|
1 year ago ::
Jan 09, 2012 - 8:13AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
May 13, 2008
|
With the official announcement of 5e I want to bring to the front many of the aspects of 4e that worked (for me) and didn't work (for me) and what I hope to see coming in the future. edit note: my computer went wonky while typing this and decided to publish this thread before I was done typing the first sentence. x.x; So here we go! Hits 
- Flexible races without stat penalties.
- More than 1 type of healer.
- Attempt to normalize power between classes across levels. Also called Attempt to Balance the Everythings.
- Easy monster stat blocks
- Easier to run a game than other editions for the DM
- Character builder / fast character generation. Lets get right into playing
- System mastery not required to make a good, effective character
- Simple skills tree / training
- Themes and backgrounds!!!
Misses 
- Feat tax feats due to poor math in monster design.
- Classes that use non STR stat for all their melee attacks having to take a feat to make that stat work for MBAs (fixed with essentials classes, but should have been erratta for all previous classes using this mechanic.)
- Lack of support for some classes compared to others, leading some classes to feel woefully incomplete compared to others (Vampires and Seekers I'm looking at you)
- Multiple iterations of the same class using different mechanics in different books without compatability between the 2 versions. Pre-essentials / post essentials rogues, fighters, paladins I'm looking at you. Compare to the Barbarian in Fey Wild. which did this much better.
- Feat bloat - Some feats no longer useful compared to new feats which do the same thing (weapon expertise feat set I'm looking at you) or feats that are just bad in general. (specific examples escape me at this time). Leads to too many choices to go through in order to make a character, choice paralysis.
Other ideas
- Languages should be able to be learned without taking a feat. Perhaps a bonus based on wis or int so that characters can start with more than 1 language depending on stats / background / theme.
- Similar idea for skills. Open up actual "you get this skill" instead of you get access to the skill or a bonus in it for your background.
Just some thoughts and some opinions. I hope 5e is better than and more fun than 4e. I hope.
I_Roll_20s @twitter. Not always SFW.
I may prefer 4e, but I will play and enjoy almost any edition, and indeed almost any table top RPG, with my friends. Down with Edition Wars. Shut up and roll your dice. :P
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 09, 2012 - 8:22AM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Sep 19, 2007
|
With the official announcement of 5e I want to bring to the front many of the aspects of
Unfortunately hits and misses depend on who you ask.
For example, someone who prefered older editions will harp on the Wizard not being "magical", the game being too balanced, and the like.
Someone who prefered 4e before essentials will probably complain bout anything essentials did differently.
Someone who prefered essentials will probably say 4e "had too many options".
And then you get the whole debate over whether expertise was a good idea or not.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 09, 2012 - 8:25AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Mar 29, 2005
|
I actually just had a thought the other day about how it would be interesting if 5E didn't have attack rolls at all. It'll never happen, of course, but I think it'd be a fun thought experiment to design a system where "accuracy" wasn't a factor, or was bundled with the damage roll.
Ever feel like people on these forums can't possibly understand how wrong they are? Feeling trolled? Don't get mad. Report Post.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 09, 2012 - 8:28AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
With the official announcement of 5e I want to bring to the front many of the aspects of
Unfortunately hits and misses depend on who you ask.
Which is the entire point behind asking a lot of people and generating a discussion.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 09, 2012 - 8:29AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
May 13, 2008
|
first post edited since computer went wonky on me. x.x;
I_Roll_20s @twitter. Not always SFW.
I may prefer 4e, but I will play and enjoy almost any edition, and indeed almost any table top RPG, with my friends. Down with Edition Wars. Shut up and roll your dice. :P
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 09, 2012 - 8:33AM
#6
|
|
|
5e needs to be fun to DM, and by fun I don't mean easy, but things actually have to have a chance of effecting the characters. 4e is so heavily player-centric that they shouldn't have even bothered giving monsters powers with rider effects.
Kalex the Omen Dungeonmaster Extraordinaire Concerning Player Rules Bias
Show
Gaining victory through rules bias is a hollow victory and they know it.
The argument goes, that some idiot at the table might claim that because there is a "default" that is the only true way to play D&D. An idiotic misconception that should be quite easy to disprove just by reading the rules, coming to these forums, or sending a quick note off to Customer Support and sharing the inevitable response with the group. BTW, I'm not just talking about Next when I say this. Of course, D&D has always been this way since at least the late 70's when I began playing.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 09, 2012 - 8:41AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Nov 13, 2004
|
Here's what I would like (assuming some of the 4e chasis will still be around).
- Power Sources are more important. One big list of powers/abilities/whatever that most classes of its type can pull from. Classes from different power sources will be built differently (like the contrast between standard 4e classes, psionic classes, and Essential martial classes).
- Magical gear is not assumed as part of the inherent game math. As 5e sounds modular in focus, this could be an optional add-on for those who like this aspect of the game.
- No 'grid-filling' or 'legacy-based inclusions.' There should be a better reason why we have to have two divinely-powered, heavily armored melee warriors who can magically heal others.
- Fewer interations of the same magic item. 12 versions of one type of alchemical item, with the more expensive versions being slightly better than the last makes me irrate for some reason.
- Feat have one purpose, and one purpose only. They are in limited supply per character, and should not be the bin in which new concept and patches should be dumped into. The new modular focus should fascilitate this concept.
There's probably more, but all I can think of off-hand.
4e D&D is not a "Tabletop MMO." It is not Massively Multiplayer, and is usually not played Online. Come up with better descriptions of your complaints, cuz this one means jack ****.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 09, 2012 - 8:44AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Jun 18, 2009
|
In 4th and previous editions you're forced to make a choice between being optimized for combat or actually taking interesting RP feats and powers. The problem is, with death around always around the corner it's difficult to justify a bonus to bluff or the ability to use history instead of arcana over something that makes you more effective in battle. It would be nice if the two sides of the house were completely separate. A clean way to handle this dilemma is to have two completely distinct “classes.” Combat class like fighter, wizard, etc.., and non-combat classes like face-man, scholar, or thug. A player would choose one of each, with the second list being the home of skills like diplomacy and bluff and knowledge whatever. As long as the non-combat classes never had abilities that could be used effectively inside a battle there would be no need to sacrifice RP choices for combat ones.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 09, 2012 - 8:53AM
#9
|
|
|
I loved the basic premise of 4E, which in my eyes was to make the game more easy to play, more accessible for beginners, and eliminate the rules-bloat that 3.5 had become.
The action cards are brilliant, and eliminate the need to reference the rules so much. Likewise, At-Will/Enounter/Daily powers made it so no one would ever be left with no options at all.
However, that last point is also part of the problem. Resources should be able to be depleted from time to time, and by making everything so uniforn, it homogenized the classes in ways that I didn't care for.
Roles (Striker, Wall, Leader, etc.) almost became straightjackets rather than options, and a lot of character flavor seemed to go away.
...and 4E just seemed a bit too combat-centric to me - where were the action cards for social encounters or other roleplaying opportunities?
I'm looking forward to providing some input and seeing what comes of it.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 09, 2012 - 9:04AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
I actually just had a thought the other day about how it would be interesting if 5E didn't have attack rolls at all. It'll never happen, of course, but I think it'd be a fun thought experiment to design a system where "accuracy" wasn't a factor, or was bundled with the damage roll.
Its a natural implication of the Hitpoint abstraction.(the idea has been around since way back but you know). You could still have damage thresholds governing special hits to regulate conditions associated with attacks.
|
|
|
