There should be a core that has all the shared elements of all of the editions with fixed math and dice.
So core should literally be roll 1d20 + bonuses - penalties try to get over a target number (DC, AC, etc...etc...)
Then have modules that layer onto the game.
Module 1 Ability Checks: Put all of the info on making ability checks to overcome obstacles here. Module 1a DC Tables for checks: Put all of the info from page 42 of the 4E DMG here. Expand on status effects etc...etc... Module 1b DM fiat for checks: Put all the wishy washy "what the DM feels like today" stuff here.
Module 2 skills: Put all of the skill info here. Classes would list skills like this "Module 2 skills: The Wizard chooses one knowledge skill to be trained in." in their description. You should still have backgrounds, but they would have the whole "Module 2 skills: You are trained in the following skills..." on each. Module 2a 3.xE Style skill points: Put the 3.xE skill point system here. Module 2b 4E style skill training: Put the 4E style skill training here.
Module 3 Feats: Put all of the feat info here. Specialties would list feats like this "Module 3 Feats: The Arcansist has the following feats: level 1 - Cantrips". The description would still be the same above it so that those games that don't use feats could still use the fluff to define their character as well as getting the special feature of the specialty (in the case of the arcanist I think its being able to exclude targets in an area spell from taking damage).
Module 4 Advanced Class Features: Put all of the things like expertise dice, at-will spells, signature spells, etc here. Advanced Class Features would list themselves like this in the class descriptions "Module 4 ACF: The Fighter gains expertise dice as seen on the chart below. Choose two starting Maneuvers..." Module 4a 3.xE style bonus feats: Put the 3.xE class related bonus feats here.
Each module would layer on top of the others. If you weren't playing with a module anything belonging to that module would be easy to identify and skip over.
This way people that like the 1E everything is in your imagination and up to the DM could play their game, while the 2E everything is physical with skills but no feats could play theirs, the 3.xE completely broken spells and sub-par non-casters and rampant multi-classing could play theirs, and the 4E completely balanced everyone gets skills, feats, class features, power, and tactical battle mat play could play theirs.
The first thing that needs to happen though is the core of the game needs to be pared down to the basic. You would keep everything up to page 2 above saving throws.
Possibly putting ability checks into an optional module.
Put saving throws into module [#]A and 4E style attacking ability scores (since we don't have Fort, Ref, or Will) into module [#]B.
Put the current dis/advantage into module [#]A and 3.xE/4E dis/advantage into [#]B.
Basically keep from Ability scores and modifiers down to Movement in combat on page 13. Put opportunity attacks into module [#]A and put 3.xE/4E style opportunity attacks into module [#]B.
Then put actions in combat into module [#]A and 1E/2E style improvisation actions into module [#]B.
Then attack basics to the optional rules of healing would be in core.
The optional rules for healing would be put into modules [#]A, [#]B, and [#]C.
The optional rules for resting would be put into modules [#]A, [#]B, and [#]C.
Conditions would be put into module [#]A and 1E/2E style DM tells you what happens would be in [#]B.
Magic on page 21 would be broken down into what we have in the packet into module [#]A, 1E/2E casting times and concentration rules into module [#]B, and 4E's move, or action to sustain and no interruption would be in module [#]C.
Spell shapes would be broken down into several modules. The play test packet rules would go into [#]A, 4E style shapes for a grid would go into [#]B.
Rituals would go into module [#].
What do you think? Would you do it differently?
Here is my take on what 5E should be.There should be a core that has all the shared elements of all of the editions with fixed math and dice.So core should literally be roll 1d20 + bonuses - penalties try to get over a target number (DC, AC, etc...et
This would be ridiculously confusing for a new player, and very irritating for those of us who don't want to spend hours trying to figure out how to integrate everything.
This would be ridiculously confusing for a new player, and very irritating for those of us who don't want to spend hours trying to figure out how to integrate everything.
This would be ridiculously confusing for a new player, and very irritating for those of us who don't want to spend hours trying to figure out how to integrate everything.
It could have suggested defaults or have a kind of survey that you take at the beginning to steer you into the right set of modules, from there you could experiment to get what you want...
It could have suggested defaults or have a kind of survey that you take at the beginning to steer you into the right set of modules, from there you could experiment to get what you want...
This would be ridiculously confusing for a new player, and very irritating for those of us who don't want to spend hours trying to figure out how to integrate everything.
It could have suggested defaults or have a kind of survey that you take at the beginning to steer you into the right set of modules, from there you could experiment to get what you want...
