Thoughts on 5E


4th Edition

151 to 200 of 231 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Malachi Silverclaw wrote:

Jiggy, reading your post brought a few thoughts:-

Eldritch Knights do get cantrips. Not sure how you missed that; they're in the text and also on the spell progression table.

D'oh!

Quote:
You're right about the focus on those two schools, but a careful choice of the unrestricted spells is your friend. The intent of the EK is to have combat magic, not more general magic.

Which is why it didn't fit my concept. That was kind of the point.

Quote:
On the way to 9th, you might be 5th/2nd, or 4th/4th. Because there is no BAB but instead a universal modifier increased by total level rather than class levels, you don't really become a worse fighter when you take a wizard level. But this means that you can customise your PC to emphasise the aspects that you want, martial or magic. This is good, not bad.

Overall, I totally agree that it's a good thing. However, when combined with another very good thing—the fact that the fighter has some juicy, appealing class features at a lot of levels—the result makes it really hard to make the multiclass fit my vision. ;)

Quote:
There are also a couple of feats (humans can have one at level one) that give you some casting. In fact, the swashbuckler Battle Master I mentioned chose Magic Initiate at 1st, giving me two cantrips and a 1st level spell. Very versatile, and you can combine that with either EK or the multiclass idea.

That thought crossed my mind as well, but in the end I decided that my intelligent Battle Master would be a doctor so I took that sweet, sweet healer feat.

Story Time:

Party of four (3rd level) fought a variant banshee. It screams, 3/4 fail their save and drop to 0HP (including me). The warlock (who made his save) shoves a healing potion down my throat. My turn, I stand up, use a bonus action to Second Wind myself for 1d10+3, use my regular action to use my healer's kit to heal the paladin for 1d6+7, then use Action Surge to do the same for the rogue. Boom, party back in action. It was pretty awesome.

Quote:

Also, the game is young. New stuff will come out, expanding your options. I've just got the latest book about Elemental Evil, and new PC races and spells are included.

I think 5E will continue to offer more options for a good while yet.

If one of those new options ends up being an arcane version of the ranger/paladin setup, I'll be pretty stoked. :)

Liberty's Edge

thejeff wrote:
Petty Alchemy wrote:
To clarify, "old-school feel" for me means I don't feel like I need tons of magic items/gold to succeed in 5e. Thanks to the bounded numbers, the big 6 aren't that taxing.
This is why I don't like the term "Old-school feel". It means something different to everyone. I've seen it used for the deadly, "Don't bother naming your character before 3rd level" style, for AD&D's "GM fiat" required style, now your "don't need tons of magic items/gold" thing. Probably others I'm forgetting.

Probably because people are discussing parts of a gaming style, not several different ones. Nothing you list nullifies any of the others.


Jiggy wrote:
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:

Jiggy, reading your post brought a few thoughts:-

Eldritch Knights do get cantrips. Not sure how you missed that; they're in the text and also on the spell progression table.

D'oh!

Quote:
You're right about the focus on those two schools, but a careful choice of the unrestricted spells is your friend. The intent of the EK is to have combat magic, not more general magic.

Which is why it didn't fit my concept. That was kind of the point.

Quote:
On the way to 9th, you might be 5th/2nd, or 4th/4th. Because there is no BAB but instead a universal modifier increased by total level rather than class levels, you don't really become a worse fighter when you take a wizard level. But this means that you can customise your PC to emphasise the aspects that you want, martial or magic. This is good, not bad.

Overall, I totally agree that it's a good thing. However, when combined with another very good thing—the fact that the fighter has some juicy, appealing class features at a lot of levels—the result makes it really hard to make the multiclass fit my vision. ;)

Quote:
There are also a couple of feats (humans can have one at level one) that give you some casting. In fact, the swashbuckler Battle Master I mentioned chose Magic Initiate at 1st, giving me two cantrips and a 1st level spell. Very versatile, and you can combine that with either EK or the multiclass idea.

That thought crossed my mind as well, but in the end I decided that my intelligent Battle Master would be a doctor so I took that sweet, sweet healer feat.

