Nothing is as bad as the 3rd edition Forgotten Realms Sourcebook. MOST OF THE TOWNS AND CITIES DESCRIBED HAD NO MAPS. The 4th edition was just as bad! It sucked IMHO. You must have MAPS of ANY TOWN DESCRIBED! With a few hotspots of the area. Now look at FR 2nd edition AD&D almost every city or town had a simple map. The DM could really get us into those worlds.
View full commentNothing is as bad as the 3rd edition Forgotten Realms Sourcebook. MOST OF THE TOWNS AND CITIES DESCRIBED HAD NO MAPS. The 4th edition was just as bad! It sucked IMHO.
You must have MAPS of ANY TOWN DESCRIBED! With a few hotspots of the area.
Now look at FR 2nd edition AD&D almost every city or town had a simple map. The DM could really get us into those worlds.
The ONE thing I would love to see from D&DNext as far as maps go is for you to hire Brandon Kruse (dandddoodles.blogspot.com/2009/07/fallcr...) to do your maps. These are amazing and the best example of D&D maps I've ever seen. If all of the city/town maps were by Brandon then I'd be very very happy.
I like the racial archtypes created by racial penalties as well, but my playgroup is full of oldschool players anyway, so regardless of what the rules say, we never have Elves with 16+ Constitution; its just lore that we'll never let die. So whether or not they include the racial penalties in the mechanics, they'll always show up when ya want 'em to.
Floating bonus for humans: sounds pretty good. Bonuses in every stat as well? Not so much. I think it would serve the archetype of the adaptable, "everyone's unique" human better to have multiple floating bonuses (probably with a limit of +2 -- +3 at the most -- per stat) than to have static, across the board +1s. Humanity's adaptability comes from the adaptability of each individual, true, but also from the slough of differing abilities found when the race is taken as a whole. Additionally, I...
View full commentFloating bonus for humans: sounds pretty good. Bonuses in every stat as well? Not so much. I think it would serve the archetype of the adaptable, "everyone's unique" human better to have multiple floating bonuses (probably with a limit of +2 -- +3 at the most -- per stat) than to have static, across the board +1s. Humanity's adaptability comes from the adaptability of each individual, true, but also from the slough of differing abilities found when the race is taken as a whole. Additionally, I like the idea of racial penalties. An Elf and a Half-Elf should generally have similar wisdom, but the Elf should normally have the lower constitution score. I feel like the penalties -- in addition to making it possible to add more bonuses without becoming overpowered -- really make it possible for the races to each have a truly unique feel (and a truly unique physiology/personality).
I know this is a long shot, since your comment is 5 months old at the time of my reply, but bounded accuracy essentially describes a paradigm shift in the "mathematical engine" that runs behind the scenes. In earlier editions there was this ever-escalating quasi-arms race between the PCs and the DM, with the PCs gaining ability bonuses and attack bonuses every level making it increasingly difficult for the DM to construct challenging encounters. The bounded accuracy system spaces out these...
View full commentI know this is a long shot, since your comment is 5 months old at the time of my reply, but bounded accuracy essentially describes a paradigm shift in the "mathematical engine" that runs behind the scenes. In earlier editions there was this ever-escalating quasi-arms race between the PCs and the DM, with the PCs gaining ability bonuses and attack bonuses every level making it increasingly difficult for the DM to construct challenging encounters. The bounded accuracy system spaces out these bonuses better making them feel special to your character, like they have crossed some important milestone in their adventuring career. Taking the place of the attack bonus bumps is damage. Now your damage goes up with level, representing a higher competence in regards to the placement of your sword in the troll's back, or the dragon's exposed underbelly. A orc raiding party facing a first level party would be an almost insurmountable task at 1st level in past editions. Whereas at 20th level, that raiding party is a cake walk. Bounded accuracy now says that that at 20th level, these orcs should still be a tangible threat without having to artificially inflate their statistics. Instead, just throw more of them at the party.
Thanks for the input on this, PrestonSnow. Now it makes sense. And you nailed something I do to this day in 4E - "level-up" creatures so they are a challenge to the party.
I have to say, as a long-time DM, I absolutely love DnDNext. All you've done, for our group at least, is taken the exact way we play, and gotten rid of all the garbage from every edition into a simplified bounded accuracy. Provided you completely leave level-based stat scaling out of the equation (aside from damage:hp), you have our entire hoard of geeks eagerly awaiting full-blown content =)
I must say I am so happy with what I have read so far. There are some issues that need to be addressed - The magic (cantrips are a great idea but just too powerful) and dying ( way too difficult to kill a character - there is very little threat). Please do can you now overhaul the public play adopted by WOTC. Hiding D&D in game shops will do as much harm to D&D as this new addition will help it. WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO SPREAD THE WORD TO GAME GROUPS, SCHOOLS and PUBLIC EVENTS.
This is... very awesome. I like the idea of moves you activate when needed. You don't necessarily have to risk wasting a daily power when you might miss, you can just follow up a successful strike with an opportunistic combo. It also clearly separates the fighter's fighting mechanic from the wizard's casting mechanic, which is always activated daily-power style (with a few exceptions, like Feather Fall).
