So, I'm guessing no one has any thoughts on my homebrew stuff?
:)
I'm afraid my interest in D&D is more meta than that. I'm not ignoring you, I just have nothing useful to say. :p
Heh. That's fine. I just would love feedback from someone!
I am, by the way, altering half-elves as follows:
ABILITY: +1 DEX, INT, WIS
Size: medium
Speed: 30
Lowlight Vision
Elf Weapon Training
Keen Senses
Free Spirit
Language: common and elvish plus one
OR: replace X with...
* Replace Elf Weapon Training with Cantrip
* Replace Keen Senses with Fleet of Foot
* Replace Free Spirit with Mask of the Wild
NOTE: you'd probably have to replace all three things with all three things, instead of cherry-picking, but I dunno
I realized that three ability scores was exactly half of what humans got, and the special abilities I listed below was also exactly half of what elves got, so it seems to make sense and probably be more balanced to me.
Also, after thinking about it, it makes a lot of sense to just give Shades some basic minor spell-like abilities. Simplicity is best, after all. So!
Advantage: attacks, opposed perception and stealth checks, and charima and constitution contests and saves. While in conditions less than bright light, they gain Mage Armor as a cantrip, and can use the following spells once per day: Darkness and Dimension Door; they may also use either Plane Shift (to or from the plane of shadows only) or
Shadow Walk once per day, as they wish, though they can't use both in the same day unless they have the ability to cast spells in other ways.
I figure that while Shadow Walk doesn't exist yet in the playtest packet, it'll probably come in at some point. I'm not entirely pleased with the wording of the last, but it works for me. I'd still be interesting in someone helping me tweak it into 5E style a bit more. :)
If you have to house rule stuff before the game even is released, you should probably consider producing some sort of feedback for the WoTC playtest
As I said, I'm running an imported group of PCs. Thus the need for the update/house rules.
One thing I've got to say, though, the fact that 5E lends itself to such things makes it more interesting right off the bat than 4E was.
But yeah, the plan is for feedback to be forthcoming, if it works out well.
Heh. That's fine. I just would love feedback from someone!
I am, by the way, altering half-elves as follows:
** spoiler omitted **I realized that three ability scores was exactly half of what humans got, and the special abilities I listed below was also exactly half of what elves got, so it seems to make sense and probably be more balanced to me.
Also, after thinking about it, it makes a lot of sense to just give Shades some basic minor spell-like abilities. Simplicity is best, after all. So!
** spoiler omitted **
I figure that while Shadow Walk doesn't exist yet in the playtest packet, it'll probably come in at some point. I'm not entirely pleased with the wording of the last, but it works for me. I'd still be interesting in someone helping me tweak it into 5E style a bit more. :)
The half-elf looks fine, I like that you can exchange things on your sub-race depending on how you've been raised (no Elven Weapon training if your raised by humans).
The Shade......pretty ridiculous power-wise. You've given him a LOT to do with realatively little drawbacks outside of being in specific lightning conditions. Advantage on attacks is an extreamly potent ability, probably prone to abuse by players. Advantage on Stealth checks isn't too bad though but then the Charisma and Constitution contests AND saves....wow. Throw in higher level spells for free, espically Dimension Door AND the ability to walk to the Shadowfell and I'd need a good reason NOT to play one.
For suggestions on toning it down a bit:
• drop darkvision's ability to pierce magical darkness or maybe, allow vision within such as spell only up to 5-ft.
• Drop the Adv. to Charisma and Constitution checks and saves ability.
• Drop Advantage to attacks while within less than bright light.
• Reword the spellcasting to say: "can use the following spells once per day: Darkness OR Dimension Door.
• Drop Plane Shift but add in Shadow Walk, however limit it to be useable once only after a short rest.
• allow them to add +1 to Dexterity and, based on if their transformatino was natural (+1 Charisma) or spell-infused (think Shades of Netheril) (+1 Intelligence).
As to your other question, I've added a few changes to the playtest so far. For starters, I gave starting 1st level characters more HP. They now start with Constitutin SCORE + rolled or fixed HD. A 1st level Fighter with a Con 15 can expect to start with 21 HP if he goes with fixed.
Second change I'm implementing is going to the Wound/Vitality system of v3.5 UA. To me, this better expresses the abstract nature that is HP plus it makes Critical hits FAR more dangerous and potent. I had to add in the Fatigued status effect, but that really wasn't hard and it works well with the system as it.
