I'm guessing you're not referring to the Ranger's Woodland Stride ability. The Cleric part of the example is covered under Areas of Knowledge, but the system is still rather weak in separating skilled from unskilled characters, especially in the Basic game. Mechanically, I'd rename, tweak and move the Ranger's Wary ability to 2nd level so they're the wilderness task experts. There still needs to be at least an option to impose disadvantage on characters for rolls which aren't in their purview...
View full commentI'm guessing you're not referring to the Ranger's Woodland Stride ability. The Cleric part of the example is covered under Areas of Knowledge, but the system is still rather weak in separating skilled from unskilled characters, especially in the Basic game. Mechanically, I'd rename, tweak and move the Ranger's Wary ability to 2nd level so they're the wilderness task experts. There still needs to be at least an option to impose disadvantage on characters for rolls which aren't in their purview (but it's difficult to define training in a skills-optional modality).
Enjoying the playtest packet a great. Gives me just enough to play the way I want to play. Looking forward to seeing what else you come up with. I actually DO like the skill dice mechanic a lot, so a bit sad it might be going away, but I'm going to trust the alternatives will be just as interesting. Thanks for bringing in bits & pieces of the past, and reinterpreting the system with a more modern feel.
Sir Corin's got a point, there's a character in my group doing just what he says and the guy isn't greased up, just punching a lot. They're likely to beef up such feats, which would bring him onto par with the barbarian in the party, so I'm not sure Sir Corin's reservations aren't misplaced. Sorry about the triple negative. I appreciate Clan Battlerage clarifying h/h view of how maneuvers could work like powers. I think maneuvers have to be defined a lot more specifically to make their...
View full commentSir Corin's got a point, there's a character in my group doing just what he says and the guy isn't greased up, just punching a lot. They're likely to beef up such feats, which would bring him onto par with the barbarian in the party, so I'm not sure Sir Corin's reservations aren't misplaced. Sorry about the triple negative.
I appreciate Clan Battlerage clarifying h/h view of how maneuvers could work like powers. I think maneuvers have to be defined a lot more specifically to make their tactical implications more than move and damage, but it is good that somebody is still talking about maneuvers. I think they have the potential to provide many characters with interesting and believable combat options, and contribute to the identity of several martial classes.
My final observation is that in contrast to the binary Fourth Edition definition of "build," Fifth Edition subclasses as described offer a multitude of choices. In addition to having more than 2 basic subclasses (although I hope every class will have at least one subclass which is basic enough to suit mechanical purists), it appears that the class, itself or through additional choices within subclasses, will present options for varying what and how characters do things.
Wow, I really like the part about DMs working with players to create their own subclasses that fit for their campaign and story. I also like the part about subclasses focusing on fluff and background, thus, the are things like Knight and not Defender (defender/slayer can be dealt with through feat and expertise dice maneuver selections). I like where subclasses are going!
4E edition was very Controller based, like confusing, slowing, stunning, dominating enemies and even going as far as scrambling their positions on the battlefield. The 4E Psion is a perfect example of how they are not the Wizard, even though they are both Controllers, and with augments (similar things already in the packet) I think they could easily stand on their own. Subroles could be Telepath, Kenetic, Shaper and maybe even Psychic Warrior, to roll them into a single class.
I once had mercenary-diplomats (really sorcerers) smuggle a band of berserkers into a castle courtyard by disguising them as furs and barrels with an illusion. They ended up holding the castle for months....
I once ran a variant of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (I had gotten a script months before the US movie release) for my players: they had to deliver an epic sword, the Green Destiny, to a merchant friend of the owner, but thieves attacked just after they delivered it.
BlakeRyan, I found it helpful to think of gehenna, bytopia, etc. as estuaries (between the "big 8" planes) as much as full blown planes in themselves. It makes them more up for grab: boundaries shift easily (ditto the nature of the planes), power converges--new items and races can come from the convergence, souls are up for grab, and even good planes can have intrigue. You could have: Archeron as a heavily patrolled demilitarized zone between Hell and Mechanus, Gehenna as a part of Hell...