Sorry, I was unnecessarily rude in my initial assessment, and I skimmed through the post. I don't know if I'd be comfortable with that much modularity, but I do like the idea of sticking a bit closer to the idea of "every player's favorite game." I feel like that could be accomplished more elegantly within the existing framework, though, by simply adding options for classes and rules that mimic the feel of different editions and playstyles. For example, the Thief Rogue without Backgrounds is pretty close to a 1E Thief, and a Fighter with Mighty Exertion (bend bars/lift gates) and the save bonus feats feels 1E-ish as well.
It could have suggested defaults or have a kind of survey that you take at the beginning to steer you into the right set of modules, from there you could experiment to get what you want...[/quote]Sorry, I was unnecessarily rude in my initial assessme
Modular options could be the basis of the game, but if it's done to this extreme, people would just play 1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th edition if they wanted to play those games...not a representation of them in a different game.
Modular options could be the basis of the game, but if it's done to this extreme, people would just play 1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th edition if they wanted to play those games...not a representation of them in a different game.
For starters, expertise dice absolutely must be baked into the core if they are to exist at all. Otherwise PCs that add that module do tremendously more damage than those without, and we have to have separate HP figures for every monster depending on whether you're playing with ED or not. There could be a default where everyone gets deadly strike, and alternative maneuvers could be a module. But an important thing to keep in mind is that adding a module shouldn't force you to completely rewrite the monster manual. If it does, it's too unwieldy, and people who don't like ED will find it easier to just play 1E than to sift through all the extraneous information that doesn't apply to them. "Hmm... I'm using module 1-3, 4a, 12c, and 17b, so which of these 200 permutations of monster stats/DCs do I use?" There comes a point where it's easier to play with a mechanic you don't like (always use DS for your ED, just ignore the rage trait...) than to sort through which of 250 modules you want and how that effects everything else.
For starters, expertise dice absolutely must be baked into the core if they are to exist at all. Otherwise PCs that add that module do tremendously more damage than those without, and we have to have separate HP figures for every monster depending o
For starters, expertise dice absolutely must be baked into the core if they are to exist at all.
Deadly Strike and its cousins are the only ones that need baked in. What's neat about them is that they can be expressed in terms that bypass the Expertise Dice concept, and thus turns ExD itself into a module which expands and extrapolates on Deadly Strike.
Deadly Strike and its cousins are the only ones that need baked in. What's neat about them is that they can be expressed in terms that bypass the Expertise Dice concept, and thus turns ExD itself into a module which expands and extrapolates on Deadl
For starters, expertise dice absolutely must be baked into the core if they are to exist at all.
Deadly Strike and its cousins are the only ones that need baked in. What's neat about them is that the can be expressed in terms that bypass the Expertise Dice concept, and thus turns ExD itself into a module which expands and extrapolates on Deadly Strike.
A 4e ranger could take feats that allowed him to sacrefice his quarry damage to create control effects.
Deadly Strike and its cousins are the only ones that need baked in. What's neat about them is that the can be expressed in terms that bypass the Expertise Dice concept, and thus turns ExD itself into a module which expands and extrapolates on Deadly
I like the idea presented in the OP, and think D&D would be a better, more popular game as a result of this kind of heavy modularity. I don't think this would confuse or intimidate new players at all, but rather engage and immerse them as they get the freedom to play the game they want to play the way they want to play it.
I like the idea presented in the OP, and think D&D would be a better, more popular game as a result of this kind of heavy modularity. I don't think this would confuse or intimidate new players at all, but rather engage and immerse them as they get t
Modular options could be the basis of the game, but if it's done to this extreme, people would just play 1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th edition if they wanted to play those games...not a representation of them in a different game.
This
I really like this idea, Lokiare. To be honest, I was thinking during the weekend why DDN was heading in the direction it was rather than making a bare-bones core and having a set of D&D modules and campaign settings templates. From there, it's just an easy step for WOTC to remake Gamma World and Star Wars Saga and for people to easily create their own worlds and games without the baked in D&D stuff
ThisI really like this idea, Lokiare. To be honest, I was thinking during the weekend why DDN was heading in the direction it was rather than making a bare-bones core and having a set of D&D modules and campaign settings templates. From there, it's
For starters, expertise dice absolutely must be baked into the core if they are to exist at all.
Deadly Strike and its cousins are the only ones that need baked in. What's neat about them is that the can be expressed in terms that bypass the Expertise Dice concept, and thus turns ExD itself into a module which expands and extrapolates on Deadly Strike.
