|
6 months ago ::
Dec 09, 2012 - 8:12PM
#221
|
Date Joined:
May 19, 2011
|
@Bronze:Eh....kinda tricky. Inevitably, 5e will have bloat. It's msotly seeing how long they can stall having too much of it.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 09, 2012 - 8:27PM
#222
|
Date Joined:
Feb 19, 2012
|
Hopefully it'll be storycreep. Interesting settings. Horror mechanics (maneuvers risk loss of sanity). Fun stuff. I could also be okay w/ them adding more levels of play and crazy powerful stuff creeping in at (4e termwise) new tiers. I could be okay with that
"What's stupid is when people decide that X is true - even when it is demonstrable untrue or 100% against what we've said - and run around complaining about that. That's just a breakdown of basic human reasoning."
-Mike Mearls
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 09, 2012 - 9:08PM
#223
|
|
|
@Bronze:Eh....kinda tricky. Inevitably, 5e will have bloat. It's msotly seeing how long they can stall having too much of it.
I agree, rules bloat happens. I just want to hear "the plan" to ensure the correct care, checks and balances are in place to maintain the integrity of the game that they (we) are trying so hard to get right...otherwise I fear all this time and emotional investment is for nought.
My suggestion ( hope ) is to abandon the previous business model of releasing new rule books (with new classes, races, spells and feats) every month..but rather put that effort into adventures, modules and other things and slow down (once a year?) on touching the "core rules enhancements" so play testing and balancing isn't compromized to meet every month's deadlines....perhaps not as compelling a business case...but a better long term strategy for 5e IMO.
I feel 5e is the last chance to get it right ( for me any ways )
I don't always summon animals, but when I do, I prefer Dire Bears.
...the most interesting Druid in the world.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 09, 2012 - 9:13PM
#224
|
|
|
I agree with you, Bronze_Age. I am hoping that, instead of bloat-producing splatbooks every other month or so, getting a steady stream of adventures or campaign booklets. Back in the 2e days, there was a lot of product released, but so much of it was campaign lore or things to help with non-crunch rules, such as the historical campaign books or the castle guides. 3e/3.5 did a pretty good job with some of that as well, including the environment books (stormwrack, etc.).
I prefer 2nd Edition AD&D. But I have played basic, 1E, 2E, 3.5, & 4E, and found all to be fun.
IF IT'S D&D, I'LL PLAY IT, NO MATTER THE EDITION.
Just roll some dice.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 09, 2012 - 9:26PM
#225
|
Date Joined:
Jul 29, 2009
|
The lack of rational and balanced design is a big sticking point for me. Alignment restrictions? Martial characters having to be boring and bad to placate the jock hating 'nards? Boring, generic, and uninspired fluff?
Yeah no thanks. I'm sorry but Fifth Edition so far hasn't been the D&D that EVERYONE wants to play. It's the edition that Mearls wants to play. He's being purposefully exclusionary in his design decisions and is trying to dress it up as an open and honest playtest.
Things that 5E needs to do:
-Make the use of battlemaps/miniatures the default.
-Make healing fun, magical AND non-magical needs to be an option. Long live the Warlord!
-Make magic items feel magic/mythical. I don't want a dagger +1, I want STING.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 09, 2012 - 9:28PM
#226
|
|
|
I agree with you, Bronze_Age. I am hoping that, instead of bloat-producing splatbooks every other month or so, getting a steady stream of adventures or campaign booklets. Back in the 2e days, there was a lot of product released, but so much of it was campaign lore or things to help with non-crunch rules, such as the historical campaign books or the castle guides. 3e/3.5 did a pretty good job with some of that as well, including the environment books (stormwrack, etc.).
Agreed. Hmm... I feel I may have inadvertently hijacked the thread so I'll a attempt a course correction here to get back on track. Despite my comments above, there are no specific rules or play test choices that are deal breakers for me.
I don't always summon animals, but when I do, I prefer Dire Bears.
...the most interesting Druid in the world.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 09, 2012 - 9:30PM
#227
|
|
|
The real trick is finding a compelling reason for both DMs and players to purchase new books. 4E's everything is core was a good idea but implemented badly. The best approach is to have books that include rules for both DMs and players. Its should include interesting settings, monsters, magic items, a short adventure, DM advice, player advice, races, classes, spells, powers, class and race features, etc...etc... That way both the DM and the players have a reason to pick it up. In fact you could do a setting adventure boxed set that had new character options as well as minis for the monsters and some character minis, adventures, battle mats (double sided poster sized maps with a grid), a list of new magic items, races, classes, etc...etc... Of course its a smart strategy so we can be sure WotC will probably ignore it completely... 
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 10, 2012 - 12:15AM
#228
|
Date Joined:
May 27, 2012
|
EDIT: What do we do when armor is removed, though? Say your character has 20 HP (5 HP from chainmail), he gets hit for 16 HP and is knocked off the side of the boat into a river, he begins drowning and removes his chainmail in order to reach the surface. -- Does he automatically fall unconscious because he lost the armor's HP bonus?
Yeah, "taking off armor" and "healing through it" are the problems created by the "armor as HP" model.
If you treat armor HP as true temporary HP, then those always come off the top. You'd lose the 5 HP from chainmail and take another 11 HP of real damage, so you'll be fine with 4 HP as you take the armor off. I'd also say that healing can only take you up to your maximum, and you need an armorer (someone with appropriate skill, or a mend spell) to restore the temporary HP to the armor.
In that situation, the only weird thing is that after the armor HP have been worn through, the armor is essentially just holding you back (move penalties) and not granting any bonuses whatsoever. Of course, that would only matter if you could feasibly remove your armor during combat.
It's unfortunate, because I really like the model where heavy armor increases your max HP by 50% (or whatever), and every three damage you take is two points of meat damage and one point of armor damage; that gets much math-ier, though.
The metagame is not the game.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 10, 2012 - 1:24AM
#229
|
Date Joined:
Apr 15, 2001
|
The real trick is finding a compelling reason for both DMs and players to purchase new books. 4E's everything is core was a good idea but implemented badly.
The best approach is to have books that include rules for both DMs and players. Its should include interesting settings, monsters, magic items, a short adventure, DM advice, player advice, races, classes, spells, powers, class and race features, etc...etc...
That way both the DM and the players have a reason to pick it up.
In fact you could do a setting adventure boxed set that had new character options as well as minis for the monsters and some character minis, adventures, battle mats (double sided poster sized maps with a grid), a list of new magic items, races, classes, etc...etc...
Of course its a smart strategy so we can be sure WotC will probably ignore it completely...
Somehitng like that would be good.
Reducing a character to a list of dice rolls and modifiers is not role playing*
*pg 30, AD&D 2nd Ed DMG, 1989.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 11, 2012 - 4:11PM
#230
|
Date Joined:
Oct 19, 2012
|
Is now a bad time to bring up the class-based AC bonus by level from Unearthed Arcana in 3e? Or the standard class-based defense bonus in Star Wars D20RPG, which is basically the same thing?
Honestly, something like that would work wonders for my acceptance of Next. Even if they kept it bounded, by giving people a static class-based AC bonus instead of AC from armor, it's exactly the kind of minor concessions toward reasonability that would convince me that they intended to make a better game.
Does armor then become significant as a source of Damage Reduction? Or what do we do with armor to make it meaningful at that point?
I'm intrigued by the idea, but it makes me do math, which is an auto-grievance. 
It's been a while since I looked at the rules, so I don't really know. I want to say that the enhancement bonus factors into the aforementioned equation. 6-7 damage reduction at level 20 is pretty significant.
|
|
|