** spoiler omitted **...

Also keep in mind that casting classes stack for the sake of your available spell slots. So if you want more casting variety than the Eldritch Knight offers, multi-class some wizard in. 6 levels of EK will get you 2 ability boosts/feats, a second attack, fighting style, weapon bond, a couple of cantrips and two effective caster levels (Since Eldritch Knight and Arcane Trickster levels count as 1/3rd). From there you can go all wizard, or mix and match wizard and fighter to get the combination of fighting and magic you like. Or, if you don't mind delaying your second attack until level 6, take a level of wizard somewhere early on to add some variety beyond what EK gives you.


There is a level 20 cap, but there are also epic boons in the DMG. There are a variety of special boons. The general boon is a stat increase (30 cap) or a feat. One of the recommended ways to hand out boons is have them cost 30,000xp apiece.

As for gishes. Valor Bards get two attacks. Pact of the Blade Warlocks get two attacks. Eldritch Knight and Wizard multiclass very well. If you go 11 EK/ 9 wizard you will have 3 attacks, 5th level wizard spells and the slots of a level 12 wizard. Casting in armor is a non-issue. If you are proficient in armor you can cast in it.

Lots of class concepts only exist in the very robust multiclass mechanic. A Cleric 10/ Wizard 10 would not be an awful character (still gets a 9th level slot).

Silver Crusade

Jiggy wrote:
Overall, I totally agree that it's a good thing. However, when combined with another very good thing—the fact that the fighter has some juicy, appealing class features at a lot of levels—the result makes it really hard to make the multiclass fit my vision. ;)

Half caster is balanced with the class abilities of Paladin/Ranger. To be balanced with fighter class abilities, it'd be one third caster.

One possible way forward is to design a variant EK, with a new name and different schools.

I've put a lot of thought into 5E character creation. If that juicy second attack at 5th level is so attractive (I know it is for me!) then then the Pact Blade version of Warlock can choose an invocation at 5th which lets him attack twice with that cool magic blade. I've thought of plenty of multiclass Warlock/warriors. : )

For a multiclass fighter/wizard, you can TWF at first level for that second attack. You don't need a feat, but there is one that lets you use bigger weapons and gives an AC bonus, and another feat that lets you cast a spell with somatic components even if you hold a weapon (and boosts concentration checks too), if you have the kind of spells that you want to cast in melee.

Dark Archive

I like both systems for what they are, but PF is so much better supported it makes GMing easier even though the game system is more complicated.

I do use the advantage/disadvantage mechanic from time to time in PF, for example, if I know one result vs. another should be pretty heavily weighted but I'm doing it on the fly because I didn't expect it or if I've run long and I've got to wrap up an encounter so my players can get going for the night. No one seems to mind and as a math construct it's as good as anything else in a pinch I guess.

It's also a good discipline tool for when players step over the line on table talk or metagaming. I usually give one warning a night, and after that a simple "you're at disadvantage on your next turn" penalty sends a clear but reasonable message that punishes the wrongdoer without crippling the party.

Silver Crusade

Among the 5E mechanics influenced by 4E, in the 'grey is the new black' way, is '3rd level is the new 1st level'.

The first two levels in 5E seem like apprentice levels, and you only qualify as a 'proper' (insert class name) once you hit 3rd; it's even explicit with the paladin.

Once you hit 3rd, you have chosen your path in whatever class you choose, and have enough hit points to stop worrying about dying to a single goblin swing. That bundle of hit points reminds me of the high starting 1st level hit points in 4E.

I get the impression that starting at 3rd level will be quite common. Indeed, it's recommended in the new Elemental Evil adventure, although it does have material to let you start at 1st.

Silver Crusade

Rhedyn had a good idea: multiclass Eldritch Knight.

I've been trying to create a fighter with magic who functions like a detective on NYPD Blue. Start with female High Elf, max Dex/Int, and start as a fighter armed with a rapier. Combine EK with a level of some flavour of wizard, and I'll get the combined slots of my wizard levels plus one third of my fighter levels, and I can choose non-abjuration/evocation spells from my spellbook, effectively getting around that restriction if I carefully take those wizard levels at the right time. At 6th I could be Ftr5/Wiz1, only delaying that second attack by one level. After that I can pick and choose what class level to take when.