Third change was allowing the plethora of homebrew classes that people have come up with over on the Wiz-Bro boards such as a homebrew Warblade (which is pretty awesome), a Warmage (simple wizard that blasts stuff) and a re-worked Fighter. There was also a homebrew Warlord but it only goes to 5th level.
Thanks for the feedback! I really appreciate it!
The shade was based mostly off of the 3rd era one, though I took cues from 4E, however the nature of the template lends itself more strongly to 3rd.
So, I wasn't sure about the CHA and CON stuff (which fits thematically both with 4E and 3rd stuff, though is mechanically more similar to 3rd). I like the +1 CHA, and I'd probably go with +1 CON/CHA in that case (because the granted template had nothing to do with their intelligence, over all).
The reason for advantage to attacks is because there aren't too many things that grant a static bonus, which they got before. That said, I suppose dropping that does make sense.
I'm interested in your take on the idea of regeneration or fast healing as it would look in 5e. Troll was the only thing I saw similar to it, I felt that their regeneration was far too potent. I'd be more willing to do "darkness or dimension door" if a shade had a way to guarantee healing (again, akin to the older editions), so I'm curious for your thoughts on that.
One of the reasons I'm hesitant to just drop plane shift, is that Shadow Walk hasn't come out yet and until it does I'd really have nothing to give those with it. I might grant them the automatic ability to use them as rituals or to prepare and cast as spells, if they're spellcasters. Seem more in line to you?
The darkvision piercing darkness-effect is specifically so their darkness effect doesn't interfere with them. Seems like it would be a screwy ability - interfere with your own sight! -, but they do have light-suppression powers in both editions, so I'm unsure exactly how to handle it if they can't see through it. Perhaps noting only that they can see through the darkness created by themselves or other shades?
Also thinking about noting that they age at 1/10 the rate (which may or may not make druid nearly immortal... if a druid could ever become a shade).
Templates are, in general, not meant for PCs. Because of that, I'm not too worried about it's power, but I am curious what you think.
Is it still "shadowfell" in 5e? I wasn't sure. I also wasn't aware that one could simply become a shade "naturally".
I like the idea of the Wound/Vitality system. What is "fatigued" in your case?
I'd actually strongly prefer the sorcerer (we're kind of winging it for several characters since sorcerers aren't in the most recent playtest we got), but you know, we'll go with what we have.
Anyway, thanks for the dialogue!
:)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Heh. That's fine. I just would love feedback from someone!
I'd love to give some feedback, I'm already thinking homebrew myself. Unfortunately the next week+ will see me buried in grading make up work, final exams, and generally making sure my seniors graduate. And that my sophomores haven't lost the willpower needed to walk or pass World History. Good thing breathing is an autonomous reflex or I'd lose most of them... munchkins. Then I'll have time to relax, work on my game, run a game, read stuff etc.
So... am I the only one to have noticed the "feedback of infinite death" syndrome in the teleport spell? Because, unless you've studied it carefully, or lack the chance of mishap at all, as-written, mishap delivers an instant death-sentence. That's four out of five cases it comes up.
EDIT: okay, correction: that's three out of five cases when it's possible, it's automatic TPK. One - studied carefully - I noted above, and causes addtional damage every time you roll a 16 or higher (not too bad, but understandably dangerous). The other, seeking a false destination, causes additional damage on d20 rolls of 13 or higher (also not too bad, but edging much closer to "ack" territory). The others automatically generate mishaps which deals damage and tells you to follow a specific course of action that continues to generate mishap.
I find it very strange that it is substantially more dangerous to attempt to go somewhere you've seen once or heard a description of than it is to attempt to go somewhere that doesn't exist. :/
|
So... am I the only one to have noticed the "feedback of infinite death" syndrome in the teleport spell? Because, unless you've studied it carefully, or lack the chance of mishap at all, as-written, mishap delivers an instant death-sentence. That's four out of five cases it comes up.
Does cause a slight problem... Hmmmm, perhaps just roll on the False Location part of the table after getting the first Mishap until they fix the boo-boo?
So... am I the only one to have noticed the "feedback of infinite death" syndrome in the teleport spell? Because, unless you've studied it carefully, or lack the chance of mishap at all, as-written, mishap delivers an instant death-sentence. That's four out of five cases it comes up.Does cause a slight problem... Hmmmm, perhaps just roll on the False Location part of the table after getting the first Mishap until they fix the boo-boo?
