My goal as a GM has always to make the game balanced and fun for all players involved, and in that regard 5th has almost done well SO FAR. And it looks like you removed MOST of the balance issues and the inpedements to a fun play-session. Unfortunately some of these things look like they could potentially fall back into that old not REALY fun but just fun enough to not try anything else at levels beyond 5.
1. Save or Die/Charmed/Paralized or Otherwise Helpless[to be refered to as save-or-(done)] -- This, to me was the death of every 3.x campaign I ever ran. When the power to end an encounter with a single roll became accesible to the players, it made everyone without that ability completely impotent. If you were doing damage that had an actual number attached to it, and not making something (or multiple things) take saves to avoid being flat-out out of the encounter, then your actions became meaningless. When the power became available to monsters, the same was true (and it seemed like the developers knew that, because you would be hard pressed to find a 3.x monster of CR 11+ that attacked in any way other than forcing players to make a save or be out of the fight.) Partially because saves auto-fail on a 1, and partially because ANY single d20 roll making a fully fleshed out character go from awake and at full health to making that player re-roll next session. I saw player after player become disheartened and stop playing at that the exact point where save-or-(done) powers became a reality time and time again, it is probably the second most common reason for a game not making it past 11th level (the leading being ADD.)
When you re-introduced saving throws in the playtest, I got worried. Fortunately, I did notice that there were absolutely NO powers resembling save-or-(done) mechanics. The closest was the sleep spell, which is just mathematical a high damage all-or-nothing finishing move. This is acceptable, because it means if someone is taken out of the fight by this, they are either SIGNIFIGANTLY below the level of the caster of the finishing move. The problem is that other than sleep and color spray (and some splat book powers not worth mentioning) most save-or-(done) abilities/spells/powers/etc... weren't introduced until level 7+ (the same time most people stopped playing games that start at lv1... think about it.) PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, if you insist on keeping saves as a mechanic (and I'll admit most of the players you lost with 4th wouldn't be happy without them,) keeping them all as high damage finishing moves instead of single die save-or-(done) abilities.
Bear in mind that it is imperative that ALL and not just SOME potential save-or-(done) abilities, because if one class has access to them, and another doesn't this just increases the imbalance issue.
2 Full-Attack actions --This one takes less explaining. Yet another frustration to MANY players through the course o 3.x was the fact that, beyond a certain point, unless you were a caster, if you wanted to do big boy damage in a turn, you had to be standing still. The absence of this (in my opinion) the biggest positive difference between 4th and 3.x: tactical combat. Because damage still mattered [thanks to the absence of save-or-(done)] and because said damage was not significantly reduced by not moving, you had a MOBILE combat experience. In the current version of 5th/next/the playtest, also has a mobile combat experience thanks to the absence of Full-Attack actions, save-or-(done) and one more feature (to be discussed below) . The only problem is that for most people, full-attack-actions didn't start mattering until after 6th level (the notable exception being two-weapon-fighting, which works fundamentally different now. Please don't include full-attacks after 5th level
3 The ability to negate attacks of opportunity --As I mentioned above, tactically mobile battlefields are fun, and they make the combat experience fun in and of themselves. One of the things that made tactical mobility matter in 4th as opposed to 3.5 (which was fun, but the combat wasn't fun in and of itself.) However, full mobility can be just as boring and static as no mobility, and the ability (everyone always being able to attack everyone is just as boring as only being able to attack the person you charged or who charged you first turn.) There seems to be no abbility to move without preventing attacks of opportunity without doing something equivalent to a 5 foot step or a shift. This is good. This is important. Of course, without the above two qualities attacks of opportunity cease to be relevant because they don't do full-attack-level damage, or make the opponent make a save to avoid dying.
4 Immunity to types of damage, particularly percision damage --Save-or-(done) is the worst kind of "you don't get to play" anymore situation, but there is another kind of "you don't get to play" situation. Have you built a fantastic rogue/scout only to find out that the campaign is going to be one in-which you primarily fight undead, constructs, plants, and oozes? Of course you have, and I've watched that player quit... or at least I would have if I hadn't have the house-rule that nothing is ever immune to percision damage, ever. In a world where damage actually matters, completely negating someone's ability to do damage is the same as saying, "you rolled a one on your first die roll today, and it was a save, so you don't get to play." The bigest difference, is that while you don't have to roll an entirely new character, you didn't even get a single die roll to save you. What's more, if you just flavor sneak attack a bit differently, then it makes perfect sense working against undead (aim for the brain against zombies,) constructs (clogging up the gears with your arrow,) and even oozes (leaking the bulk on the floor with a well timed and placed puncture.)