I'll have to look at it in more detail when I get home. I might even end up dropping the EK path and go Battle Master/wizard. I'll have to see.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

We had someone who was going old-school Fighter/Thief/Magic-user two-weapon wielder and was considering Eldritch Knight/Arcane Trickster/Evoker (so at 3/3/3 would be CL 5), but ended up going straight up Eldritch Knight because he had TOO MANY bonus action options (second wind, cunning action, off-hand weapon, various spells, etc.).

I also like how the different classes are really different. Even the spell lists for different classes are pretty specialized. For example, druids are really good at battlefield control and moving opponents around.


I like it because I don't need to app to keep my character sheet correct.....was kinda weird at first creating a d20 pc w/o herolab

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

thenovalord wrote:
I like it because I don't need to app to keep my character sheet correct.....was kinda weird at first creating a d20 pc w/o herolab

I use looseleaf.

I know, I know, I'm a barbarian.

But I play a cleric. And a rogue.

:-P


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I have never needed a digital program to create a character (I even have that 2nd edition computer program with the books, character sheets, dice roller, and campaign cartographer on it). So all this crying about no digital character creator from people baffles me. I can kinda see it for 3rd/Pathfinder and 4th editions, but definitely not 5th edition. But that's for another thread, and I hope I didn't just derail this one with that comment.

But I am loving this edition. Started a game back on the 1st of April. Our poor rogue had to roll his death saves from a lucky hit from a creature. The paladin nearly joined him for the same reason. I am actually enjoying DMing again (haven't really enjoyed it since the very beginning of 3rd edition), and my players are having fun as well (despite 2 characters nearly dying).

This is the best Wizards of the Coast D&D edition, and it makes me sad that they have dropped the amount of releases for this edition compared to the last 2. I don't want a brand new rule book (or 2 or 3) each month like what happened with 4th edition and the latter half of 3rd edition, but 2 books per year is an extreme on the other end of the spectrum (now that the 3 core books are out).

I am curious what this month's Unearthed Arcana article will be about. Maybe we will find out on Monday.


What are they releasing for DnD this year


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You could just check their website and find out.


Adjule wrote:
I have never needed a digital program to create a character (I even have that 2nd edition computer program with the books, character sheets, dice roller, and campaign cartographer on it). So all this crying about no digital character creator from people baffles me. I can kinda see it for 3rd/Pathfinder and 4th editions, but definitely not 5th edition. But that's for another thread, and I hope I didn't just derail this one with that comment.

Most of the crying I've seen is about the lack of pdf (or other digital) versions, not a character creator. That their failed attempt was intended to do both tends to conflate the two.


I could... But I don't see why I would need to, what with Paizo people being so nice and helpful :-)

Silver Crusade

Arakhor wrote:
You could just check their website and find out.

Could you provide a clickable link for the computorially challenged, like me? : )


This is the best I could find.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Princes of the Apocalypse (Temple of Elemental Evil for Forgotten Realms) is the only thing I know of that is being released this year (releases on Tuesday, but some stores already had it available). What else will be released this year? I honestly don't know, as I haven't heard a single thing about anything past Princes of the Apocalypse. And I don't count the DM screen as a product release.

Shadow Lodge

I'm not sure how long this has been up, but for all those who kept complaining that 5e lacked an SRD, they have an online version of the Player's Basic Rules HERE.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kthulhu wrote:
I'm not sure how long this has been up, but for all those who kept complaining that 5e lacked an SRD, they have an online version of the Player's Basic Rules HERE.

Oh wow no. That does not even begin to count.

The basic rules are a taste. By themselves they are a crappy game.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rhedyn wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
I'm not sure how long this has been up, but for all those who kept complaining that 5e lacked an SRD, they have an online version of the Player's Basic Rules HERE.

Oh wow no. That does not even begin to count.

The basic rules are a taste. By themselves they are a crappy game.

They're a taste. And a nice way to try the game out before committing to it. They're definitely a good thing.

But no substitute for either a SRD or pdf/digital versions.