That's been the most popular suggestion so far on the WotC forums. In order not to derail the whole game every time my crew gets a mishap, I've been ruling it as a %re-roll instead. That's still pretty close to a 50/50 chance of mishap in a few cases (Viewed Once and Description have anything of 57% or higher yield a mishap), but it's actually survivable (as the current system puts the % at 81-100, or 80+d20, which is auto-mishap for Seen Casually, Viewed Once, and Description).
There's also the fact that I'm not imagining a "similar location" to anything they're going through right now.
I'm also open to suggestions for reinterpreting the Rope Trick. As it is, the language is unclear if the spell ends or only the entrance to the realm. Consensus - what little I've received - seems to agree that it's only supposed to last for an hour. That doesn't work for our games, so I'm curious about an idea that lasts beyond that.
* Increase with Caster Level (at Xth lvl it lasts 2 hours; at Yth level it lasts 4 hours; etc)
* Increase with multiple castings (so each casting generates an hour, or 1d4 or 1d2+1, or something)
* Increase by using a higher level slot (+1 hour/slot above second, or something? +2 hours per slot? I don't know.)
* Increase in some other way I'm not considering
:)
Lol Lokiare is here now.
|
|
My opinion is that 5E is not as interesting, fun, or balanced as any edition before it or what little I know of pathfinder.
I've dropped out of the play test myself because I'm simply no longer interested in dealing with WotC or an inferior product. My main game is 4E, but I also enjoy some 3.5E and I'm looking at getting into Pathfinder and playing in that or running the Pathfinder setting in 4E.
Simply put 5E does not have the deadliness of 1E, the simplicity of 2E, the variety of 3E, or the balance of 4E. I'm sure it doesn't have the variety or balance of Pathfinder either.
I'm going to keep downloading packets, but I've given up on getting a game I want to play out of it.
Isn't a board game, like 2e, is something it has going for it...
Not being 4th ed as well would be worth a +1.
... but it seems a lighter version of PF with optional rules and complex negligible mechanics (such as life points recovery) just to give the sensation things have changed.
Any input?
If so, there is nothing wrong with that. Perhaps PF needs a light version.
So no tactical map with miniatures needed?
No its going back to TSR era D&D in the map needed part.
No its going back to TSR era D&D in the map needed part.
Sweet, I'll buy the pdfs when they are released.
... PF sort of is itself a lite version of 3.5.
You think? I havent heard it put that way before.
Even in the latest release it still 'feels like' 2e. Although I will say that with the release of the premium 2e books why wouldn't I just play 2e?
dying to get the Premium line Advanced/2E but waiting on PDF versions. Any word on these?
... PF sort of is itself a lite version of 3.5.You think? I havent heard it put that way before.
Yeah...this is the first time I've ever heard anyone use 'Pathfinder' and 'lite' in the same sentence.
Isn't a board game, like 2e, is something it has going for it...My opinion is that 5E is not as interesting, fun, or balanced as any edition before it or what little I know of pathfinder.
I've dropped out of the play test myself because I'm simply no longer interested in dealing with WotC or an inferior product. My main game is 4E, but I also enjoy some 3.5E and I'm looking at getting into Pathfinder and playing in that or running the Pathfinder setting in 4E.
Simply put 5E does not have the deadliness of 1E, the simplicity of 2E, the variety of 3E, or the balance of 4E. I'm sure it doesn't have the variety or balance of Pathfinder either.
I'm going to keep downloading packets, but I've given up on getting a game I want to play out of it.
lol, was that the knee-jerk reaction to 2e back in the day? "2e's a board game, 3.x is MtG, and 4e is WoW." Good to know the more things change, the more they stay the same.
What will 5e be, I wonder?
...Or so terribad that it drags the D&D name into obscurity?
Nah, I think the first is naive optimism and the second is misguided alarmism.
Tequila, I don't disagree with you, but I do think that the OSR has emancipated the nerds from WoTC's property ownership; I'm not saying that DDNext has nothing to offer, just that when they finally release the finished project, I'll buy the core books to cannibalize for parts, not to drink the cool-aid.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
...Or so terribad that it drags the D&D name into obscurity?
Nah, I think the first is naive optimism and the second is misguided alarmism.
I don't know what he personally feels, but I'm not so solid on my Hasbro trust that I dismiss the idea. If 5E is moderately successful for PnP RPGs, but not good in a Hasbro way, than I understand the suspicions they may shelve it for a while, which, you know, might be nearly as good as "killing it" for a time.
