|
11 months ago ::
Jul 25, 2012 - 10:29PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Jun 28, 2003
|
EDIT: this post has now become 3 Separate threads  community.wizards.com/dndnext/go/thread/...community.wizards.com/dndnext/go/thread/...community.wizards.com/dndnext/go/thread/.... Uniting Editions, Vancian Fatigue POints, 3 Pillars, Survey Nostalgia Otherwise known as what I typed as comments for the last playtest survey sans 7 words (limit is 500 "): I believe in the dream of uniting all editions. I believe in starting simple and adding on modularity for complexity. I like vancian casting. But as I've brought many "newbies" to the game, vancian is NOT simple. For the Core Four Classes, we need a simple: mage, fighter, cleric, and rogue. Why? Turn the future of this hobby away, there won't be a future. We all want a future for this hobby. Balance each class Equally across all pillars! Since in general consensus the fighter comes up the most often i'll use the Ftr as an example: yes we know fighters can fight - check we have combat down, but they can also lead; countless examples are in history and stories, myths and legends - bam - social pillar. Fighters have also been known to lead troops on campaigns exploring as well as sometimes conquering the 4 corners of the earth - exploration. Also, for the example of making fighters more complex in a module, in league with vancian casters, and not AEDU (I like it, the general consensus seems not to) is to use an already existing system - psionics. Monks called upon hidden resserves to do amazing stunts, why not fighters? Once again history/myth already shows us this. As a slight tweek with the 4E Psionics rules, make them endurance or fatigue points instead of PSPs. Novels are replete with the idea that fighters/warriors/etc, can get tired. Do away with per encounter/daily powers and just have a finite amount of points they can use per level. If the Ftr spends enough points to use it once and get tired out or use a bunch in short bursts, that's the Ftr's perogative while at the same time being more realistic. Saves... nostalgia. Maybe have saves work like this. The snake attacks against the PC's AC or DEX score (with "flater math" DEX would be the DC) does normal bite damage and then the PC makes a CON save to see how virulent it is. The Mage rolls to hit the Goblins WIS, beats the Score/DC and the Goblin is Charmed. Then, said goblin makes a WIS save to see how long, hours, days, weeks, etc. This serves two purposes: 1) Mage still has fun rolling to hit, 2) The Nostalgia of Saves is still kept AND it fits mechanically as well as story wise. Please simplify things for DMs too. DM's shouldnt have to flip back and forth between the MM, CC, whatever you decide to call it and the premade adventure, that's one of the reasons people would be paying you for the adventure. All in all i like the theory behind DDN so far, just not the implementation. I'd like not to have to, "sell the game" to my friends. As it stands right now, that's what I'm doing.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 25, 2012 - 10:43PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Apr 10, 2001
|
Personally, what I am seeing right now is them compromising on everything until we all hate it, or until half of the book is banned at every table. I'm already envisioning it: (DM) Want to play some D&D Next?
(Player) I dunno... what version are you playing?
(DM) 5.4.NoVance.GritHeal.AllAEDU.AdvRuleMod.
(Player) Sorry man, I only play 5.35.OnlyVance.GritHeal.BanAEDU.AdvRuleMod.
I'm really hoping that this is not the path this "modularity" is taking.
Above all else, the most dangerous thing that can ever be said during any sort of testing scenario is "It's just the test." Assumption that an issue, no matter how glaring, will be fixed in the final product is the most devastating assumption that any tester can make, and the most disastrous of excuses for any flaw.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 25, 2012 - 10:45PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Oct 28, 2008
|
I agree with many of your points, and I am conflicted on the selling to one's friends part.
On one side of the coin, one has to sell the game to their friends every time a new version comes out. The reason is simple: Presumably they are playing something they already like, so they are going to need an incentive to make the switch.
Then there are cases like my group which is the other side. My group is sold on Pathfinder. I am not such a huge fan, I like it, but as DM, it drives me nuts. The fact is, they are skeptical about 5e despite all the issues the PF/3e system has. Myself and one other are optimistic about 5e, the others aren't so much yet. 5e will have to sell itself, for I can't sell it for WotC.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 25, 2012 - 11:08PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Jun 28, 2003
|
@atmaweapon, I hope that doesnt happen :[ @kishri, glad u agreed with most of my points Sorry for the confusion on the selling point, what i mean by this is that i had to sell my friends on even trying to playtest DDN. I had them look at the character sheets to pick a PC and they all called it quits. I had to pretty much beg them to give it a try and "sell it" to 'em. Even after we playtested they all said they will not go back to 5E unless it changed drastically. They didnt even sight examples, and I dont blame them. And this was my 4E group that uses a 4E chassis and adds 3.5 crit cards, 1E hirelings, 2E magic item tables, and BECMI overland movement rules to say the least. I also play in a mostly 1E slightly 2E (for some classes) and throw in the Perception Stat game. All they did was read forum posts and say no. These are ppl that played OE, 1E, 2E, 3E, 4E and started over again. We rotae DM's and editions. Noone ever had to "sell" another on an edition like this before. I'm the optimistic one believing this could work. My friends that play are all usually pretty open. It's just from the "friends and family" playtest reports and character sheet photos and the hype leading up to the "public playtest", most of us felt, "let down"  I can't really blame them in this regard. I honestly hope WotC changes not only our perception on this but the reality of the matter soon. Granted, "the people we know playing D&D" aren't WotC's total demographic, but reading these boards it seems liek many folks have similar issues. I'm hoping either people like my examples or at least use it as a springboard for their own.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 25, 2012 - 11:20PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Oct 28, 2008
|
@Talaeden I hear you. I went through that with 4e. My group is a staunch 2e/3e/PF crowd. In fact, myself, and my 4e loving friend failed utterly to sell the game to them to the point I have yet to experience a 4e campaign.
