Community

LEVEL
I like things in threes and I thought the "tiered" play idea was a good one, so I'm all for levels 1-30.


POWERS
I think powers have mostly been a good innovation on the part of WotC. However, I'd like to see something similar to Essentials, where different classes have different power rates rather than all classes gaining powers at precsiely the same rate as was the case in the original release of 4e.


VANCIAN SYSTEM
I kind of like the strategic aspect of Vancian magic but on the whole I'd rather have powers than Vancian magic, so I guess you can put me on the side of bad, though it's hardly a deal breaker for me.

CLASS ROLES
Class roles are good but I think some thought should be given to roles outside of combat. I thought Mike Mearls' breakdown of D&D into combat, exploration, and social/roleplaying as pretty succinct and I wouldn't mind seeing exploration and roleplaying roles alongside 4e's combat roles. In fact, I hope WotC does something similar to that.

MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY
I'm not sure I actually understand this one. I mean waht would a magical item be that didn't have a mechanical effect? How's that different from a regular item? If the question's about the inflation of magic items, then I wouldn't mind seeing them toned down a bit. But it's not important to me.


ABILITIES SCORES
Good. While the current method of ability scores is a little bit obtuse, most of everybody who plays any kind of RPG has a basic understanding of the six classic abilities and how they work. While changing the scale might be a worthwhile endeavor it's not important enough to alienate those who are used to the old scale.


A LOT OF CLASSES
Bad-ish. As many classes as are necessary to fill the standard roles of D&D and power sources. No more. We don't need to have the explosion of classes we currently have. Also, a role and a power source shouldn't be combined just to fill the gap. More than a few classes, like invokers or wardens, feel like they're there to "fill the gap" rather than because they fulfill a unique and interesting role, which is the entire point (in my mind) of a class in the first place. So fewer classes than 4e, but no need to cull the field completely.

A LOT OF RACES
Good-ish. If D&D was covering a specific setting it might be a good idea to limit the number of races down to a  smaller number, but since it's a generic fantasy RPG lots of races are good, particularly since most races have at least some ardent supporters. I'd probably limit the number of races in the Core Rules to just elves/eladrin, dwarves, humans, halflings, tieflings, devas/aasimar, and maybe dragonborn and/or gnomes. Anything else can be added in supplementary material, be it online or in books. I'd also recommend revising the rules for half-breeds like half-elves and half-orcs, which currently make no sense.

ABILITY SCORES FOR RACES
Yes. It's important that the races feel distinct from one another and this is a big part of doing that. I'd probably also bring back ability score penalties, although it'd be reasonable to make them less extreme than they were in 3e (perhaps 2 ability bonuses and 1 ability penalty).


FEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES
Good-ish. I actually really like feats, though there seems to be a preponderance of distaste for them. Still, I admit that sourcebooks often go way overboard in making feats, to the point that there's far too many of them for anybody to actually comprehend or playtest effectively, resulting in significent power imbalances. I'd say fewer feats that are perhaps slightly more powerful to compensate.


HIT POINTS
Good, though I'd like to see the rules for HP revised. Combat often ends up being a slugging match betwee players and monsters at mid to high levels using the current rules. Perhaps fewer HP per level or a smaller bonus to start out with.


HEALING SURGES
Pretty unambiguously good. It gives players whose healer is unavailable or powered down to stand a fighting chance when their HP sinks down to the lower levels. All my players have used this feature to their advantage but never have abused it.


DEFENSES
I'd actually like to see AC dismissed. There's no real difference between AC and Reflex, as far as I'm concerned, other than AC also uses armor as part of its mathematical formula (which really should be more like armor resistance). So Reflex to dodge, Fortitude to endure, Will to ford of mental stress, and Armor Resistances to absorb damage from attacks that get past one of the three defenses.


SKILL CHALLENGES
Good, but they need to be designed more intelligently. Part of the problem here is that while the 4e rules for dealing with combat are very elaborate and well-tested, skill challenges were clearly a secondary or even tertiary concern for 4e. Without clear class roles for exploration or roleplaying and a truncated number of skills available to players, skill challenges end up being kind of awkward and hardly what they could be.


SKILLS HAVE TO BE
Important. And we need more of them. I'd suggest breaking skills down into three categories: combat, roleplaying, and exploration, with some skills overlapping in two roles. Plus, I'd love to see crafting skills return. It's not an important part of the game, per se, but it can be useful and adds character.


NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT
50%.


ALIGNMENT IS
Fluff, though I'd be fine with optional mechanical effects in supplementary materials, such as for traversing the planes and dealing with paragons of morality. But for the most part, alignment should be a descriptor of a character rather than a mechanical restraint. And bring back the old alignments already!


SAVE OR DIE
Bad-ish. Something similar isn't a bad idea (only at high levels, of course), but most players (including me) loathe any spell that automatically kills you if you fail a single save. Perhaps a "save once out of two or die?"

Lian87: On your first post, you indicate which is the last Poster to be included, but you reference it by Page number. You're currently up to page 5, but I am only on page 2. I must have a more posts per page setting than you. Could you reference where you are in the updates by post number instead of page number?

Thanks!

Levels: 1-20
Powers: good but may have been overemphasized in 4e
Vancian Magic: bad
Class Roles: useful descriptively.
Magic Items: unimportant, or important but few in number.
Ability Scores: good. Cut down on stat-based benefits in powers, though.
A lot of classes: bad; make a smaller number of more flexible classes.
A lot of races: bad. There should be methods of customizing bloodline and background other than races.
Ability scores for races: bad, except possibly as minimum/maximum values. Spent too much time going "what race gives me the most plusses at what I'm trying to do" with 4e.
Feats (and other static + bonus): bad.
Hit Points: good, though the scaling may need work.
Healing Surges: second wind is good, healing surges in general I can take or leave.
Defenses: AC never made a lot of sense to me, but it's a chunk of work to make damage reduction work well. Possibly dice-based (i.e. leather is d4 armor, plate is d12 armor)?
Skill Challenges: some structured challenge method might be good, skill challenges don't work very well.
Skills should be: Important
Normal Chance to Hit: I'm going to go with 75% (as now)
Alignment is: fluff or setting detail
Save or Die: bad, at least for PCs and major NPCs.

LEVEL
    1-20--30 just doesn't seem as round and finished to me as 20 does.
    POWERS
    GOOD--I like everyone having a way to shine in combat, rather than slogging along doing the same thing every round.
    VANCIANT SYSTEM
    BAD--too powerful for wizards, too limiting on encounters per day.
    CLASS ROLES
    GOOD --they were always there, even if they weren't labelled as such.  Now the classes get mechanics to make them better than others at what they do.
    MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY
    IMPORTANT--they need to impact the game, but not so much that they become necessary, or that a PC needs to keep upgrading every few levels.  If the attack bonus and enemy defenses scale consistently, a +1 sword is as cool at 20th level as it is at 1st.  King Arthur didn't trade in Excalibur when he got to 10th level, did he?
    ABILITIES SCORES
    GOOD --How else will you measure who's gifted at certain activities?
    A LOT OF CLASSES
    GOOD --as long as they are balanced, why limit options?
    A LOT OF RACES
    BAD--It just gets a bit ridiculous.  I'm fine with variety, but lets not go overboard.
    ABILITY SCORES FOR RACES
    YES--It just makes sense.  Halflings beating dragonborn at arm wrestling matches doesn't ring true to me.
    FEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES
    BAD --if the bonus needs to be there, make it automatic.  If it doesn't, make the choices more exciting, unique and flavorful.
    HIT POINTS
    GOOD --and keep them somewhat close between the classes.  Otherwise it's hard to make monsters that can worry one PC without being able to instakill another.
    HEALING SURGES
    GOOD --very cinematic and cool to have a hero shrug off the damage he has already absorbed.
    DEFENSES
    AS AC--caginess and reaction to avoid getting hit is good.  Armor as DR is the better change here.
    SKILL CHALLENGES
    BAD --they try to make everything a combat-like challenge.  This is one area where I preferred 3.x's mechanics.
    SKILLS HAS TO BE
    IMPORTANT --It can't just be numbers for combat and narration for everything else.  Characters need to grow and shine on multiple levels.
    NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT
    50% AS NOW --otherwise it gets too easy, and there is little need to roll.
    ALIGNMENT IS
    FLUFF --open to interpretation, full of gray areas.
    SAVE OR DIE
    BAD--fear is good, random, meaningless death of PCs is horrible.