|
1 year ago ::
Jan 24, 2012 - 7:25AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Aug 23, 2008
|
Just figured I'd open a general discussion on what everyone wants to see in 5E since most threads at the moment are concerning specifics. Top 5 things I want in 5E:
- 1) Modern Business Model.
- With the advent of smart phones and tablet PC's D&D has a unique opportunity to expand the player base in a manner FAR more cost effective than print. Don't get me wrong, there's no school like the old school, but those days of pencils and paper are over. Going digital not only cuts production costs, but also makes the product more accessable. The original ideas of a character visualizer, virtual 3D game table (not the junky wannabe Map Tools knock off I beta'd), and full featured online tools for both DM's and Players is the right way to go.
- 2) Highly Customizable.
- 4E is an obvious step away from the homebrew versions that preceeded it in an attempt to establish simplicity. Though in reality customization and simplicity are not at odds with each other, quite the contrary. Maintaining a core mechanic which guides everything is far simpler than inventing a new one for each class that comes along. Thus, balancing one mechanic and simply attaching options to it in order to create class variation is a much more attainable goal to create game balance.
- 3) Not Party Composition Dependant.
- When thinking of my favorite fantasy characters, Elminster, Drizzt, Wulgar, Legolas, Arigorn, hell Merlin even...not once did I see a "crap we need a healer and a tank!" before any adventuring took place. Each of these characters was capable on his own, but when amoung friends nigh invincible. "Class" shouldn't be divided by what slot you fill in the DPR/TANK/HEAL spectrum, it should be divided upon play style and nothing more. The ranger should have knowledge of healing herbs, the wizard should have the ability to bend arcana to mend himself, and a rogue should know just the right pressure points to stop the bleeding, all just as a cleric might call upon a diety to accomplish the same goal. It shouldn't be about WHAT you play, just how you decide to play it.
- 4) No Useless Options.
- We all know D&D is famous for having absolutely useless build options cluttering up it's feat, power/spell, and item libraries. Options that don't even have the excuse of expanding RP elements for the sake of a richer game experience...the ones that are just plain bad. At best they make for a good laugh when trying to make the worst build possible, otherwise they only make scrolling down for the good stuff take longer.
- 5) Attribute Equality.
- 4E sure loves a high wisdom score! You can base your AC on it, Hit Points, initiative, and the majority of your skills. But what about our little friend Constitution? Sure you can base your AC and Hit Points on it, but that's what it's supposed to do. There are no options to make it improve your initiative and it gets the fewest skill synergy in the game...exactly 1. Clearly simply being Wisdom based gives any class a natural advantage in 4E, and this is simply unbalanced by nature (...which is also wisdom based). There shouldn't be any "dump stats", the consideration of a trade off to create both a strong point and a weak point of the character being built should be of equal measure in each attribute. All attributes should have the potential to be just as useful to a Wizard as they are to a Fighter, and each should have it's own fair balance of skill synergy. For example, one can learn of Nature by reading about it (intelligence), being born and raised in it (wisdom), having endured it's harshness (constitution), having worked it by the sweat of ones brow (strength), having perfected moving within it without being seen or heard (dexterity), or having an empathic understanding of creatures that dwell within it (charisma). Each one of the atributes, when viewed as equal variants, can contribute to a skill, attack, or defense.
Granted I'll likely be fully ignored or possibly treated with a sort of mild neglect by the almighty game devs...like an outdoor cat you put food and water out for but never really see. But hey, there's always the off chance they'll take a peek. So, what're your top 5? |
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 24, 2012 - 7:34AM
#2
|
|
|
1. A core game that doesn't need more to be effective (3 books)
2. Additional Books that are equal amounts Fluff and Crunch
3. Healing Improved (Remove the absolute abraction of hit points, making it a combo)
4. Non Combat stuff (skills/feats/powers/spells)
5. Real settings that grow and evolve instead of 'abstract points of light
6 Bonus - Weapon qualities (length/damage type/speed factor) that make a difference in combat.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 24, 2012 - 8:29AM
#3
|
|
|
1. The game to be complete, playable, and expandable / customizable from the three core books.
2. The business model to not focus on a never ending cycle of splats.
3. The game to focus on being itself, i.e. it's a role-playing game, not an app, not a video game, not a widget.
4. The core game to allow the use of any module, adventure, setting, and most resources from most / all older editions of the game with very little conversion.
5. The game to not make wizards a stupid choice at low levels and fighters a stupid choice at high levels.
"And why the simple mechanics? Two reasons: First, complex mechanics invariably channel and limit the imagination; second, my neurons have better things to do than calculate numbers and refer to charts all evening." -Over the Edge
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 24, 2012 - 8:38AM
#4
|
|
|
Introduce an "HONOR" aspect to the game for all PCs, NPCs, and monsters that facilitates roleplay, much like they use in Hackmaster.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 24, 2012 - 8:51AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Jan 13, 2012
|
- A complex character generation system without fast play off the shelf cookie cutter characters. I want my character to be different from your character even if there both fighter‘s warlords etcetera.
- I want spells, as in 3.5 spells, I want rituals’ as in 4e rituals’. I want a magic item crafting system that works. I want to get better at my skills as I progress in level.
- I want a computer program to keep track of both characters and monsters that has all the content updated with each book that comes out. I do not want to pay a monthly fee for this.
