LEVEL 1-30 POWERS (4e power mechanic) BAD Ver bad even. They are restrictive and make no sense whatsoever. Clearly not desigend for RPG but for tactical balance. VANCIANT SYSTEM (3.x caster mechanic) BAD Also doesn't make sense. Mana would be better.
CLASS ROLES (defender, controller, striker, leader) BAD They encourage tweaking classes so that they fit in one of these roles. It's restrictive and pointless.
MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY (you want magic items to be almost necessary? a big part of the game?) IMPORTANT Magical items are a practical way to get characters to do cool things they would otherwise not be able to do. Also, I've always preferred high magic over low magic. However, magical items should not gravitate towards just combat.
ABILITIES SCORES (str, con, dex, int, wis, cha) GOOD Sometimes I think they could be further refined (especially charisma seems a bit too broad), but they get the job done.
A LOT OF CLASSES GOOD More choice, more diversity. As long as classes remain flexible and adaptable.
A LOT OF RACES BAD Normally, I would say good and use the same argument as for the classes, but going for more races tends to lead to "invented" very similar races which only seem to exist to increase the number of races available (e.g. eladrin/elf).
ABILITY SCORES FOR RACES (you want a particolar race to be better with some classes and bad with others?) YES It's realistic, and part of what differentiate races from each other.
FEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES (weapon focus, weapon expertise) GOOD It adds choice and diversification. HIT POINTS GOOD Sustaining damage is probably one of the most difficult things to represent accurately, and although hit points may not be the best way, they hold up pretty well.
HEALING SURGES (part of 4e heal system) BAD You can't just heal out of nowhere. Another example of tactically oriented rules which do not make sense.
DEFENSES AS AC AS DAMAGE RESISTANCE It's been a long time since I played 4E, so this one is not so easy to answer. But I have the impression they can be combined, no? AC is about the armor, damage resistance is about the character wearing it.
SKILL CHALLENGES (4e) GOOD It's a first step towards rewarding RPing as opposed to combat.
SKILLS HAVE TO BE IMPORTANT They are quite defining for a character and facilitate RPing.
NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT None of the above. The chance to hit should not be static, it should depend on what you do and what you do it to. The chance to sneak attack a skeleton should be 0% for instance.
ALIGNMENT IS FLUFF They are simply a means to give a general idea of a character's morals. And because even a good character can sometimes do bad things (or vice versa), mechanical alignment would be unnecessarily restrictive.
SAVE OR DIE (finger of death) BAD Probably one of the few things where I'd put realism aside, as being killed without getting a decent chance simply is no fun, not even when it's realistic.
LEVEL: 1-30 POWERS (4e power mechanic): BAD (I liked Powers in 4E but I want to see some new mechanics in 5E other than "AEDU" repeated). VANCIANT SYSTEM (3.x caster mechanic): BAD (We 're still not clear on this?!).
CLASS ROLES (defender, controller, striker, leader): GOOD (They have always been there, albeit incognito). MAGIC ITEMS HAVE TO BE MECHANICALLY: NOT IMPORTANT (Too many magic items -like omnipotent spells- make the fantasy genre look like a silly circus wankfest). ABILITIES SCORES (str, con, dex, int, wis, cha): GOOD (As always).
A LOT OF CLASSES: BAD (Only because besides the core ones, Wotc has been unable to provide interesting or flavourly diverse others). A LOT OF RACES: BAD (I hate my fantasy game to look like an alien circus or the show of freaks. The less the better in this case). ABILITY SCORES FOR RACES (you want a particular race to be better with some classes and bad with others?): YES (As in Elven Rangers, Dwarven Fighters, Halfling Thieves - fantasy archetypes are good).
FEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES (weapon focus, weapon expertise): GOOD (Options to choose from, improve and diversify your character - always welcome). HIT POINTS: GOOD (D&D franchise property). HEALING SURGES (part of 4e heal system): BAD (You can't just heal without proper resting time or medical assistance). DEFENSES: AS AC (It doesn't present itself as an issue, though. Damage resistance makes no sense. That's what HP are for, anyway). SKILL CHALLENGES (4e): EH... GOOD (Though the use of skills should not be limited by streamlining it in a series of dry die rolls). SKILLS HAVE TO BE: IMPORTANT (Duh). NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT: It should improve by level and above all *experience*. ALIGNMENT IS: FLUFF (Only fluff, not a mechanical restraint). SAVE OR DIE (finger of death): BAD (In fantasy, they should be given a chance to avoid death).