The rules for playing the game are the same aren't they? Isn't it just player options that are limited?

It's obviously not the same as PDF versions of the core books, but i thought it was the same game.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

The basic rules Kthulhu listed? For the most part, yeah. It's the same game. But, the problem with it is that it only gives you 4 races (human, elf, dwarf, halfling; with their subraces, which is 2 each, except for human), 4 classes (fighter, rogue, cleric, wizard) but only a single archetype for each (champion, thief, life, evocation, respectively), along with (I think) a smaller spell list/selection, and a smaller selection of pre-made backgrounds (6 instead of the 12 or so). There are no gnome, half-elf, half-orc, tiefling, nor dragonborn races; no bard, druid, monk, paladin, barbarian, warlock, sorcerer, nor ranger; no feats or expanded selection of archetypes for the 4 classes.

It's a good taste to see if you would be interested in the new edition, though it is only a taste. But a taste is better when you are looking at $50 per book unless you go to Amazon. The PRD (as well as d20pfsrd, etc) give you practically EVERYTHING, and you never need to purchase a book. Where the basic 5th edition rules give you a taste, and if you want more, you need to fork over the money (unless you get the books in a more unsavory way).

This way people can see what it is like, without getting burned for the book price. Personally, I think the new edition is worth it, but not everyone's tastes are the same.


Yeah, as I said - it's obviously not the same as a PDF of the core books (or an online database equivalent). I was a little puzzled at the suggestion it was a different game. I can understand that perspective without sharing it, I was just checking there wasnt some difference in the same way the PF Beginner Box is actually a different, simpler game than the PF Core rules.


Rhedyn wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
I'm not sure how long this has been up, but for all those who kept complaining that 5e lacked an SRD, they have an online version of the Player's Basic Rules HERE.

Oh wow no. That does not even begin to count.

The basic rules are a taste. By themselves they are a crappy game.

I wouldn't say it's a crappy game to go with just the basics, especially when there's a significant portion of the community who doesn't want to delve into the multitude of additional options the PHB has. A DM can have the players download the basic rules while they buy the DMG and then go from there. And if the DM wants to gradually add more content like additional sub-paths, more spells or classes or races, it's pretty easy to do.

Basically it's all in how much you're looking to put into your game. For myself, I'd be happier with the full rules bit I've run a few basic games and they're just as fun.

RE: Topic
As far as the rules go, I'm a fan for the most part. There's a few things I'm not happy with like no actual Warlord (battle master doesn't cut it for me, sorry) and short rests = 1 hr, I like what they're doing. Coming from a mostly 3.5/PF/4e background I have to say the general mechanics of 3.5 and PF were getting to a point of ridiculous proportions that a more streamlined and simpler game is needed.

The way I look at it is like this, D&D is an exception-driven system. Specific beats general and the TONS of specific modifiers, rules, and exceptions that it makes it almost not ever try something you're specifically not build for. Have you ever seen people in 3.5/PF attempt to trip someone else when they weren't equipped with a trip - specific weapon and/or have the Improved Trip feat? My guess is no or it's only done sparsely because the penalties and repercussions of trying it without the feat is a near waste of your turn. To me, that's problematic. I'd rather not have penalties and repercussions for basic actions and allow people who delve into those specific mechanics the greater benefit.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Steve Geddes wrote:
Yeah, as I said - it's obviously not the same as a PDF of the core books (or an online database equivalent). I was a little puzzled at the suggestion it was a different game. I can understand that perspective without sharing it, I was just checking there wasnt some difference in the same way the PF Beginner Box is actually a different, simpler game than the PF Core rules.

Yeah, they are the exact same game, minus quite a few options.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adjule wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
Yeah, as I said - it's obviously not the same as a PDF of the core books (or an online database equivalent). I was a little puzzled at the suggestion it was a different game. I can understand that perspective without sharing it, I was just checking there wasnt some difference in the same way the PF Beginner Box is actually a different, simpler game than the PF Core rules.
Yeah, they are the exact same game, minus quite a few options.