Well you could just have an alternate module that just adds the average damage so if you don't play with the class features modules you play with the 'old school features' module or whatever you want to call it. Then just add the average damage to the Fighters attacks.
Deadly Strike and its cousins are the only ones that need baked in. What's neat about them is that the can be expressed in terms that bypass the Expertise Dice concept, and thus turns ExD itself into a module which expands and extrapolates on Deadly
Well you could just have an alternate module that just adds the average damage so if you don't play with the class features modules you play with the 'old school features' module or whatever you want to call it. Then just add the average damage to the Fighters attacks.
That's an even better idea.
To get it to work, defaults need to be compartmentalized, so it's easy to know what any given module is enhancing or replacing.
That's an even better idea.To get it to work, defaults need to be compartmentalized, so it's easy to know what any given module is enhancing or replacing.
For starters, expertise dice absolutely must be baked into the core if they are to exist at all. Otherwise PCs that add that module do tremendously more damage than those without, and we have to have separate HP figures for every monster depending on whether you're playing with ED or not.
I think it much better for the group to decide whether or not they'll use Expertise Dice as a group. That way there won't be some PCs who use the concept and others who don't.
I think it much better for the group to decide whether or not they'll use Expertise Dice as a group. That way there won't be some PCs who use the concept and others who don't.
For starters, expertise dice absolutely must be baked into the core if they are to exist at all. Otherwise PCs that add that module do tremendously more damage than those without, and we have to have separate HP figures for every monster depending on whether you're playing with ED or not.
I think it much better for the group to decide whether or not they'll use Expertise Dice as a group. That way there won't be some PCs who use the concept and others who don't.
That is still possible. The group can decide which optional modules will be used. Some groups will want each character to be able to pick a different sub-module (e.g.: ED or fixed average), while other groups will decide to apply the same module to all classes/characters/etc. No one is ever "forced" to use a module, nor is a DM "forced" to allow any module into the game simply because it exists. D&D is a group game, and as such, the group decides everything, or it won't work well (if at all).
I think it much better for the group to decide whether or not they'll use Expertise Dice as a group. That way there won't be some PCs who use the concept and others who don't.[/quote]That is still possible. The group can decide which optional modules
Monster and class design wont allow for most of this. Monsters will be too powerful and classes wont be balanced.
Some players don't care about balance, and many editions the monsters are meant to be deadly...
I am one. I like my monsters deadly. I do not care if the classes are balanced to each other. As a DM, I balance the gameplay myself based on my party's abilities and needs.
That said, I like having a simple core and then modules of complexity, but I do not plan to buy 50 books. So, for me it depends on how they plan to market this.
I will also say this again. IF THEY PLAN TO GO ONLINE, they need a way to enable book purchase = digital copy. (Yes, like Paizo but not because it is Paizo, but because it makes sense) This however is a different topic.
Some players don't care about balance, and many editions the monsters are meant to be deadly...[/quote]I am one. I like my monsters deadly. I do not care if the classes are balanced to each other. As a DM, I balance the gameplay myself based on my
Well you could just have an alternate module that just adds the average damage so if you don't play with the class features modules you play with the 'old school features' module or whatever you want to call it. Then just add the average damage to the Fighters attacks.
That's an even better idea.
To get it to work, defaults need to be compartmentalized, so it's easy to know what any given module is enhancing or replacing.
That's why I had [#]A and [#]B...
That's an even better idea.To get it to work, defaults need to be compartmentalized, so it's easy to know what any given module is enhancing or replacing.[/quote]That's why I had [#]A and [#]B...
Monster and class design wont allow for most of this. Monsters will be too powerful and classes wont be balanced.
Some players don't care about balance, and many editions the monsters are meant to be deadly...
I am one. I like my monsters deadly. I do not care if the classes are balanced to each other. As a DM, I balance the gameplay myself based on my party's abilities and needs.
That said, I like having a simple core and then modules of complexity, but I do not plan to buy 50 books. So, for me it depends on how they plan to market this.
I will also say this again. IF THEY PLAN TO GO ONLINE, they need a way to enable book purchase = digital copy. (Yes, like Paizo but not because it is Paizo, but because it makes sense) This however is a different topic.
I'm assuming all this would be in the core books and color coded. So you could say we are playing with green, and orange, but not blue...
Some players don't care about balance, and many editions the monsters are meant to be deadly...[/quote]I am one. I like my monsters deadly. I do not care if the classes are balanced to each other. As a DM, I balance the gameplay myself based on my