"We thought about casting minor spells as the kind of thing a wizard might use around a laboratory that also happened to be useful in a fight. For example, a cantrip used to ignite a torch could also burn a goblin. At the last minute, however, we decided that trying to make that design work would take too long to hit this playtest." - M.Mearls This is what I expect from DnDNext. Original ideas that may or may not work, but sound awesome. Give us the chance to playtest it and find out if...
View full comment"We thought about casting minor spells as the kind of thing a wizard might use around a laboratory that also happened to be useful in a fight. For example, a cantrip used to ignite a torch could also burn a goblin. At the last minute, however, we decided that trying to make that design work would take too long to hit this playtest." - M.Mearls
This is what I expect from DnDNext. Original ideas that may or may not work, but sound awesome. Give us the chance to playtest it and find out if it does or not. The rest of the article I have likes and dislikes about.
Except then You have to sacrifice your background and specialty choices just to approximate that class, rather than having an equal ability to explore different stories within the class as the Fighter, Rogue, Cleric, and Wizard do. NO WAY.
View full commentExcept then You have to sacrifice your background and specialty choices just to approximate that class, rather than having an equal ability to explore different stories within the class as the Fighter, Rogue, Cleric, and Wizard do.
I think in relation to paragraph 2 above, it would be awesome if a paladin had martial dice to use but instead of straight damage they could be used to provide effects based on deity choice. For example: I follow the edicts of a god of healing and as an option I can spend a martial die on a hit allowing the party member with the lowest HP to gain HP equal to a given modifier.
I agree with some observations. One thing that frustrated me to no end in 4ed was that players looked up to "Skills" section of their character sheets as some kind of choice menu. Considering that skill system is mostly used out of combat, in roleplaying situations - it felt like it was overly restricting. Furthermore, penalizing party for failures created a situation where players would pass on interesting ideas because their characters are unlikely to make the roll. I also didn't...
View full commentI agree with some observations. One thing that frustrated me to no end in 4ed was that players looked up to "Skills" section of their character sheets as some kind of choice menu.
Considering that skill system is mostly used out of combat, in roleplaying situations - it felt like it was overly restricting. Furthermore, penalizing party for failures created a situation where players would pass on interesting ideas because their characters are unlikely to make the roll.
I also didn't quite like the way the skills were always tied to the same ability score. I liked World of Darkness system idea of combining skills with different abilities depending on the action performed. Think the episode in Terminator 2 when the machine cuts open his arm to remove the skin - that would be great example of Intimidate (CON) roll. Or scaring someone by punching a hole in a wall beside his head would be Intimidate (STR).
I think that ability checks could work for all 'skill' checks. But there are two things missing from that basic approach. The first is that some skills really do require learning and, secondly, people can get better with practice. But I think it's a very simple prospect to address both while still retaining the same mechanic. First is to have a small list of skills that require training (acrobatics, swimming, etc.). There would have to be a mechanic for limiting the number and types....
View full commentI think that ability checks could work for all 'skill' checks. But there are two things missing from that basic approach. The first is that some skills really do require learning and, secondly, people can get better with practice.
But I think it's a very simple prospect to address both while still retaining the same mechanic.
First is to have a small list of skills that require training (acrobatics, swimming, etc.). There would have to be a mechanic for limiting the number and types. It could be similar to any of the older systems, or like feats.
Second, the modifier would be the ability score modifier plus 1/2 the character's level or something similar. Yes, that means that somebody picking up the skill at 10th level would be as proficient as somebody who learned it at 1st level and is now 10th level. But for simplicity (and you could argue that a 10th level character could learn faster and more easily), this mechanic would work well.
Combining a question from another post, I do think that a 'skill feat' should be separate from choosing a 'combat feat'.
Although players in my campaigns learned that I don't always play to their strengths, and the environment is a powerful ally or enemy so they tended not to min/max on just combat abilities.
I like concept A the best. The other examples don't show enough 'bear'. See also Curse of the Asure bonds - my original introduction to owlbears. www.gamebanshee.com/curseoftheazurebonds...
I like the anatomy and the "mammal snout" of the second design but the exposed skull looks too wrock. While I always though of it as a creature of mystical (almost fey) origin it also was clear to me that it is "of the forest". I might be totally wrong. The skin on the legs and feathers on the body should feel to the touch like an owl but the feathers and pigmentation of the skin should look different in each forest depending on foliage and season. Thinking of this I wouldn't be...
View full commentI like the anatomy and the "mammal snout" of the second design but the exposed skull looks too wrock.
While I always though of it as a creature of mystical (almost fey) origin it also was clear to me that it is "of the forest". I might be totally wrong.
The skin on the legs and feathers on the body should feel to the touch like an owl but the feathers and pigmentation of the skin should look different in each forest depending on foliage and season. Thinking of this I wouldn't be surprised to know that they shed their feathers as the seasons change ("Winter-shade owlbear feather" sounds like a ritual-component), white/blackish/brown for winter, shiny-deep green/brown/gray in spring, deep bluish green most of the year (maybe the vivid color of a local flower at the "owl-ears" feathers).