I won't say that the Elemental Evil Player's companion is rife with options, but I was glad to see that the few it offers are just as compatible with Basic as they are with the PHB. That is, I'm glad the Player's Companion doesn't require the PHB. (Yes, I realize there are spells list for classes that aren't contained in Basic, but you get my point.)


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I love that the Elemental Evil player companion has new racial options and spells for all the classes, for free. I also like that once a month they have the Unearthed Arcana articles, which also presents free options. The only gripe I have with those is the fact they are playtest versions. But hey, at least they are free.

Sovereign Court

Might I humbly suggest perhaps tackling this issue from another direction? Consider taking the wizard, then removing the school archetype, and replacing it with a decidedly martial archetype option; extra attacks, other fighter-esque options... You might be so bold as to simply use one of the existing fighter archetypes, with a little tinkering.


Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Jiggy wrote:
For instance, I'm a fan of caster/martial hybrid types of characters. When I went to make a character for 5E, that was the first thing I started looking at how to do. I wanted an intelligent fighter who was reasonably competent as a melee combatant and dabbled in magic to give him utility options and some variation in combat.

It's definitely not a perfect fit, but you may want to check out the favored soul example at the bottom of the page. Will certainly require reskinning. Not sure how by the book your group plays, but i figure you could swap the spell casting stat to be intelligence without a ton of mechanical implications.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Thanks, but we're way past character creation now. :)

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

I've re-built my PF dwarven waraxe-wielding dwarf barbarian 1/magus 7 as a mountain dwarf wizard abjurer with the Tough feat. I can wear medium armor, cast arcane spells, and wield a battle axe two-handed, and have around 93 hit points with that really awesome abjurer ability.


Rhedyn wrote:
Multiclass spellcasters progress the same spell-slot table but prepare/know spells as individual classes (so a cleric 9/ wizard 8 gets one 9th level spell slot). Spells were compressed when possible. Some spells have added effects when cast in higher levels.

The example you gave here is for a 17th level character. There are other factors that apply to a multi-classed character.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Overall, I like it. Not as much as my favourite edition (which is 4e by the way) but it is good. My only real complaints about 5th are as follows: the battle master fighter does not have enough options to choose from, especially at higher levels since any maneuvers they can pick up are things they could have taken earlier if they had actually wanted them, in other words they either need higher level maneuvers that are balanced for higher level characters since the current crop are all balanced to be equally attractive for a 3rd level character or for maneuvers to scale in some way besides getting to use a bigger die; the beast master ranger is broken, not because it is weak but because it doesn't function like one would expect it to, instead of having an animal companion that fights alongside the beast master and adds to his capabilities, he's stuck with a remote controlled drone that he needs to actively control each turn (though he does eventually get good enough at it to somewhat simulate the flavour of a real companion creature); and lastly polymorph effects are a little on the overpowered side, this becomes glaringly obvious with the Circle of the Moon druid.

Though the latest UA has me concerned as they're thinking of bringing back prestige classes, and while I'm not concerned about bloat; I am concerned about the balance problems inherent in such a system. There's basically three possible outcomes; the prestige classes (in whatever is their final form) are either A)too weak, thereby no one bothers taking them and thus not being worth the paper they're printed on; B)actually balanced well with the regular classes, strong enough to be worth taking but not becoming a mandatory thing, kind of like feats; or C)too strong, to the point where you're gimping yourself if you don't pursue one or more prestige classes.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Shadowmane wrote:
Rhedyn wrote:
Multiclass spellcasters progress the same spell-slot table but prepare/know spells as individual classes (so a cleric 9/ wizard 8 gets one 9th level spell slot). Spells were compressed when possible. Some spells have added effects when cast in higher levels.
The example you gave here is for a 17th level character. There are other factors that apply to a multi-classed character.

Another example to look at might be a 4th level spellcaster. Multiclass options at 4th level include 2/2 or 3/1. Both get four 1st level spell slots and three 2nd level spell slots. The 2/2 would have to use 1st level spells in the 2nd level spell slots. The 3/1 would be able to use 2nd level spells in their 2nd level spell slots. Both would have delayed access to feats and/or ability score increases, and most multiclassed spellcasters use different ability scores for their spells (except cleric/druids and sorcerer/warlocks).