TLDR: Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Edit: Edited for potentially flame war inducing edition banter
On the issue of the rogue/scout, why wouldn't someone make weaponry designed to take those out? For example, maybe there are smiths capable of forging masterwork arms that do elemental damage without providing any other magical benefit. And naturally those weapons are expensive compared to mundane arms, so a newbie rogue would only be able to afford one but could obtain a set over the course of a low-level campaign.
Another option is to use something like Ragnarok Online's card compounding system, where a rogue can (at fairly great expense) have a weapon upgraded to do better damage against a category of monsters? For example, a dagger that does increased damage against the undead, or a bow that crits oozes on a 18-20 when used with normal arrows ?
Either way, I don't see how these would require a change to the game mechanics. Sneak Attack RAW can work on any kind of monster or character, so these are module-level changes.
In 3.x, RAW sneak attack and scout damage specifically did not work on undead, constructs, plants, or oozes, and there seems to be no such caviat in the playtest. I think that is a good thing, and I want them to not change that. That's what this thread was: things that are right with the playtest that I don't want them to change, particularly things that I suspect they might change back to a more 3.x-ey state.
Some good points. On the rogue, I have a feeling the Sneak Attack damage will work vs Undead & Constructs as it stands now... though probably not against oozes, Shambling Mounds, etc. What honestly worries me just as much is the fact that the Sneak Attack Damage only adds 2d6. this is fine for the first few levels but will cease to be of a major benefit. I know we might (hopefully) see this benefit increase beyond LV 5.
On Save or Done mechanic, I hear you & understand your concerns (OP). However, I respectfully disagree; I think that the threat of the Save or Done mechanic can also work in favor of the PCs. Also, it adds the threat of dire consequences for those who choose to live the life of an Adventurer. "Go home, Willow. It's a dangerous world" said Madmartigan to Willow. Another thing of note about Saave or Done effects: many of them can be either prevented or can be dispelled. Your character is turned to stone by a Basilisk?? Have your loyal companions get a Stone to Flesh cast on you to resore your beloved character. Good preparation on the part of the PCs can greatly lessen the extent to which the Save or Done effects have on them....
Monday evening, my Pathfinder Rogue was turned to Stone by a Medusa (I rolled a 2 on my Saving Throw). So for now, my character is unplayable. I can take over an NPC or play a temporary character until my main PC is restored... and I'm sure it won't take very long.
I'm not saying that save or done isn't balanced, it's perfectly balanced if everyone has access to it. The problem is that it reduces what could be a chess match to a game of rock-paper-scisors. When you lose, it wasn't because of how you played, but because you lost a single die roll, and if you win it wasn't because you defeated a challenging opponent with your superior tactics and preperation, but because you won a single die roll. I will never concede that rolling once for initiative and once for a save is more fun than a fully fleshed out tactical combat full of flaverfull maneuvers, witty banter, the ebb and flow of combat, and the constant uncertainty of outcome. I played 3.x for years, and after level 7 or 8, with a well built party, and monsters of appropriate level, no fight lasted longer than one or two rounds, because that's what save or done does to combat: it makes it not fun.
Also, I sometimes hear the pro save or done mechanic argument that it adds to the realism, and I never understood the draw towards realism and away from heroic drama in a game about fantastic magical heroes fighting fantastic magic creatures in a world where magic, and good and evil as absolute measurable concepts objectively exist. I thought we were escaping to a fantasy world. I suppose I can respect your desire for realism in a fantasy game, I do play CoC afterall, but I would be verry sad (and I'm quite tight walleted when sad) if 5th turned into CoC medieval edition. Because to be honest, if you replaced cthulan horror who auto kills you with a lord of the abyss, and replaced your flesh-to-stone spell with a rocket launcher, there is little difference between the endgame of a CoC game and a high level D&D game where save-or-done exists... and to be entirely frank, CoC just does that game better. We should endeavor to do something that we do better than any other game: Dramatic Heroism in Fantasy.
@Aehrlon68: Sneak attack starts at 2d6, but goes up by 1d6 each level. So at level 5, the 6d6 it adds is quite significant.
As odd at is sounds, I hope they leave Sneak Attack as usable against everything.