I'm not sold that they will - D&D does make money, and its possible that Hasbro will accept that D&D is their corner of the RPG market and continue with it.
It's possible that whatever 5E ends up is so great that it dominates the market again... which still might not be "enough"... or it might.
Who knows?
Personally, I hope it continues, and I hope it does well.
I also hope that PF continues and does well.
And I really hope that someone, somewhere out there, creates an NWN-like something for D&D 4E (but on a grid, like Final Fantasy Tactics, Tactics Ogre, or similar games) because, frankly, it's the best edition for something like that, and the fact that Hasbro can't get Atari to move their corporate rear end and nobody's willing to step up and develop the thing due to all the licensing fees is ridiculous.
The 4E game I'm playing right now would run so much more smoothly as a video game it's crazy silly that I can't get one (except for an MMO which diverts strongly from the rule system, doesn't have a modding toolset available as I understand it, and, being an MMO, I probably won't touch).
Sigh.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
...Or so terribad that it drags the D&D name into obscurity?
Nah, I think the first is naive optimism and the second is misguided alarmism.
You forgot the third option: the system is sound in places, but horribul brand management and marketing decisions drag it into oblivion.
You know, like it happened with 4E :P
|
|
Isn't a board game, like 2e, is something it has going for it...
lol, was that the knee-jerk reaction to 2e back in the day? "2e's a board game, 3.x is MtG, and 4e is WoW." Good to know the more things change, the more they stay the same.
What will 5e be, I wonder?
Oops my meaning was lost in the internet!
2e = only edition (prior to 5e) that no where makes use of little toy soldiers and gridded battle mats/boards. Yet with the initiative system had some of the coolest combats in D&D (or PF) I have every DM'd or played.
Nothing makes me as a DM more want to pluck out a players eyes and replace them with d20's than hearing "I take a 5'-step"... <shudder>
2e = is the win (for me)
5e = may be a win... time will tell.
Which sort of brings me back to thinking, why the heck aren't I just playing 2e? Not like it isn't now as current as 1e, 3.53, 4e, and PF!!!
PDF would rock however.
I still dig 2e AD&D, as some of my buddies never got to 3e (and are missing out on the awesomeness of Pathfinder.) We're planning a Gaslamp/Steampunk game in a couple weeks (A MotRD/RavenLoft, DragonLance, Forgotten Realms, Buck Rogers, and Blackmoor mashup! With some weird stuff from the magazines like the Sheens, magical firearms, and more.)
But, on main topic, DDN is okay. I've playtested since it started. I hated its first incarnation and I'm slowly beginning to like it. Will I buy the end product? Nah, I'll just let my gaming group do that, see how it runs, and then see if I'll purchase it down the road. I already have AD&D 2e, Pathfinder, Savage Worlds, (sometimes) D&D 4e/7e Gamma World, among others. Who knows? I may come to love D&D Next... But first, they have to change the name! One could imagine how much I LOATHE D&D Next's name. I want a roleplaying game, not a Pepsi product!
Lol Lokiare is here now.
It's a slowly growing WotC boards reunion, eh?
...Or so terribad that it drags the D&D name into obscurity?
Nah, I think the first is naive optimism and the second is misguided alarmism.
You forgot the third option: the system is sound in places, but horribul brand management and marketing decisions drag it into oblivion.
You know, like it happened with 4E :P
Yeah, I think this is closer to how 5e will turn out, when we're looking back at it a decade from now.
2e has lots of great settings, which may or may not have been responsible for TSR going under.
3.x has lots of fiddly chargen customization and a lot of great ideas, even if they don't all pan out well in play.
4e has a fresh take on many D&Disms, great game balance, a streamlined ruleset that really works...and brand management failure that turned many fans into 4e-haters.
I think 5e will be...the D&D edition. Not because it'll exemplify the game's soul or whatever, but because it won't be really remarkable or memorable to most of us. Those of us into game rules will remember it as "That time they tried that advantage thing, and 'bounded accuracy'...haha, remember how that turned out?" Gamers who happen to grow up when 5e is on the shelves will remember it as their first edition, but to most D&D fans it'll be just another edition.
Which sort of brings me back to thinking, why the heck aren't I just playing 2e? Not like it isn't now as current as 1e, 3.53, 4e, and PF!!!
