Community

Feh.

I really need to stop  listening when my friend texts me with news of a new playtest packet...they just get worse and worse with each new iteration.

This is basically shaping up into just another 3rd edition clone like so many before it (Trailblazer, Pathfinder, Fantasycraft, True 20, et al.) I mean, the market is practically choking on them.

If WotC releases a 5th edition that is ostensibly Pathfinder to Pathfinder's 3E, then they have a guaranteed commercial failure on their hands. It won't 3E enough for the loyalists, and will be too 3e for 4rries or Ossers.

5th edition needs to be it's own unique invention, and not just an apologetic goulash of legacy mechanics...the best WotC can hope for in that scenario is to make everyone's second favorite D&D edition. We'll just wind up blowing it off for the version we've ALWAYS been playing.

As it stands...to win me over they're going to have to scrap the whole thing and start over from square one. Go back to the drawing board, and don't come back until you have something fresh and interesting. If you sdon't have anything fresh and interesting up your sleeves, then you shouldn't be working on this in the first place. There are still lots and lots of people who want to buy 4E stuff.

That said...here are my specific gripes:

Skill dice - Huh? The idea isn't bad, but why have entirely separate mechanics for skill rolls and attack rolls. C'mon D&D...I thought we were past this? You should be lookign for ways to integrate skilsl and combat...not segregate them.

Fighters - Expertise Dice AND extra attacks? Clunky and unnecessary. That's too many rules for the player to manage each turn, and will make each of the Fighter's rounds sound like someone balancing a check book.

I would instead just grant martial classes extra plain vanilla hit & damage attacks at set intervals, and as an adanced option, let the characters perform maneuvers in place of regular attacks to chain together wicked combos.

Clerics  and Monks - WHY do they have expertise dice? They don't need it. Clerics already get spell. and monks are more interesting when they do their mystical ki junk anyway. When you can fart corrosive rainbows of destruction at your foe from your nipples, then you don't need sword tricks. If you really want sword tricks then multi-class into something martial.

Martial flavored classes really need their own unique and special schtick that no one else gets. You don't need to give EVERY swording class access to the same mechanic. It's okay if Paladins don't get expertise dice if they get to radiant smite the crap out of foes instead...that's a big part of what makes them interesting as a class.

Remember when 4E was in the design stage, and Heinsoo said one of the goals was to avoid forced symmetry? That was a good idea, and one that bears revisiting.

Spells - The magic system really needs a pennyroyal tea big gulp. Flush the whole thing and start anew. This is THE primary thing that holds D&D back.

Just to clarify...I don't mean Vancian magic. X spells per day is a perfectly serviceable resource management scheme and is easy to replace with some careful rebalancing.

I mean get rid of the old spell list and spell levels. having 8 slightly more powerful versions of "Charm ____" is a legacy mechanic that nobody would miss. It's redundant nd it takes up space that could be used for other character options, world lore and adventure hooks, or left out for a better pricepoint.

Instead...have ONE spell called Charm and have it scale up from level 1, or make it's effect useful at ALL levels. Then do this with ALL the spells.

Cut down on the number of spells that a magic user gets to prepare and cast in a day (since they will no longer have lower level slots full of redundant spells) and watch Wizards become easier and more user-friendly, and NPC generation become less cumbersome. I already started a lengthy thread about this.

Rituals - Again..why? They had a purpose in 4E, where everyone was expected to have a basic level of combat potency and segregating blast-y/fight-y spells for water breathing and far seeing spells served that principle. However, it looks like D&D5 doesn't want to go this route, so why have rituals for player characters at all? If you want to have rituals, then make them do somethign different from your bog standard Wizard/Cleric spells.

Garthanos I hate you. Fonzy taps machine, legendary mechanics skill.

Dec 18, 2012 -- 11:41AM, greatfrito wrote:

Dec 18, 2012 -- 10:41AM, DoctorBadWolf wrote:

And I really hope that they don't think that the assassin scheme is going to satisfy assassin fans.

Even as someone who has pushed (as hard as one can push for these things) for the ability to build a "martial assassin" using just the Rogue class, I do agree.  I hope they continue to put work into the concept, and I hope they avoid shoving the concept of the more "supernatural" assassin off into higher levels or "a specific story" or organization via "prestige classes".

I want the ability to make this guy:


I don't care if it requires some multiclassing, though.  In a more perfect world, it might use a theme for the more supernatural elements (if themes - and feats - were a bit more robust).

One of the other things that bugs me is that the poison use thing should be a feat, not a rogue exclusive. What the hell has the rogue got to do with poisons, to be better at it than anyone else? Balls.

And the rogue scheme is just...a sliver of the Assassin Archetype. It's just a rogue with a different sneak attack in this packet. Where's class features/maneuvers/whatever to make it so targets can't escape, can't hide, can't run from the assassin. Where's the specialty gear, especially weapons, that any fictional assassin should have, and be better than others with?

I'll be honest, the assassin would fit better in the monk than in the rogue, right now.

I'm just...completely dissatisfied with this.

Dec 18, 2012 -- 12:03PM, mellored wrote:

I agree.

Marital assassin -> rogue.
Supernatural assassin -> a new class.

Put stuff like teleport, cloud of darkness, daily posions, and shadow coffin.  At the cost of the martial damage bonus.

I could, possibly, settle for this, as long as the martial assassin is better than it is right now. Because this rogue scheme is terrible.

But even then, I would disagree (I'd just be settling). The martial assassin still needs enough things, including enough variations to choose from, that a class can be built that would play differently than the rogue. We aren't on a minimal classes structure, and the assassin is a well known, popular archetype which is thematically quite separate from the thematic elements of the rogue, so a class should be built.

Dec 19, 2012 -- 12:18PM, mellored wrote:

Dec 19, 2012 -- 11:29AM, DoctorBadWolf wrote:

Dec 18, 2012 -- 12:03PM, mellored wrote:

I agree.

Marital assassin -> rogue.
Supernatural assassin -> a new class.

Put stuff like teleport, cloud of darkness, daily posions, and shadow coffin.  At the cost of the martial damage bonus.

I could, possibly, settle for this, as long as the martial assassin is better than it is right now. Because this rogue scheme is terrible.

But even then, I would disagree (I'd just be settling). The martial assassin still needs enough things, including enough variations to choose from, that a class can be built that would play differently than the rogue. We aren't on a minimal classes structure, and the assassin is a well known, popular archetype which is thematically quite separate from the thematic elements of the rogue, so a class should be built.

Rogue-as-assassin could certainly be expanded.

But i'm not sure what specificly your looking for.  (special weapons are an easy add, but i don't see how that makes an assassin).

Part of it is stuff that I feel doesn't belong in the rogue, and instead belongs either in the assassin or detached from class. there needs to be a good poisoner theme, and the assassin could certianly use some executioner-esque specialty poisons, but what the hell does poison use have to do with a rogue?

I've described my thoughts on this in some detail in other threads. Maybe I'll make a blog about it, so I don't have to do it again after that.