LEVEL 1-20, I have found that epic level play doesn't need to be included with the starting materials but it should be part of the system and the number crunching for it needs to be worked into it. POWERS (4e power mechanic) GOOD VANCIANT SYSTEM (3.x caster mechanic) BAD, the system requires having a notebook to keep track of all your spells so you can determine what you wnat to memorize at the begining of the day. CLASS ROLES (defender, controller, striker, leader) GOOD, I would make the role more modular where you pick your role and class without each class being a specific role. MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY (you want magic items to be almost necessary? a big part of the game?) NOT IMPORTANT, I don't think that magic items need to be mechanically required for the game. ABILITIES SCORES (str, con, dex, int, wis, cha) GOOD, don't change what isn't broken. A LOT OF CLASSES GOOD, I like having a lot of choices A LOT OF RACES GOOD, I would like to have about 8 races to start with. ABILITY SCORES FOR RACES (you want a particolar race to be better with some classes and bad with others?) YES, I love the flavor that each race's modifiers make them unique. FEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES (weapon focus, weapon expertise) BAD, I don't think there should be a feat tax to keep up with monster level progression. HIT POINTS GOOD HEALING SURGES (part of 4e heal system) GOOD, Make surges to be an encounter resource instead of a daily resource, potions do not get used as much as they could. DEFENSES AS AC, Each edition has had AC and it has always been a target number for enemies to hit. SKILL CHALLENGES (4e) GOOD SKILLS HAVE TO BE IMPORTANT NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT MORE LIKE 75%, It's too easy to hit monsters after level 3, the hit chance is closer to 60% now. ALIGNMENT IS (mechanical means there are powers/spells that work on what you write on your sheet, fluff means pure role play) FLUFF SAVE OR DIE (finger of death) BAD
LEVEL 1-20 POWERS (4e power mechanic) GOOD VANCIANT SYSTEM (3.x caster mechanic) BAD CLASS ROLES (defender, controller, striker, leader) GOOD MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY (you want magic items to be almost necessary? a big part of the game?) NOT IMPORTANT ABILITIES SCORES (str, con, dex, int, wis, cha) GOOD A LOT OF CLASSES GOOD A LOT OF RACES GOOD ABILITY SCORES FOR RACES (you want a particolar race to be better with some classes and bad with others?) YES FEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES (weapon focus, weapon expertise) BAD HIT POINTS GOOD HEALING SURGES (part of 4e heal system) GOOD DEFENSES AS AC SKILL CHALLENGES (4e) BAD SKILLS HAVE TO BE IMPORTANT NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT MORE LIKE 75% ALIGNMENT IS (mechanical means there are powers/spells that work on what you write on your sheet, fluff means pure role play) FLUFF SAVE OR DIE (finger of death) BAD
LEVEL 1-30 POWERS (4e power mechanic) GOOD VANCIANT SYSTEM (3.x caster mechanic) BAD CLASS ROLES (defender, controller, striker, leader) no opinion MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY (you want magic items to be almost necessary? a big part of the game?) NOT IMPORTANT ABILITIES SCORES (str, con, dex, int, wis, cha) GOOD A LOT OF CLASSES GOOD A LOT OF RACES GOOD ABILITY SCORES FOR RACES (you want a particolar race to be better with some classes and bad with others?) YES FEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES (weapon focus, weapon expertise) BAD - too much munchkining and min-maxing HIT POINTS GOOD HEALING SURGES (part of 4e heal system) GOOD - but needs some polishing DEFENSES AS AC SKILL CHALLENGES (4e) GOOD SKILLS HAVE TO BE IMPORTANT NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT 50% AS NOW ALIGNMENT IS (mechanical means there are powers/spells that work on what you write on your sheet, fluff means pure role play) FLUFF SAVE OR DIE (finger of death) BA
Bravo Lian87! I applaud your organization, and keeping this thread flame free!
See "Old School Hack" and Basic Edition Black Box D&D. Classes and Races can be separate, but the systems overall embody the philosophy that powers the retro-clone renaissance; it goes beyond mere nostalgia.
4e was too much about tweaking a player-build minutae and not enough about adventuring. I don't want to effectively build a new Magic: the Gathering deck of attack powers and feats whenever I make a new character; I want to pick maybe 2 abilities, make a character concept from my ability scores, and go. That's it; no assigning skill points, no "if-then, +1-here-or-there" class-build and feat mazes.
I want goals and treasure to award more XP than killing things so the players may want to use guile or stealth once and a while to get what they want instead of bum-rushing everyone.
Surviving to level up should be an accomplishment, not an entitlement.
PS: My feelings in proper format are posted up ahead.
Level: Both work for me as long as there's adequete support for all tiers and not a mass supporting one and not the others.