Alternatively, you can be a single class spellcaster and just dabble in another class's spells by taking the Magical Initiate feat.

Or look at a 6th level multiclassed spellcaster. 3/3 would get two types of 2nd level spells, but no feats. 5/1 would get a feat and 3rd level spells. Another thing to consider is archetype abilities.

President, Jon Brazer Enterprises

1 person marked this as a favorite.
HenshinFanatic wrote:
the battle master fighter does not have enough options to choose from

That sums up my complains about 5e, except that it extends to EVERYTHING. Core book races: I'm sick of them. Subclasses, ok the basics are covered, how about something fun, unique, and flavorful. Feats, they are all solid options, but nothing that excites me. Short adventures that I can use to make my own campaign, nope.

This is why I am making my own material and buying into other 5e compatible material.

I really didn't mean for this post to be a plug for my own company, but that is what it turned out to be.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Well, you should be somewhat glad that Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide is coming out in a little over three weeks. It has new options for everyone (though ranger's get the least love -_-). The fact that it's meant for use in the Forgotten Realms can easily be handwaved by renaming things to fit in your campaign setting. Hopefully more of this kind of book will show up and we'll see Adventurer's Guides for Eberron, Krynn, Athas, and my hopes against all hope Spelljammer and Mystara.


HenshinFanatic wrote:
My only real complaints about 5th are as follows: the battle master fighter does not have enough options to choose from, especially at higher levels since any maneuvers they can pick up are things they could have taken earlier if they had actually wanted them, in other words they either need higher level maneuvers that are balanced for higher level characters since the current crop are all balanced to be equally attractive for a 3rd level character or for maneuvers to scale in some way besides getting to use a bigger die;

That's a good point, I hadn't really thought of that. Some options with level prerequisites (like the Warlock incantations) would have been good.

President, Jon Brazer Enterprises

HenshinFanatic wrote:
Well, you should be somewhat glad that Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide is coming out in a little over three weeks.

Rant

Spoiler:
Yes ... and no. I am glad that more options are coming. But honestly, 1 book. One stinking book in a year and a half?!? Compared to the 1 hard cover/month back in 3.5, 3 hard covers/year in Pathfinder to 1 hard cover in 18 months. And it's Forgotten Realms themed, a setting I have no particular love for. It almost feels like I am being tossed a crumb compared to what we use to get and expected to love it because "it is better than nothing."

I mean this is Wizards of the Coast, the company that did everything they wanted with the Star Wars license, the company that made card games more than different ways to play spades, clubs, diamonds, and hearts, the company that made Dungeon Tiles long before terrain was anything other than PDF printouts on paper or repurposed aquarium terrain, the company that brought prepainted fantasy minis into the being a thing, and the company that brought Dungeons and Dragons back from legal death. Where did that company go?

And now after a year and a half after the players handbook is released we get our first book of player options. Gary Ray of Black Diamond Games was not kidding when he called this the Stable IP Edition of D&D. And that is why we're getting next to nothing. They are putting out just enough to keep interest alive for licensees. And that's about it.

Which is why I went rogue and started putting out my own material for 5e, even though there is no official license for the system. I know I am not the only one that shares this frustration and want more, alot more, for their favorite game.

HenshinFanatic wrote:
Hopefully more of this kind of book will show up and we'll see Adventurer's Guides for Eberron, Krynn, Athas, and my hopes against all hope Spelljammer and Mystara.

Again, rant.

Spoiler:
I'm sorry, but I'm holding no hope out for that. At all. Not in the next 18 months nor in the next 5 years. None of these are the Forgotten Realms and none of these settings make as much money as the Forgotten Realms for licensees. And that is the bottom line for them.

Sorry for the rant.


Dale McCoy Jr wrote:
HenshinFanatic wrote:
Well, you should be somewhat glad that Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide is coming out in a little over three weeks.

Rant

** spoiler omitted **

HenshinFanatic wrote:
Hopefully more of this kind of book will show up and we'll see Adventurer's Guides for Eberron, Krynn, Athas, and my hopes against all hope Spelljammer and Mystara.
...

