|
4 months ago ::
Jan 21, 2013 - 7:12PM
#11
|
Date Joined:
Nov 27, 2006
|
Plan A: A version that starts with 3rd edition as it's base, corrects it's mistakes, and improves/expands it's features.
Plan B: A version that starts with 1st or 2nd edition as it's base, corrects it's mistakes, and improves/expands it's features.
My plan A is your plan B.
My plan B is your plan A.
Dealbreakers:
Significant 4th edition influences (Powers systems, Healing Surges, Alignment system, Planar design, Over-reliance on minatures.).
I would also include if the game goes entirely digital. I don't really see that happening.... But, I don't WANT to have to play on a laptop/tablet.
And I sure as all 9 Hells will not be paying WoTC a monthly fee to play.
Non-issue:
I italicized "Planar Design". For me this one is irrelivant. Company provided fluff - be it from TSR or nowdays WoTC only ever applies as I want it to in the games I run. Heck I don't always stick to any one of my own fluff designs!
So they can describe the planar design however they please..... Afterall, they have to fill x # of pages with something.
Same thing for campaign settings. Print it. I'll read it & then decide how much I'm going to use.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 21, 2013 - 7:17PM
#12
|
Date Joined:
May 18, 2002
|
I would also include if the game goes entirely digital.
If it does go digital, and the PDFs still cost $40, that's definitely going to be a dealbreaker.
It they keep everything on-server with a monthly subscription (and likely some god-awful DRM'd client that only runs worth a damn on some PCs), that's going be more of a "why bother?".
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 21, 2013 - 9:09PM
#13
|
Date Joined:
Sep 19, 2006
|
My Plan B:
Continue with the status-quo and maintain my 4E campaigns while continually refining v3.5 and growing the mechanics for a stonger E6 system. With some heavy revisions, I can make 3E work well, even at higher levels so long as I retool some elements and completely re-do how Monsters and NPCs are created (ie. NOT with PC rules).
Do you have your houserules written up?
Hmm, I'll have to check. It's really been a while since I did v3.5 as a DM (when we use modules, we tend to stick to the RAW of books *shrugs*) but some of the houserules remain prevalent regardless of campaign. For a few example;
• Removing crit conformatin rolls on all nat. 20's
• Using weapon groups for feats and other specific features.
• Skills start at 4 + Intelligence modifier (x4 at 1st level) instead of 2 + Int for classes like Fighter, Paladin, etc.
• Scrolls provide versatility, NOT more firepower to spellcasters. So a wizard who had a a scroll of web, scorching burst, and magic missile can use them in place of prepared spells. For Sorcerers, they expend the level of the spell on the scroll.
• Cantrips are cast at-will and they deal max-damage. So Ray of Frost (if prepared/chosen) is at-will and deals 3 damage.
• Ported over the Favored Class benefits from Pathfinder (either a +1 HP or +1 to skills when taking a level in your favorite class).
• Certain races get stat-changes that make sense, such as Half-Orcs and Tieflings not getting Charisma penalties.
While I admit that these are more like band-aids for the mechanical imbalance for 3E, it's a start and have served us pretty well.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 21, 2013 - 9:22PM
#14
|
Date Joined:
Mar 28, 2008
|
My ideal version of D&D would be a revision, and improvement of 4E such as:
- Making it more flexible in terms of grid use having rules for playing without it, in other words, a simplified method of combat along with a more tactical one.
- Balanced and interesting classes, all classes should have special stuff, be it AEDU or something else
- Economic system, elegant rules, the less subsystems and clunkiness the better.
- Make race a very important choice.
What I could not live with, and probably skip it over other systems
- It´s simply a mess of old rules glued together
- It look too much like 3E
- Classes are too unbalanced
- system is not economic, several subsystems are all over the place.
- the art is 2nd class and cartoony
Unfortunately, now DDN look a lot more like the second option.
Pretty much describes where I'm at right now.
My plan B is a different system entirely probably Savage worlds, Dresden Files, or maybe 13th Age.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 21, 2013 - 9:42PM
#15
|
Date Joined:
Jan 10, 2013
|
Plan A: A cleaned up 2E/3E hybrid with snipits of 4E and some new offerings.
Plan B: Keep playing AD&D and Call of Cthulhu.
Looks like we'll be getting A, but I'll still participate in B regardless.
The 2 core goals of DDN:
1. Create a version of D&D that embraces the enduring, core elements of the game.
2. Create a set of rules that allows a smooth transition from a simple game to a complex one.
- Mike Mearls
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 21, 2013 - 9:47PM
#16
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2008
|
I bought 90% of the published 4th edition material. I have played D&D off and on for near 30 years. I would have payed a monthly or yearly subscription for a rules complete and enforcing VTT. Unless "Next" substantially improves on what I liked about 4th AND has a rules complete VTT I won't spend a penny on the core books. Adventures and minis maybe. I currently have all the game mechanics I desire for the next 20 years with regards to fantasy based PnP.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 22, 2013 - 12:36AM
#17
|
Date Joined:
Dec 13, 2006
|
Plan "isn't-actually-going-to-happen" A: A game that actually progresses the industry, learning from previous mistakes in game design; a game with heroic adventuring and balanced, fun, and cinematic combat and non-combat challenges; a game that provides the online support that an industry giant like WotC should be pioneering.
Plan "what I actually expect to do" B: 13th Age, 4e, or a homebrew system.
Want the tl;dr of my posts? Read the bold text; I put it there to highlight the main points for ease of skimming.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 22, 2013 - 12:51AM
#18
|
Date Joined:
Jun 21, 2012
|
Plan A: Really I want a new way to play the D&D classes and some new mechanics that intrigue me. I love my multiclassing and I want a system that gives me the flexibility of 3e and the simplicity of 2e. I want a lot of ways to bolt concepts on like 2e's kits and I don't want to have to delve into the guts of the system to make a character the way feats and PrC requirements have in the past. I want a game that attempts to undermine the sense of entitlement in the game on both sides of the screen. Plan B: To be honest, Plan A will happen with or without 5e. The playtest all ready gives me new mechanics that intrigue me. I all ready have devised a multiclassing system that's as flexible as 3e and as simple as 2e thanks in part to ideas on the forums here. The playtest all ready gave me ways to bolt on concepts like 2e's kits and it's all ready offered strategies to avoid delving into the guts of the system to make a character. My group has very little in the way of a sense of entitlement so it's easy enough for me to ignore rabid stupidity elsewhere. I'm basically posting here and taking part 'cause it's enriched my gaming knowledge and given me some new ideas. I don't need a new D&D.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 22, 2013 - 2:26AM
#19
|
Date Joined:
Oct 17, 2007
|
Plan A: An elegant, flexible and balanced system optimised for running high fantasy games and allowing to do that in a variety of styles. Using polyedral dice rolls as the main device for resolution (any other sacred cow can go if need be).
Plan B: A revised and streamlined iteration of 4E: less feats and powers bloat, math fixes, faster combat, more support for exploration and roleplay pillars, support for ToTM style combat...
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 22, 2013 - 5:31AM
#20
|
|
|
Plan A: Refine with very little chage playtest #1.
Plan B: A version that starts with 1st or 2nd edition as it's base, corrects it's mistakes, and improves/expands it's features.
Dealbreakers: Significant 3e/4e influences (Too much of everything, classes, races and prestige classes and skills/feats, Powers systems, Healing Surges, Alignment system, Planar design, Over-reliance on minatures.)
|
|
|