I think 5e has a chance, but people have to be willing to give it a chance. I applaud WotC for giving us the opportunity to play test and get a sneak peak at DDN. There is a danger in this concession they have given us, however, in that many folks might develop negative opinions about a product that is not complete. This issue can make selling the game much more difficult if those negative impressions prevail at release. I have seen this happen multiple times in MMO betas and such. Even if the final product is awesome, the negative press garnered during the play test phase could really put a damper on the game.
Like you, I have optimism for 5e, and I have adapted a "wait and see" attitude until I have an actual final copy of the game in my hands.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 25, 2012 - 11:23PM
#6
|
|
|
BASH Fantasy, while more of a rules lite game, does something like "fatigue points" you suggest for fighers. All characters have Energy which can be used to fuel spells, use fatiguing combat moves - whatever a particular character is built to do - as well as things like general endurance related stuff. So it's possible to use fatigue points as a universal resource management scheme, but you could certainly also do it as a module that the party's fighter could use, while the rogue uses AEDU and the mage is old school Vancian, etc. Really any combination would be possible, but fatigue points do work nicely as a limit on special combat maneuvers.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 25, 2012 - 11:39PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Jun 28, 2003
|
@ Kishri: Nice to be heard1 Sorry u had to go through this too, i wouldnt wish it on anyone! Here's hoping things get better!
@fairytalejedi: exactly! Each of the Four Core would be balanced in power yet have different mechanics that DON'T break verisimulitude (sp?). They'd also have unique Class Features.
Mage = Vancian = Fire and Forget
Fighter = Manuevers = fight until you collapse from exhaustion
Cleric = Channel Divinity = pray and thou shalt recieve depending on deity
Rogue = Tricks based on Stat Specialization? I'm still a lil' foggy on this one but maybe DEX Rogue is like Disney's Aladdin evading the town guard in the opening seen, INT Rogue is like a master thief casing a vault to plan out the play (think Ocean's 11), while a CHA Rogue is like Bilbo Baggins sweet talking his way past Smaug the red dragon.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 26, 2012 - 7:07AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Nov 16, 2009
|
Personally, what I am seeing right now is them compromising on everything until we all hate it, or until half of the book is banned at every table.
I'm already envisioning it:
(DM) Want to play some D&D Next?
(Player) I dunno... what version are you playing?
(DM) 5.4.NoVance.GritHeal.AllAEDU.AdvRuleMod.
(Player) Sorry man, I only play 5.35.OnlyVance.GritHeal.BanAEDU.AdvRuleMod.
I'm really hoping that this is not the path this "modularity" is taking.
Vance/NoVance and AEDU/BanAEDU would both be player level options- thats been mentioned as a design goal. So a Vancinan player can sit beside an AEDU player and play in the same game.
Grit Heal is the only really binary thing there- but that definately could be one way or another. If a DM wants to ban a players favorite option- he better have a damn good reason or he doesn't deserve that player. I think once we see modules we'll see how they're implemented. I plan on hosting a VT game with the next playtest.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 26, 2012 - 7:20AM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Nov 16, 2009
|
@Talaeden_Denthiir
Totally agree that the game should be simple at its core. The mage concept is a good one. Although it remains to be seen how many options come in the first book- I'd like to see a single core book, with a players handbook add options (like vancian wizard and complex fighter)- instead of the PHB,DMG,MM trilogy required to play.
For the saves I've been doing this- treat all that would use saves as contests (in that the player has to beat the value to consider a hit, a tie is a "miss") using the relevant ability score vs the type of save +10. It works great, and requires no actual change to the mechanic other than who rolls the die. (since saves are ties go to the victor you have to beat the value to make it match)
All three pillars must be represnted by each character. I believe this is handled by Class & Theme (combat) Race & Background (interaction & exploration). Perhaps it would be better if they could split them all up, but I'm happy with the divisions. They also need to be balanced (fun and effectiveness) which in the playtest they werent imo, but we'll see when we actually have some good interaction/exploration options in the next adventure hopefully.
On class features- I'd like to see every paired "high stat" showcase a different dynamic. Since Rogues need DEX, you could see DEX STR (thug) DEX CON (the guy who keeps getting beat up, but turns back up again and again) DEX INT (lockpicker thief) DEX CHA (scoundrel)
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 26, 2012 - 7:31AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Jun 29, 2011
|
I could get on board with this, I think their should be the four prime classes and anything else breaks down from it (using themes or whatever). People drool over warlocks, its just a type of arcane. Go gaga over assassin its really just a type of rogue. In all I think it would be easier to work with four classes and abilties/powers within them four then trying to make 50 classes and then make abilities/powers for all 50.
I like the power points thing, when they came out with this for psionics I kinda wish they did this with all classes. And I think this would be a great way to achieve balance towards the classes as well.
Fighters can get Energy
Mages can get Mana
Divines can get Faith
Rogues can get Luck
Granted can be named whatever but you get the idea. And even classes in same bracket can have different names. If your a warlock your mage type but your pool can be called Pact or whatever floats your boat.
|
|
|