It's hard to know their motivation. Unfortunately, another trait WotC have (besides the ground-breaking you list here) is an opaqueness when it comes to business plans.

I'm personally taking it as a cautious testing of the waters to avoid the problem of bloat (which was a thing they were criticised for in both 3.5 and 4th edition). My hope is that, once the two adventures one sourcebook a year rate is deemed too slow by the market, that things will increase somewhat.

It's not my preference, but I'm still hoping things will pick up in a year or two.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Me too.

Especially since the core classes and races and even Backgrounds are so modular. They're designed to have additional options built into the classes (as archetypes) and races (as subraces).

I want to see additional Barbarian Totems, Bardic Colleges (College of Medicine, College of Divinity, College of Secrets, College of Espionage), additional Cleric Domains (Luck, Travel), additional Druid Circles (Circle of the Sea, Circle of the Sun, Circle of the Beast), more Fighter types (Arcane Archers, Divine Knights that use cleric spells instead of Eldritch Knights using wizard spells, Samurai, Steadfast Defender), monks (Zen archer, Jedi), paladin oaths (Harmonium, Mercykillers, Rules Lawyer), ranger paths (horizon walker, falconer), rogues (saboteur, swashbuckler), sorcerer bloodlines (ALL OF THEM!!!!), warlock pacts and boons, and wizard schools (elemental schools, arcane archer, beguiler, Wizards of High Sorcery, Thayan Cabalists).


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Dale McCoy Jr wrote:
**snipped**

Eh, as great as the 3.X and 4e eras were for quantity of material, some people still felt that that was too much. Also, there's the fact that the D&D department of Wizards of the Coast has always kept their cards close to their chests as the saying goes. Besides they're running on a skeleton crew which is why pretty much everything released so far apart from the three core books has been outsourced to another company or group of freelancers.

As for two of my favourite settings being a prayer of a long shot to happen that doesn't mean I can't still dream. Krynn and Athas have lower odds than Eberron true but I think that Eberron has a big enough fan-base to at least get 1 supplement. Dragonlance, because it has fallen by the wayside (I mean, the last time it was given any focus was 3.0 and only pulling middling numbers for a niche industry killed further support) but the fact that they had a beta version of Minotaurs from Krynn in one of their Unearthed Arcana articles gives some hope. Dark Sun has less odds because relatively speaking, it just got a revival during 4th edition's run.

Steve Geddes wrote:
That's a good point, I hadn't really thought of that. Some options with level prerequisites (like the Warlock incantations) would have been good.

I'm working on such things right now actually, in fact I go the route of using both options I mentioned to shore up Battle Master Fighter's simply because for what was supposed to be a complex counterpart to the Champion and a non-magical equivalent to the complexity of someone who can cast spells, it really didn't deliver.

I won't give out specifics but some things I've done besides adding built in upgrades to the standard PHB list of maneuvers is add 7th, 10th, and 15th level maneuvers which themselves upgrade at certain levels, except the 15th level ones for what should be obvious reasons. One is a version of the Ranger's whirlwind attack tied to the superiority die mechanic and ends up a fair bit stronger (the class isn't called Battle Master Fighter for no reason after all). I also did some re-jiggering of the weapon table to have it make more sense to me (and to make certain sub-par weapons a slightly more tempting choice). I also added some Pathfinder maneuvers to the base combat rules. Everything is still a work in progress so I'm a little uneasy about giving the specifics.


The one thing that is missing for me is shorter adventures. There are a few being released/ kickstarted. Even simple 12 page adventure to gain a level or two would be great. Rules etc release wise we are very happy with the slow schedule and unbloat

President, Jon Brazer Enterprises

thenovalord wrote:
The one thing that is missing for me is shorter adventures.

Deadly Delves comes our for 5e comes out really soon (next week if I can finish getting the layout done in time).

Editor, Jon Brazer Enterprises

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Look at the October poll results Wizards recently posted: in summation, new monster books and new setting material are what fans seem to be most interested in buying.

Now, there's another side to this, and that is that consumers are not always the best at telling you what they will actually spend money on, even when you flat-out ask them to tell you what they want. I think a lot of RPG creators are wary of making products based solely on customer feedback for that reason. But Wizards ought, in theory, to have a much larger respondent sample than smaller game producers do.