POWERS (4e power mechanic) : Bad. Realy? only the fighter can cleave and a ranger can't? This is stereotyping and is unacceptable to me. Unless they're going to merge all of martial classes (not including warlord) into a "warrior", theres gotta' be powers like cleave and etc. that can be picked from other classes.
VANCIANT SYSTEM (3.x caster mechanic) : On the fence about this...
CLASS ROLES (defender, controller, striker, leader) : Good... Only if used as guidance purposes and not for determining what a class can do.
MAGIC ITEMS HAS TO BE MECHANICALLY (you want magic items to be almost necessary? a big part of the game?) : Not important. 4e had made it like shopping for a brand new Coffie maker at walmart just because they have better features. Pointless, make it like a reward and not an manatory benchmark to have magical items.
ABILITIES SCORES (str, con, dex, int, wis, cha) : Keep em' goin' strong. An essenstial pert of the game.
A LOT OF CLASSES : Bad, I favor the way Pathfinder did, make it like archtypes within a build or like sub-classes that 4e did. I don't want like, 10 classes with an feature like rouge and can do it worse than a rouge.
A LOT OF RACES : good, Now I like this. As said by Mithrilwing, lets start with eight races and gradualy (not steeply) add more races.
ABILITY SCORES FOR RACES (you want a particolar race to be better with some classes and bad with others?) : good, adds what a race favors to do and what they need to work hard at to be good at somthing else.
FEATS (AND OTHER OPTIONS) THAT GIVES YOU STATIC +X BONUSES (weapon focus, weapon expertise) : Bad, no feat taxes that just scale by tier and get boring after getting and getting the same kind of feat over and over again.
HIT POINTS : Good, an sacred cow of RPGs.
HEALING SURGES (part of 4e heal system) : Bad, Im against healing in battle just because of vigor in a persons body. Make it more of healing per day and magical healing surgeless.
DEFENSES : Don't care about NADs or vs. AC, just so it works fine is how I like it.
SKILL CHALLENGES (4e) : Ok.... If they fix em' up to not be only dice rolls initialy.
SKILLS HAVE TO BE : Important, They define whats your character's good at you know?
NORMAL CHANCE TO HIT : Don't have a preference... as long as it works.
ALIGNMENT IS (mechanical means there are powers/spells that work on what you write on your sheet, fluff means pure role play) : Fluff, Don't need to be constrained of just because what your character think is right mechanicly.
SAVE OR DIE (finger of death) : varies, if it's not flat boring like "I pertryfy you unless you save" good.
Level 1-30, Though i think epic tier needs far more support. Just give me more stats for gods, Primordials, and Far Realm Entities and i'll be happy.
powers good
vanciansystem bad
Class roles Good, I like the concept of roles but i don't think each class should only ever be that role. Give them some breathing room.
magicitems has to be mechanically not important, if your not reliant on +X bonuses from magic gear to make you comparable to everyone else then your magic items can be pretty simple and still be loved by the players who get them.
abilitiesscores Good, it makes DnD something recognizable as DnD. When you hear talk about someones 21 Int Wizard while browsing a book store you know what they are talking about.
a lot of classes Good, i like the array of builds each class can have in 4E but sometimes i'd rather see a full new class as opposed to another version of something we already have.
a lot of races good, I like what 4E did to make the race mean alittle more to who your character was. And I think it would be worthwhile to make many of the monstrous races playable. A book of Monsters Turned PCs would be sweet. And a DM not interested in such things could simply call "No races from X book"
ability scores for races yes, Some races are better at some things then others. Though i'd replace the skill bonuses each race gets with skill bonuses from a background.
feats (and other options) that gives you static +x bonuses bad, when overdone. A 5% chance to hit isn't a big deal until you can take three different feats to give you another 5% chance each. And a simple +1 bonus isn't going to make a feat a must have for any and all characters.
hit points good, a simple and timeless system that can help build suspense for any battle.
healing surges good, though i'd reduce how many we get.
defenses as AC
skill challenges Quite enjoyable, definatly good.
skills has to be Important
normal chance to hit 50-60% wouldn't be bad. As long as Monsters are similiar.
ALIGNMENT IS (mechanical means there are powers/spells that work on what you write on your sheet, fluff means pure role play) Fluff, Mostly. You could have feats and things that require sticking to a particular alignment.
SAVE OR DIE (finger of death) Bad, I prefer how 4E treated such things. Though some spells could do more damage(disintegrate)
Class Roles: GOOD, but hybridized roles (ala Warlock) or classes which transition between roles (ala Berserker) are acceptable.