Can't say I'm much fond of my alma mater edition, but hey, if 2e is your cup of tea...I agree, you should be playing it!
Tequila, I don't disagree with you, but I do think that the OSR has emancipated the nerds from WoTC's property ownership; I'm not saying that DDNext has nothing to offer, just that when they finally release the finished project, I'll buy the core books to cannibalize for parts, not to drink the cool-aid.
Oh for sure, the OSR has proven -- although I don't know anyone who ever doubted -- that nobody needs WotC or the current edition for great D&D gaming.
|
Another aspect that needs to be considered is that many game stores have a large stock of 4E material just sitting there and not moving. This happened fairly early into 4E's lifecycle, and I question how much these bookstores, particularly the ones focused on Comics/RPGs are willing to take such a risk again. I do understand that this is not universal, but in my personal experience, it is pretty common.
Although that might be mitigated by WotC's market power. Not sure how it is in the US, but I know there have been requirements to carry certain product from WotC in order to be supplied regular stock. (This may have changed recently, since WotC stopped handling the distribution to Australia directly).
Given the cash cow of magic cards, the stores I've known well would be happy to devote a shelf to a non-moving D&D edition.
|
I think 5e will be...the D&D edition. Not because it'll exemplify the game's soul or whatever, but because it won't be really remarkable or memorable to most of us. Those of us into game rules will remember it as "That time they tried that advantage thing, and 'bounded accuracy'...haha, remember how that turned out?" Gamers who happen to grow up when 5e is on the shelves will remember it as their first edition, but to most D&D fans it'll be just another edition....Or so terribad that it drags the D&D name into obscurity?
Nah, I think the first is naive optimism and the second is misguided alarmism.
You forgot the third option: the system is sound in places, but horribul brand management and marketing decisions drag it into oblivion.
You know, like it happened with 4E :P
Man I have been waiting for over 20 years for bounded accuracy. Why does it have to be implemented into the edition nobody is going to remember? :(
|
|
Which sort of brings me back to thinking, why the heck aren't I just playing 2e? Not like it isn't now as current as 1e, 3.53, 4e, and PF!!!.Just to see about exploring that old time nostalgia, we did a session of Temple of Elemental Evil old school. First Edition rules and all. That was when I remembered that I had grown to loathe First Edition with enough of a passion, that I played anything BUT AD+D for a ten year period. (pretty much skipping all of Second Edition and most of 3.0) If I never crack open an AD+D book for anything other than casual reading, I'll die content.
The initiative system of 2e was the best attempt I have seen in D&D to try to get away from the he-go / she-go to date. The introduction of the static initiative system of 3e and above combined with the heavy reliance on miniatures left me thinking - cool a really complicated version of chess.
Now before the beatings about my virtual head begin, keep in mind that the largest part of my roleplaying life was 2e. Because of this I dislike ANY version that forces me to use a battle mat. I find that combats just end up clinical and slows down the pace of the game.
I stand by the fact my opinion is neither right or wrong - but it is my opinion.
S.
The initiative system of 2e was the best attempt I have seen in D&D to try to get away from the he-go / she-go to date. The introduction of the static initiative system of 3e and above combined with the heavy reliance on miniatures left me thinking - cool a really complicated version of chess.
Now before the beatings about my virtual head begin, keep in mind that the largest part of my roleplaying life was 2e. Because of this I dislike ANY version that forces me to use a battle mat. I find that combats just end up clinical and slows down the pace of the game.
I stand by the fact my opinion is neither right or wrong - but it is my opinion.
S.
Being an opinion, it is neither right nor wrong. :)
Some (most) times I feel like a battle map and minis...but some times I don't. It would be awesome if they were able to pull off an edition that does both well.
Man I have been waiting for over 20 years for bounded accuracy. Why does it have to be implemented into the edition nobody is going to remember? :(I think 5e will be...the D&D edition. Not because it'll exemplify the game's soul or whatever, but because it won't be really remarkable or memorable to most of us. Those of us into game rules will remember it as "That time they tried that advantage thing, and 'bounded accuracy'...haha, remember how that turned out?" Gamers who happen to grow up when 5e is on the shelves will remember it as their first edition, but to most D&D fans it'll be just another edition....Or so terribad that it drags the D&D name into obscurity?
Nah, I think the first is naive optimism and the second is misguided alarmism.
You forgot the third option: the system is sound in places, but horribul brand management and marketing decisions drag it into oblivion.