So, now the ball is in their court to make either of those products happen. Personally, I think the best thing they could do is to branch out into another campaign world for a half year cycle--and by this, I do NOT mean a gazetteer for another part of the Forgotten Realms. The entirety of the fan base is not going to be satisfied by Realms-exclusive content in perpetuity. I'd love to see a campaign sourcebook with bestiary for either Dragonlance or Planescape, although I think Eberron is a more likely candidate just because it's so vastly different from the Realms and will scratch an itch for some gamers that FR won't.

But the worst case scenario is that these poll results just get ignored and the current cycle of "outsource a new Realms adventure every 6 months" continues until 2017. That means one of two things: either they're not confident in the sales potential offered by the poll results, or the D&D team can't convince Hasbro to depart from the charted strategy and try something a little different. The latter is really the worst case scenario for gamers, because it will clearly demonstrate that the fan base isn't who this edition is designed to appease. (That is not to say that I dislike 5E--far from it. I quite like the game, and wish more were being done with it beyond this slow churn.)

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I've played every version of D&D since 1st Edition AD&D back in the 1970's (with the exception of 4E which just did not interest me in the slightest)

I'm currently a pretty die hard Pathfinder fan. I like the system, I know the rules pretty much inside and out, and I like the people that make the game. I will say, though, that 5E is a good game. As countless people have pointed out, it's a quicker, less rules intensive version of D&D than Pathfinder is. There are some things about 5E I'm not fond of and there are some elements I think are pretty darn ingenious!

You can tell that, regardless of your opinion of WotC the corporate entity, the folks that actually designed and developed 5E were incredibly passionate and dedicated to making the best game they could.

I will *heartily* agree that 5E fans need MORE monsters though! :)

President, Jon Brazer Enterprises

SmiloDan wrote:
monks (Jedi), paladin oaths (Rules Lawyer),

*Snorts a laugh*

Sovereign Court

I do want to see more setting come out, for sure, and I think that people are hungry for it.

Legendary Planet, for instance, has me very excited.

Primeval Thule is amazing and I can't wait to run or play it.

But it would be nice to really see other settings shine. Sadly I think that people are reluctant to revisit Greyhawk, which is a shame given that the system itself is going back to some sort of roots, and Greyhawk really lends itself to the play style a lot more than Faerun does.

The trick is to figure out what will stick. Eberron sounds like a good idea (the prevalence of magic notwithstanding), but WotC is at a precipice when it comes to branching into other settings.

The setting diaspora really hurt them in the past, and a weak response to a non-faerun setting might make them even more risk averse, so I imagine that there is (or was, depending on any pending release schedule) a lot of handwringing about where to go next.

Personally, I am more eager for the eventual 3pp offerings. I think I can wait for WotC to catch up. That's not to say that I don't understand the frustration for those who would rather just have more material now. They need to grow their team and provide more content, even if it is just smaller adventures that flesh out other settings.

Editor, Jon Brazer Enterprises

Without trying to speak for an entire generation of gamers, my personal aversion to Greyhawk is that it's just been done to death over four different editions of the game to date, and I don't think many people who started gaming after 1990 have any emotional connection to the setting--the people who fondly remember AD&D 1E and a Gygax-led TSR LOVE it, but beyond those people I don't really hear a clamoring for that sort of material any more. Nowhere is this more evident than in the latter days of Dungeon Magazine--one of the biggest walls I'm hitting while running a Savage Tide game right now is that I have to de-Greyhawkify everything in it because all of that mythology is baked in (despite the Isle of Dread really being more of a Mystara artifact).

It's also too close to Forgotten Realms in terms of what it offers GMs for campaign fodder. Publishing a Greyhawk sourcebook wouldn't really be presenting an alternative to the FR default, and as much as it pains me to say it, neither would a Krynn/Dragonlance sourcebook. That's why I think Eberron or Planescape are much more likely to be revisited if Wizards ever decides to branch out from the Realms.

151 to 200 of 231 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Gaming / D&D / 4th Edition / Thoughts on 5E All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.