I found it helpful to think of gehenna, bytopia, etc. as estuaries (between the "big 8" planes) as much as full blown planes in themselves. It makes them more up for grab: boundaries shift easily (ditto the nature of the planes), power converges--new items and races can come from the convergence, souls are up for grab, and even good planes can have intrigue. You could have: Archeron as a heavily patrolled demilitarized zone between Hell and Mechanus, Gehenna as a part of Hell where the devils have lost control of most of the real estate and the yugoloths have moved in, Carcini and Pandemonium are parts of their respective realms infected (but not yet absorbed) by the Abyss, Ysgard as a bulwark created by powers in Arborea to stop the expansion of Limbo that was created after some displaced (by 5e) 4e primal spirits occupied some unguarded border space between Arborea and Elysium (the Beast Lands) [the Arboreans didn't want to go through that again], Bytopia is a joint construction project between Mt. Celestia and Elysium, and Arcadia is where Mt. Celestia and Mechanus litigate over who has dominion over "justice."
I preferred the newer names of Yugoloths, Gehreleths etc. Otherwise, it Demon, Daemon, Demodand, basicly - Demon, Demon, Demon... Anthraxas is a good name, because it makes it sick just hearing it. You know is bad without any explanation. Phraxus could be anything - it could be a new model of car.
Pondering the direction of skills. I asked myself what skills would I say I possessed in my life. Sadly, I can only think of two exemplary (Carpentry and Performance - day job vs. aspiring actor). My conclusion is this: *Skills are vague in most cases - Looking at Perform (not a listed SKILL in this iteration as yet), obviously there are many types of performance (Dance, Oration, Acting, Painting, Sculpting, etc.). So it seems to me that a general Skill (ARTISTRY) can represent a sub-skill...
View full commentPondering the direction of skills. I asked myself what skills would I say I possessed in my life. Sadly, I can only think of two exemplary (Carpentry and Performance - day job vs. aspiring actor). My conclusion is this:
*Skills are vague in most cases - Looking at Perform (not a listed SKILL in this iteration as yet), obviously there are many types of performance (Dance, Oration, Acting, Painting, Sculpting, etc.). So it seems to me that a general Skill (ARTISTRY) can represent a sub-skill or several.
*Skills can vary with type of game - DRIVE, for instance isn't necessarily a useful skill for a fantasy game where most vehicles are animal powered. Handle Animal you say? As would I, but, should Handle Animal be generalized to all animals? Can a horse trainer equally be a lion tamer? I say no. But, If we generalize Handle Animal and produce sub-skills therein (Horses, Lions, Dogs, etc.), we can say that a skill an be flexible contingent on another factor. What might that be? See below.
*Advancement - Should a character that makes little use of a certain skill advance the same as one who makes greater use? IMO, no. How do we progress then? This is where we are with our playtesting.
SUMMERY:
*Skills should be an optional, but in the basic package.
*The list should include general/specific skills (under different game types - fantasy, sci-fy, dark age, etc.) The ability score to represent should be flexible depending on the group (i.e. - Climb might be Str or Dex based or average of both).
*A skill that can be broken down into sub-skills can be adjudicated by ability score modifiers. Handle Animal (potentially based out of Cha) might cover one or more animal types based on modifier.
*Base Modifier - IMO the Skill Die works.
*Advancement - Feat based. All start with their (four?) skills (which may have subs, broadening variety) and beginning level Skill Die (d8?). Buy Skill advancement with feats - die increase, specialist, etc.)
I don't think creature types should have much if any mechanical consequence. I'd rather label creatures with keywords, so special effects can work on them. Hide from Undead needs the game to notate what is an undead creature, and an Amulet of Protection from Vegetables needs you to define what is a plant. But I don't want dragons inherently having different stats than bears. The complexity of 3e-era monster creation was WAY too high. 4e monster design suffered from divorcing mechanics from...
View full commentI don't think creature types should have much if any mechanical consequence. I'd rather label creatures with keywords, so special effects can work on them. Hide from Undead needs the game to notate what is an undead creature, and an Amulet of Protection from Vegetables needs you to define what is a plant.
But I don't want dragons inherently having different stats than bears. The complexity of 3e-era monster creation was WAY too high. 4e monster design suffered from divorcing mechanics from narrative a bit too often, but I did very much appreciate that you could decide how challenging you want a monster to be, and then simply fiat the stats to be in the right place. Keep that ideology, albeit with a mild requirement of some justification for stats (sure, the monster is supposed to be a challenge for a 10th level party, but why is its AC 20? is it slow and armored, or fast but vulnerable to being grappled?). Then add monster types as keywords only.
Much preferred the Origin, Type (Subtype) system from 4E than this. I understand that, without the core assumptions that 4E had, there would be problems in labeling something as having a Fey origin in a setting without a Feywild, I think this is one thing that the previous edition just plain got right. Although, when it comes to 5E monsters, I'd be happy just to see the Level and XP value at the TOP of the write-up
View full commentMuch preferred the Origin, Type (Subtype) system from 4E than this.