Magic Item Mechanics: GOOD, but perhaps to a slightly lesser degree than 4e
Ability Scores: GOOD in concept, but: ditch the scores completely, use the modifiers directly. M&M 3e did this, and it just works.
Lots of Classes: GOOD... IF you can make them distinct (I think 4e is adequate at this)
Lots of Races: GOOD... IF you can make them distinct (I think 4e is adequate at this)
Racial Ability Scores: GOOD, but only if positive. Negative mods BAD.
+X Feats/options: BAD. If they must exist, link them to specific classes, races, or weapons.
HP: GOOD. Static-per-level values with a high starting value as 4e is best.
Healing Surges: GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD! Additionally, all characters should have a limited ability to heal themselves, as per 4e Second Wind.
Defenses: As AC
Skill Challenges: GOOD in concept, but need to be thought-out better than 4e did
Skills have to be: IMPORTANT (and DISCREET from ability scores!). In fact, increasing the importance of skills beyond past editions may be good. I would not mind seeing feat/power prereqs based on skill training (eg. Come and Get It must be trained in Intimidate. Sly Flourish must be trained in Acrobatics.)
Normal chance to hit: split the difference to about 60-65%
Alignments: FLUFF... and I further admit I would not miss the elimination of the alignment system entirely, or its replacement with another marker of disposition. Some past systems I've liked were Nature+Demeanor (WoD, FFG), Honor+Renown/fame+infamy/reputation (L5R, Shadowrun), and Hero+Scoundrel+Villain (7th Sea). That, or steal a cue from Bioware: the most interesting thing about the Paragon/Renegade distinction in Mass Effect is that there's no question whether Shepherd is a hero... just a question of what kind of a hero Shepherd is.
Save or Die: BAD
And a category that may be worth adding to this poll:
"Retro is not new. Retro-fit is not new." --Seeker95, on why I won't be playing DDN
DDN Metrics (0-10) | enthusiasm: 1 | confidence in design: -3 | desire to play: 0 | Sticking with 4e?: Yep. | Better Options: IKRPG Mk II
The Five Things D&D Next Absolutely Must Not Do:Show
1. Imbalanced gameplay.Any and all characters must be able to contribute equally both in combat and out of combat at all levels of play. If the Fighters are linear and the Wizards quadratic, I walk. 2. Hardcore simulationist approach. D&D is a game about heroic fantasy. I'm weak and useless enough in real life; I play RPGs for a change of pace. If the only reason a rule exists is because "that's how it's supposed to be", I walk. I don't want a game that "simulates" real life, I want a game that simulates heroic fantasy. 3. Worshipping at false idols (AKA Sacred Cows). If the only reason a rule exists is "it's always been that way", I walk. Now to be clear, I have no problem with some things not changing; my issue is with retaining bad idea simply for the sake of nostalgia. 4. DM vs. players. If the game encourages "gotcha!" moments or treats the DM and players as enemies, adversaries, or problems to be overcome, I walk. 5. Rules for the sake of rules. The only thing I want rules for is the things I can't do sitting around a table with my friends. If the rules try to step on my ability to roleplay the character I want to roleplay, I walk. Furthermore, the rules serve to facilitate gameplay, not to simulate the world.
1. When in doubt, wing it. 2. Keep the story moving. Go with the flow. 3. Sometimes things make the best characters. 4. Always give players lots of things to do. 5. Wherever possible, say ‘yes.’ 6. Cheating is largely unnecessary. 7. Don't be afraid to give the characters a fun new toy. 8. Don't get in the way of a good players exchange. 9. Avoid talking too much. 10. Save some details for later. 11. Be transparent. 12. Don't show all your cards.
"Essentials zigged, when I wanted to continue zagging..." -Foxface on Essentials
"Servicing a diverse fan base with an RPG ruleset - far from being the mandate for 'open design space' and a cavalier attitude towards balance - requires creating a system that /works/, with minimal fuss, for a wide variety of play styles, not just from one group to the next, but at the same table." -Tony_Vargas on design
"Mearls' and Cook's stated intent to produce an edition that fans of all previous editions (and Pathfinder) will like more than their current favourite edition is laudable. But it is also, IMO, completely unrealistic. It's like people who pray for world peace: I might share their overall aims, but I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for them to succeed. When they talk in vague terms about what they'd like to do in this new edition, I mostly find myself thinking 'hey, that sounds cool, assuming they can pull it off', but almost every time they've said something specific about actual mechanics, I've found myself wincing and shaking my head in disbelief and/or disgust, either straight away or after thinking about the obvious implications for half a minute." -Duskweaver on D&D Next