- I want a module for the forgotten realms campaign setting that comes out every month and is part of a full campaign setting. It follows a story line from level 1-20 it is downloadable to my kindle each month you would buy a subscription to this content 10$ to20$ a month.
- I want one new addition to rule them all.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 24, 2012 - 5:25PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Jan 18, 2012
|
1. A core game that only includes the first: Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's guide and Monster Manual. All other books should be considered optional content. The designer's should advertise this concept that the other books are meant to add certain features that may not be desired in every game. This is of course a departure from 4e's initial stance of everything is in core.
2. A release schedule that focuses on a few well done larger supplements under the Dungeons and Dragons label(my suggestion top 4 a year). It is expected that these would be longer and not as limited in score as previous supplements(no splatbooks). This excludes campaign settings and campaign setting specific supplements these can be released at whatever rate WotC desires. I make this exception, because I know WotC does not like releasing setting stuff to begin with(from directly questioning WotC employee's at GenCon), because it reduces the product's target market.
3. A small group of core classes(my suggestion somewhere between 8-10) with multiple variants. New classes could be added in optional books, but whenever possible a variant of an existing class should be used. An example would be Ranger and Warden, the ranger from a story perspective fulfills the role of both of these classes. Furthermore, class variants could allow for a ranger that has no spells(4e and Aragorn / Lan al'Mandragoran style), a ranger that uses divine magic(i.e 2nd and 3rd edition) and a ranger that uses arcane magic (i.e first edition). Another example would be wizard and necromancer, no need for two classes a wizard variant can represent necromancer. One more example fighter, knight, samurai etc. can all be represented by fighter variants.
4. A greater emphasis placed on the mechanics reflecting the state of the character in the world, rather than mechanics for their own sake.
5. A rules set that allows for more than just heroic fantasy as a play style. It would be ideal if Dungeons and Dragons books organized the modular pieces of their mechanics by the play style that they suit best i.e (classic fantasy, high fantasy, heroic fantasy, steam punk, horror, and also specific campaign setting such as FR, Dragonlance, Dark Sun, Greyhawk, 4e FR, Ravenloft). This allows groups to make a choice on the kind of elements that work best for their game. Characters inspired by Kratos and Elminster kind of ruin a horror atmosphere and by the same token the defiler magic concept really doesn't go well in high fantasy. Obviously, not everyone one will agree on what archtype a given mechanic belongs under. However, it would be very easy to quickly glance over a new supplement and determine whether it has a home at your table or not. And a supplement could include multiple elements just in seperate chapters or color coded.
and one additional for the road!
6. If Paragon Paths, Prestige classes or whatever WotC chooses to call them exist in the new edition. They should actually represent something in the world: a membership in an organization, an archtype, or a concept that doesn't make sense for a level 1 character. A Paragon path, prestige class etc should have appropriate roleplay requirements to enter when needed. For example in order to become a Harper from FR, the character must actually get accepted by and train with the Harpers. In the case of representing something in the world, arcane archer and dwarven defender both represent archtypes. Why do people thing of elves as magic wielding archers? Arcane Archers. The same logic goes for dwarves and dwarven defenders. The assassin is a great example of a class that represents something beyond the scope of a low level character, murder a couple of commoners and nobody calls you assassin. Now take down a well protected duke, a powerful orc chieftain, the local tower dwelling wizard etc and maybe the character can start growing a reputation.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 24, 2012 - 5:36PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Sep 20, 2004
|
1) Rules for combat resolution that do not require a grid and/or maps.
2) Equally robust combat and non-combat rules.
3) Balance (preferably spotlight balance, though I wouldn't mind every class having an equal potential in multiple areas of spotlight specialization, with combat being one area of the game which every class can, not must, be built effectively).
4) Rules that reward narration, and stimulate narration, both in and out of combat.
5) A GM role that amounts to more than just running the world. The strength of this game's platform is that it is mediated by a sapient human consciousness. The game should make use of that.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 24, 2012 - 6:05PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Aug 17, 2007
|
1) Class style just like Star Wars Saga Edition. Classes as concepts, with a lot of customization. Trees.
2) Vancian spellcasting.
3) Core material = common material. Races that have great population, classes easily found in any world.
4) Paladin with some auras. Courage, e.g.
5) Healing surges.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 24, 2012 - 8:06PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Jan 12, 2012
|
Top 5 not necessarily ranked:
• I can make build a PC that closely matches my character concept (i.e. highly customizable character creation).
• There are lots of interesting ways my character can interact with the game world.
• Many tactical choices to be made; good decisions resulting in success, poor decisions causing (or at least increasing the risk of) failure.
• Different mechanics available for different types of characters.
• My standard for balance is not very high; to me balance means that all characters contribute meaningfully to (almost) all encounters.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 24, 2012 - 9:30PM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Oct 11, 2007
|
1. Nearly any race can be effective in any nearly class, or at least power-source and roll.
2. No role is indespensible.
3. Default builds of each class should be roughly equally valuable in combat against most sorts of encounters at most levels, and in most skill challenges at most levels.
4. No classes should have xp or gold taxes. (This means that magic item crafting shouldn't take xp, and rituals shouldn't take (much) gold.
5. Feats and utility powers (or spells) shouldn't consistently trump skills in non-combat situations.
|
|
|