I understand that, without the core assumptions that 4E had, there would be problems in labeling something as having a Fey origin in a setting without a Feywild, I think this is one thing that the previous edition just plain got right.
Although, when it comes to 5E monsters, I'd be happy just to see the Level and XP value at the TOP of the write-up
I mentioned this article to my girlfriend (it came out the day after I rolled up a wizard), and somehow talked myself out of having companions on his adventures!
Word. They're far too derivative on their own. They're awesome as subclasses/paragon paths/etc. Same goes for Seeker (should be incorporated into Ranger), Warlord (should be under Fighter), and Assassin (should go into Rogue).
I like playing jesters and minstrels. I don't see them being necessary as backgrounds, but there needs to be room for a tricksy tumbling bard with magic to impress, as well as excise wounds.
My only problem with the 4 classes I tried, was the wizards look. "Prancing" as a combat stance was...embarassing, not to mention being forced into a dress expecting an NPC to whisper "It rubs the lotion on its skin". I know bath robes are comfortable, but so are pants. Other classes, awesome, Rogue standing out as my favorite.
View full commentMy only problem with the 4 classes I tried, was the wizards look. "Prancing" as a combat stance was...embarassing, not to mention being forced into a dress expecting an NPC to whisper "It rubs the lotion on its skin". I know bath robes are comfortable, but so are pants.
Other classes, awesome, Rogue standing out as my favorite.
I'm pretty down on the look of my female dwarf. She's a battle cleric, and I wanted her to look like a tough dwarf: broad shoulders, massive frame, squat but stout, etc. Instead, she looks like a short human woman who ate one too many pastries. All the male NPCs have the right qualities (I haven't seen any female dwarven NPCs). Please rethink the art so we can play cool looking dwarves, ready for battle, in either gender.
Umm, in my last session my level one party encountered a band of orcs. I went through both my magic missile spells, one of them empowered to do maximum damage, and I only killed one Orc. Granted, my first casting was split my missile between three different orcs (as they all were already damaged by a fire trap) but didn't kill a single one despite the fact that they were each already hurt. My second cast used my daily feat to empower them and two missiles hit one Orc and killed him, and one...
View full commentUmm, in my last session my level one party encountered a band of orcs. I went through both my magic missile spells, one of them empowered to do maximum damage, and I only killed one Orc. Granted, my first casting was split my missile between three different orcs (as they all were already damaged by a fire trap) but didn't kill a single one despite the fact that they were each already hurt. My second cast used my daily feat to empower them and two missiles hit one Orc and killed him, and one missile hit another Orc, and he still survived. After a short rest, I have one first level spell back, the fighter and rogue in the party have not lost any ability to do anything. This was just a random encounter on our way to a town (it was one Orc per party member) and it was our first encounter for the adventuring day. So I don't want to hear any nonsense about the uber power of magic missiles over other classes. Thank you.
Also, not a complaint, I am having fun playing my wizard, at least so far.
Maybe what they should do is have "classic" advancement, which is more of what we are used to and then "official advancement" for use in dnd encounters and living campaigns, as i suspect that's what is behind this move any way. Then people can chose. That could work but it involves not singling out the fast track approach as the default or "right" way to play. I know this for sure, it will fail miserable in its goal of attracting old school players back into the fold if they read that the...
View full commentMaybe what they should do is have "classic" advancement, which is more of what we are used to and then "official advancement" for use in dnd encounters and living campaigns, as i suspect that's what is behind this move any way. Then people can chose. That could work but it involves not singling out the fast track approach as the default or "right" way to play.
I know this for sure, it will fail miserable in its goal of attracting old school players back into the fold if they read that the default game is level every other session as it suggests the game was designed to again he something comlpleatly foreign to what they grew up with. As I said, I myself have been in games that house ruled quicker leveling tracks, and they were fun. But to define DnD as that kind of play won't go over well in winning people back.
How'd it go solo? If I get into this game when it comes out, I'd rather play it solo...I don't usually enjoy games where you have to pay to win (D3), or have no choice other than teaming up with strangers to win (most MMOs).
I enjoyed it. It was fast paced and doable. There were 2 areas that I reached that the mobs seemed a bit close for me to fight alone. I tend to teleport a lot anf found myself backing away and then drawing a new mob.. After a couple of attempts I grouped with some one for help and then continued to solo. Equipment wise I felt I was adequately set up, but could be a bit more. FYI. I reached level 16
View full comment