [W] is that the weapon damage racials get a BIG boost in power.

Suddenly the dwarf fighter goes from even with human to WAY better than human  
My two copper.
Low damage weapons will be a chump choice.  Enjoy getting punished for your charater concept.




As opposed to the current approach which punishes two handed weapon players for thier character concept.


We know the current approach fails.  Lets see the new approach before we jump to conclusions.


(For example - it is easy enough to just say:  If your weapon die is larger than a d6, you can use your weapon die as your martial damage dice. I suspect they didn't do so - but it is easy enough to fix if necessary).


Carl
Low damage weapons will be a chump choice.  Enjoy getting punished for your charater concept.




As opposed to the current approach which punishes two handed weapon players for thier character concept.

We know the current approach fails.  Lets see the new approach before we jump to conclusions.

(For example - it is easy enough to just say:  If your weapon die is larger than a d6, you can use your weapon die as your martial damage dice. I suspect they didn't do so - but it is easy enough to fix if necessary).

Carl


I agree in that I don't think the current iteration is perfect.  However, I don't really have much faith that they will fix the 2-hander issue without making the whip, dagger, and other low-damage weapons chump choices.  Heck, the whip is already a chump choice because of the whole "special weapons" requiring you to spend a feat or specialty on them thing.

I still maintain that every character should gain proficiency in one ranged and one melee weapon of the player's choice, regardless of class.  This allows characters, regardless of class, to wield weapons that will become iconic of that character.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

Low damage weapons will be a chump choice.  Enjoy getting punished for your charater concept.




As opposed to the current approach which punishes two handed weapon players for thier character concept.

We know the current approach fails.  Lets see the new approach before we jump to conclusions.

(For example - it is easy enough to just say:  If your weapon die is larger than a d6, you can use your weapon die as your martial damage dice. I suspect they didn't do so - but it is easy enough to fix if necessary).

Carl


I agree in that I don't think the current iteration is perfect.  However, I don't really have much faith that they will fix the 2-hander issue without making the whip, dagger, and other low-damage weapons chump choices.  Heck, the whip is already a chump choice because of the whole "special weapons" requiring you to spend a feat or specialty on them thing.

I still maintain that every character should gain proficiency in one ranged and one melee weapon of the player's choice, regardless of class.  This allows characters, regardless of class, to wield weapons that will become iconic of that character.




I admit that I don't have a lot of confidence in the first version of this new approach. That is why we test for them.  I'd prefer that they always think of these things themselves, but...

But rather than dump on them and their process (as your quote clearly demonstrates) I prefer to toss out suggestions and approaches which avoid the problem - such as my comment above - and then a) wait for the actual rules to come out and see what they did, and b) once they do so, if they are still badly flawed, point out the problem in the surveys, repeatedly if necessary.

Comments like "enjoy getting punished for your character concept" - especially when referring to your imagined version of vaguely described and unreleased rules - is not useful to the process in any way, shape or form.


Carl
I'm liking more and more the relationship between Basic and Standard.  That they're the same game, only presented differently.


Yeah, in the Standard class description, it says: “You can make a Wizard quickly by following these suggestions.” Instead, it can just say: “You can make a Basic Wizard by following these suggestions.”

Feb 7, 2013 -- 6:31PM, MechaPilot wrote:

Feb 7, 2013 -- 6:23PM, CarlT wrote:

Feb 7, 2013 -- 3:34PM, MechaPilot wrote:

Low damage weapons will be a chump choice.  Enjoy getting punished for your charater concept.




As opposed to the current approach which punishes two handed weapon players for thier character concept.

We know the current approach fails.  Lets see the new approach before we jump to conclusions.

(For example - it is easy enough to just say:  If your weapon die is larger than a d6, you can use your weapon die as your martial damage dice. I suspect they didn't do so - but it is easy enough to fix if necessary).

Carl



I agree in that I don't think the current iteration is perfect.  However, I don't really have much faith that they will fix the 2-hander issue without making the whip, dagger, and other low-damage weapons chump choices.  Heck, the whip is already a chump choice because of the whole "special weapons" requiring you to spend a feat or specialty on them thing.

I still maintain that every character should gain proficiency in one ranged and one melee weapon of the player's choice, regardless of class.  This allows characters, regardless of class, to wield weapons that will become iconic of that character.





I admit that I don't have a lot of confidence in the first version of this new approach. That is why we test for them.  I'd prefer that they always think of these things themselves, but...

But rather than dump on them and their process (as your quote clearly demonstrates) I prefer to toss out suggestions and approaches which avoid the problem - such as my comment above - and then a) wait for the actual rules to come out and see what they did, and b) once they do so, if they are still badly flawed, point out the problem in the surveys, repeatedly if necessary.

Comments like "enjoy getting punished for your character concept" - especially when referring to your imagined version of vaguely described and unreleased rules - is not useful to the process in any way, shape or form.


Carl


I disagree with you, MechaPilot. Making the weapon's damage die matter is something that contributes to weapon balance.
Low damage weapons will be a chump choice.  Enjoy getting punished for your charater concept.




As opposed to the current approach which punishes two handed weapon players for thier character concept.

We know the current approach fails.  Lets see the new approach before we jump to conclusions.

(For example - it is easy enough to just say:  If your weapon die is larger than a d6, you can use your weapon die as your martial damage dice. I suspect they didn't do so - but it is easy enough to fix if necessary).

Carl


I agree in that I don't think the current iteration is perfect.  However, I don't really have much faith that they will fix the 2-hander issue without making the whip, dagger, and other low-damage weapons chump choices.  Heck, the whip is already a chump choice because of the whole "special weapons" requiring you to spend a feat or specialty on them thing.

I still maintain that every character should gain proficiency in one ranged and one melee weapon of the player's choice, regardless of class.  This allows characters, regardless of class, to wield weapons that will become iconic of that character.




I admit that I don't have a lot of confidence in the first version of this new approach. That is why we test for them.  I'd prefer that they always think of these things themselves, but...

But rather than dump on them and their process (as your quote clearly demonstrates) I prefer to toss out suggestions and approaches which avoid the problem - such as my comment above - and then a) wait for the actual rules to come out and see what they did, and b) once they do so, if they are still badly flawed, point out the problem in the surveys, repeatedly if necessary.

Comments like "enjoy getting punished for your character concept" - especially when referring to your imagined version of vaguely described and unreleased rules - is not useful to the process in any way, shape or form.

Carl


I am not dumping on them or their process.  I am dumping on the idea of making a weapon's damage dice increasingly important to the point that lower-damage weapons become trap options when not dual-wielding (which is itself impossible for some low-damage weapons, like the whip).  I have expressed this sentiment several times, and in a handful of different threads, and was under the impression that my comment was largely self-explanatory as to its meaning.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

I disagree with you, MechaPilot. Making the weapon's damage die matter is something that contributes to weapon balance.


I'm not saying that it shouldn't matter.  But there is a difference between "it matters" and "it multiplies the disparity as you level."

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

To me and a few others, the whole "smaller dice weapons" things seems to be more of an assumption thing.

"If you are purposely weilding a smaller dice weapon, then you are dual-weilding or actively using one of the weapon's propeties"

A dagger isn't a chump choice. The game is assuming that you are a good Dex character who is two weapon fighting with a few thrown attacks... or a wizard.

The game is assuming that you powergame your weaponry somewhat.

Perhaps that could be part of the nonuse of damage die. Whips and reach weapons could let you perform Trip without spending die.

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!