You know, like it happened with 4E :P
My condolences, friend. :(
Bounded accuracy could be done well, but I think the Mearls dream team is too focused on 'Does it feel like D&D?' and 'It's the story, not the math!' to be able to design their way out of a wet paper bag. Maybe history will prove me wrong, but I suspect that bounded accuracy will be remembered much like iterative attacks: a neat idea that was ruined by poor execution.
I dislike ANY version that forces me to use a battle mat. I find that combats just end up clinical and slows down the pace of the game.
I stand by the fact my opinion is neither right or wrong - but it is my opinion.
S.
Agree 100%, kinda messes up the "products of your imagination" feel that I miss.
|
|
My condolences, friend. :(
Bounded accuracy could be done well, but I think the Mearls dream team is too focused on 'Does it feel like D&D?' and 'It's the story, not the math!' to be able to design their way out of a wet paper bag. Maybe history will prove me wrong, but I suspect that bounded accuracy will be remembered much like iterative attacks: a neat idea that was ruined by poor execution.
I appreciate the sentiment. I was dismissive of the speculation you have of the design team for quite sometime. However, the recent live podcasts have really put a damper on things. I was really hoping WOTC was playing their cards close to the chest and the "playtest" was really just a testing ground for feel. Meanwhile, they were working on the real game and getting it ready to drop on us. I hope the next packet is something really radical I am losing interest in this process. BA got me here, hopefully they can show me something to get me to go a little further.
Some (most) times I feel like a battle map and minis...but some times I don't. It would be awesome if they were able to pull off an edition that does both well.
Very skeptical this is possible. All you can really get is does both equally badly. Your simply trying to achieve different goals if your going with a grid then if your going gridless. The grid adds time and micromanagement - you need to bring detail and movement into the equalization to make it worth having a grid otherwise your just wasting time setting up and such that would better be spent actually gaming.
In essence if a combat can be done without a grid and that won't cause real hassles then it always should be done without a grid because you came to game not set up mini's. The only justification then for having a grid is when its going to help make the game better then it could have been - if it offers something more that one can't get without a battle matt. Almost certainly that is a dynamic combat and battlefields with interesting elements and unique moving parts.
In the end you get the best game if its built from the ground up to take full advantage of either one style of play or the other. Try and do both and you compromise on both.
|
|
Being an opinion, it is neither right nor wrong. :)
Some (most) times I feel like a battle map and minis...but some times I don't. It would be awesome if they were able to pull off an edition that does both well.
Your opinion on 'nor' seems to align well with that of every grammar teacher on the planet. Mine however does not...
I agree completely with you end statement. Let the players decide minis or not - not the game itself. 3e+ showed the game can work with minis, 2e showed it can work without them. Either extreme will cut down their potential market and trying to find a middle ground will be a disaster. I would like to see non-mini by default and then a large appendix with how to play with minis (ala 3e/4e type rules). But neither way should be ignored or thrown in as lip service.
S.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
We started with miniatures in 1974. We had been playing Chainmail w. fantasy for a while (That's how I started my campaign world). Using miniatures was natural. We've never played without them. No matter the rules edition, miniatures lay out the situation making it clear to everyone what the situation is and save a lot of arguments that would arise about who is where / who can do what / who can see what / who will be effected by "X". Without DM fiat. It may take a bit of time to set up, but I think it saves more in discussion / explanation / argument. And they look cool :)
I appreciate the sentiment. I was dismissive of the speculation you have of the design team for quite sometime. However, the recent live podcasts have really put a damper on things. I was really hoping WOTC was playing their cards close to the chest and the "playtest" was really just a testing ground for feel. Meanwhile, they were working on the real game and getting it ready to drop on us. I hope the next packet is something really radical I am losing interest in this process. BA got me here, hopefully they can show me something to get me to go a little further.My condolences, friend. :(
Bounded accuracy could be done well, but I think the Mearls dream team is too focused on 'Does it feel like D&D?' and 'It's the story, not the math!' to be able to design their way out of a wet paper bag. Maybe history will prove me wrong, but I suspect that bounded accuracy will be remembered much like iterative attacks: a neat idea that was ruined by poor execution.
I'm in a similar boat. I lost interest in 5e a few months back; no doubt I'll crack open the core books when they arrive in B&N, but unless Mearls & Team have pulled a 180 by that point I won't be buying anything until 6e.