The "wing" (or better the feather cape descending from the arms) gets longer with age and it gets somewhat longer for females tending the offspring (Imagine a mother owlbear covering 2-3 chick-pups with her blanket of feathers).
As for the color of the eyes gold-brown during the day and almost glowing silver with a faint bluish hue during the night.
See the claws on the front paws as very short mostly straight mining picks, ideal to dig frozen soil or to break armor plates. The hind claws I would describe as hooks (a bit thicker/sturdier than owl-claws) which help to climb trees... or just imagine a specimen leap-grabbing onto a poor soul and charging forward on his arms while pulling the victim over roots, branches & rocks.
But of course it is a omnivore (surely any forest would lose its fauna to a fit "predator" like this), and so I think that the pointy "snout" - with a line teeth that looks almost human ones sorted into a two triangles - serves to dig up fungi and insects /this also implies an acute sense of smell/.
The roots of a tree plagued by fungal-infection could serve as nest. The owlbear would get food and tree would get saved.
Choose to wear less armor, pray for laser spells, choose feats that make your laser spells better and bolster your defenses, etc. Play a WoW priest if you want all of those choices made for you. My second-favorite cleric of all time was a 2E priest of Liira in the Forgotten Realms. I put a decent score into dex, got bracers of defense and a ring of protection, and threw all of my weapon profs into martial arts from the Fighter's Handbook. I loved my dance-fighting spellcasting chick.
View full commentChoose to wear less armor, pray for laser spells, choose feats that make your laser spells better and bolster your defenses, etc. Play a WoW priest if you want all of those choices made for you.
My second-favorite cleric of all time was a 2E priest of Liira in the Forgotten Realms. I put a decent score into dex, got bracers of defense and a ring of protection, and threw all of my weapon profs into martial arts from the Fighter's Handbook. I loved my dance-fighting spellcasting chick.
actually, I have no problem at all with that. If they want to make a Build, Background, or Theme of "Priest" "Follower of" or "Holy Chosen of" or whatever, I'm down with that as a solution. Keep the Cleric as the general pantheist, and if you want to be a follower of a specific god, with holy granted powers, take the appropriate customization to do it off your base class. Nothing wrong with the so-called "feat-tax" there either, as your trying to step into more than one set of shoes, that's...
View full commentactually, I have no problem at all with that. If they want to make a Build, Background, or Theme of "Priest" "Follower of" or "Holy Chosen of" or whatever, I'm down with that as a solution.
Keep the Cleric as the general pantheist, and if you want to be a follower of a specific god, with holy granted powers, take the appropriate customization to do it off your base class. Nothing wrong with the so-called "feat-tax" there either, as your trying to step into more than one set of shoes, that's what feat-taxation is for, isn't it?
I have mixed feelings about Backgrounds and themes... I feel that they are miles ahead of what D&D has done in the past. But then, I think back to what other systems do: The system Mutants & Masterminds, a Point-buy d20 based Superhero system, has a source-book for using it in a Fantasy setting. I don't particularly like using it for that, since it just wasn't really built for that scale, but one thing that the sourcebook did impart to me is that it made me begin to question why...
View full commentI have mixed feelings about Backgrounds and themes... I feel that they are miles ahead of what D&D has done in the past. But then, I think back to what other systems do:
The system Mutants & Masterminds, a Point-buy d20 based Superhero system, has a source-book for using it in a Fantasy setting. I don't particularly like using it for that, since it just wasn't really built for that scale, but one thing that the sourcebook did impart to me is that it made me begin to question why there isn't a better way to pick skills?
In M&M, skills, like everything else, is point buy. That way, your Wizard can be a spy, without having to choose a background, which means you can tinker with the skills. Maybe the wizard isn't as good at stealth, but is a master at disguise and deception. With backgrounds, at least from what we know about them as of now, you don't have that type of modability. They're set: Spy is bonuses to X, Y, and Z, and Benefit Q.
Similarly themes seem to take some things that used to be class features, and make them able to add customization, since they can be taken by any class. But what they really are is feat-chains. Now, I'm not saying to go all the way to point buy, since I don't think Fantasy works well for that, but I'd like to see Themes not necessarily be a chain, but a guideline.
If you want the "Magic User" theme, for example, it'd basically be a guideline. You take feat X, Y and Z, and character creation goes really quickly, but if feat A looks more appealing than feat Y, you can have X, A and Z, and the character wouldn't be "house ruled"
I've never liked the mechanic of multiclassing but the theme / background sounds like a better fit for simulation than suddenly learning to cast spells or wield divine power. A more subtle way to customise a character than change its direction completely.
You must have MAPS of ANY TOWN DESCRIBED! With a few hotspots of the area.
Now look at FR 2nd edition AD&D almost every city or town had a simple map. The DM could really get us into those worlds.
View full comment