For starters, it keep the game more consistant and doesn't gimp one of the key features of a core class. More than that, though, once you start adding in "logic", it opens Pandora's Box. If you can't hit a vital point in an ooze, then you have to examine everything. How could Crit Hits work on creatures without vulnerable points? What about other type of creatures like Ghosts or Elementals? How can you Parry against creature that don't have physical, hard, and/or material weapons? Same with Protect. What about Knock Down? Etc Etc.
Eventually, you just end up with a rules heavy system that's trying to make the fantastic realistic.
Just grab some dice and have fun in D&D playing a heroic character that does unbelievable things in a world that's hard to imagine in real life against enemies that only appear in fiction.
@Aehrlon68: Sneak attack starts at 2d6, but goes up by 1d6 each level. So at level 5, the 6d6 it adds is quite significant.
As odd at is sounds, I hope they leave Sneak Attack as usable against everything....
Eventually, you just end up with a rules heavy system that's trying to make the fantastic realistic.
Just grab some dice and have fun in D&D playing a heroic character that does unbelievable things in a world that's hard to imagine in real life against enemies that only appear in fiction.
D'oh! I don't know how I missed that; I think I was looking in the far right column detailing Class Features & somehow overlooked it despite the Sneak Attack column being RIGHT NEXT TO the Features. My bad & thanks for pointing it out, Shaderaven. I too hope that Sneak Attack remains viable vs a variety of targets. And I do like the advancement of it, though I can forsee them putting a cap on just how many extra d6s that a Rogue's player gets to roll.
@Mjorkk: I can totally see where you're coming from and I do agree with you that the over-use of "Save or Done" effects is a bad thing. I never over-used it when I ran my 3.x game and the one I still play in to this day, that DM does likewise. The times you roll for your life are not overly abundant, but they are there from time to time. AND the group has a powerful cleric on-board. That really helps. I think judicious use of them is the best way to handle Save or Done effects.
And of course, your gaming group should always sit down with their DM before hand to discuss what kind of game they want to play. Take ShadeRaven's comparison of a Save or Done heavy game such as CoC: I would never want a D&D game to be quite that lethal. That being said, I confess I enjoy the sense of danger & knowing that at times, my character might not survive, despite my best efforts. Sometimes you just have bad luck. It happens. So, yes, I do like having Save or Done in the game despite how I as a player might get hosed from time time. You can't win them all...
It's true that SoD isn't disruptive if not overused... but that's the same as saying that rocket launchers aren't disruptive to a world of knights in shining armor if not overused. If you live in a world where your two options of fighting are rocket launchers, or knights on horseback, there is literally no reason to ever use the knights other than for flavor. Similarly, there is never any reason for a player to attemot to do damage to a monster when SoD is available. Then you run into the problem of having a class who's whole schtick is having a giant bag of rocket launchers (Wizards.)
I could likey it to the Shadowrun sniper-rifle cold war. Mechanically, there is no reason to ever use any weapon other than a sniper rifle... ever, but having sniping all the guards then stealing the data is only marginally less boring than your whole team's heads simultaneously exploding from that sniper 100 yards away. SO before every Shadowrun game, the GM and the Players will usually agree "if you don't open the shiper rifle's pandora's box, we won't." Of course this makes sense in a setting where sniper rifles have to exist in order for the world to make sense (they exist now, so the must exist in the super-future.) In, D&D it's just a mechanic, and if you remove the "sniper rifles" then you don't have to rely on cold wars to keep your game fun, they are just fun.
Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion. Your comparison is funny & to the point but I think it's missing some of the finer details. I have played (& DMed all but 4E) all versions of our beloved D&D and I have not encountered one person who quit the game because of a SoD effect happening to them in game. And even when/if it does happen, there's always Raise Dead.
SoD is not always so cut & dried (in effect, it is of course, just not in implementation). Meaning, not just how often it is used but HOW & by whom. Also keeping in mind that players who have their characters do their homework can either choose NOT to face a SoD threat that they know is there OR choose to face it while taking every available precaution. Indeed, some earlier versions of the game up to and including Pathfinder still have an abundance of SoD. From what I've read of D&D Next thus far, not so much. Sure, there was a Medusa in the Caves of Chaos... Haven't fully read this new module. I suspect that while SoD effects are still present, they will be relatively rare and only sporadically appear rather then become the default, do to effect. I think the days of Power Word: Kill and Disintegrate are over...
Wouldn´t it be better if "Save or Done" effects were contested? This way you add the variable of the enemy also rolling poorly ans so your low-rolled Save could still, well, save you as long as it is higher than his. It is not a perfect soulution but it is a start and not too big a change from how it used to work.
