The final version of the D&D Next playtest rules are out. In many ways they seem to be consistent with Pathfinder (although with the game's math flattened a bit). Skimming through them made me wonder if there were any rules that were obvious candidates for inclusion in a future Pathfinder revision?
For example, I like the way that the Monk's Stunning Strike works in next as opposed to Pathfinder as an "always on" ability that automatically triggers on a crit.
Anything else stand out to you as cool?
I'd suggest widening the question out to "what can we learn from other game systems that have come out since the initial pathfinder rulebook". If we're looking to imorove the game, Why limit it to D&D next, which is only one game...
I'd for instance suggest what Trail of Cthulhu/Eternal Lies calls "beats" in adventure paths and supplements (they can make a game very atmospheric) and I like the 13th age's "one unique thing"
Neither require significant rule changes and yet are excellent things to bring into a game.
I like the whole "advantage" roll thing, rather than a flat bonus. However, I think mechanically pathfinder doesnt need much.
I'm fond of the whole "bonds" mechanic from dungeon world. Motivates players to flesh out their characters and do more than just murder monsters, and gives you XP for doing so. (a bit off topic)
I always liked the minion idea from 4th; it helped make the game feel larger without killing the players with overwhelming numbers. For those who don't know, they are 1 hitpoint monsters with attacks that do fixed damage. They rate at about 1/5th the xp of a full monster of a particular level.
I am going to be using 13th Age's Icons and Advantage from Next in my next game... mind you, I'm Also homebrewing plenty of things.
I like the whole "advantage" roll thing, rather than a flat bonus. However, I think mechanically pathfinder doesnt need much.
I'm fond of the whole "bonds" mechanic from dungeon world. Motivates players to flesh out their characters and do more than just murder monsters, and gives you XP for doing so. (a bit off topic)
How do bonds work?
I think they were actually one-quarter normal xp. 4E did things in powers of 2 like that, with elites being worth double xp and solo creatures being worth quadruple xp But yeah, minions were fun. My wizard routinely was on AoE minion mop-up duty in between bouts of debuffing the real enemy soldiers. Never felt boring or like wasting time, either, since the little buggers could still hurt a lot if there were enough of them swarming you.
|
I always liked the minion idea from 4th; it helped make the game feel larger without killing the players with overwhelming numbers. For those who don't know, they are 1 hitpoint monsters with attacks that do fixed damage. They rate at about 1/5th the xp of a full monster of a particular level.
I love the idea of minions, although I haven't utilized them in my Pathfinder game. Maybe it's time to rethink it, but I'm never sure how my players will react to new ideas, hahaha.
How do bonds work?I like the whole "advantage" roll thing, rather than a flat bonus. However, I think mechanically pathfinder doesnt need much.
I'm fond of the whole "bonds" mechanic from dungeon world. Motivates players to flesh out their characters and do more than just murder monsters, and gives you XP for doing so. (a bit off topic)
I havent played much Dungeon World (so I dont have much comments on how they work in game) but they're built around a statement you make about another party member:
"I no longer trust X because he abandonned me while we where fighting the dragon" (as an example, dozens of other possible bonds exist)
You can accumulate several bonds, and during each session, try to resolve them. There's a one bond per session resolution limit (other PnP-ers, correct me if I'm wrong). Generaly it's the DM's prerogative to decide wether this aspect of the relationship can be concluded. This could also lead to new bonds, such as "I now feel a debt towards X, because he took a wound trying to protect me from Y".
I love the roleplaying basis of dungeon world (mechanically, it's very sparse though). More emphasis on the "world" (and the individuals inside, with their motivations/desires/goals) rather than emphasizing straight battle. The PDF's only 10 bucks for 400 pages, so it's even affordable for a poor student like me.
I see nothing of value to be gained from D&D NEXT.
Enlighten me.
|
You can accumulate several bonds, and during each session, try to resolve them. There's a one bond per session resolution limit (other PnP-ers, correct me if I'm wrong). Generaly it's the DM's prerogative to decide wether this aspect of the relationship can be concluded. This could also lead to new bonds, such as "I now feel a debt towards X, because he took a wound trying to protect me from Y".
I love the roleplaying basis of dungeon world (mechanically, it's very sparse though). More emphasis on the "world" (and the individuals inside, with their motivations/desires/goals) rather than emphasizing straight battle. The PDF's only 10 bucks for 400 pages, so it's even affordable for a poor student like me.
I'm pretty sure that you can resolve any number of bonds per session, but you only have one bond per character. There are other independent games that instead of a statement have an emotion, and that emotion can be a plus or a minus depending on the situation; while, in Dungeon World, the bond is always a plus if you are assisting the person bonded. And, yes, it is a great game and highly recommended. It is not a game that ever will require another rulebook, though, because it is the epitome of "sandbox," Pathfinder's campaign setting series can be useful.
|
Nothing from D&D next.
People are going to hate me for saying this, but hit location charts, notable from rolemaster or perhaps D&D2e combat and tactics (also weapon vs armor types from 2e). Another is damage to weapons and armor, oh boy am I pushing it, but I would like to see equipment become worn and less effective as the adventure progresses. A stamina system, I want combat to tire people out making it harder to attack/defend/cast spells etc. Exploding damage dice (you heard me). Vs die rolls from Palladium in lieu of a static armor class, and armor that absorbs damage. 1st & 2nd editions style multi-classing (just liked it better).
Wait, I just thought of something from D&D next. The proposed three pillars of play (exploration, roleplaying, and combat) would have been a cool idea, but didn't really seem to pan out. But, if pazio's could do it right.
|
I don't know much about D&D Next, except what I saw at the PAX Live D&D game.
Advantage seemed like an interesting idea, but I already prefer Mutants & Masterminds Hero Points. Spend a Hero Point and you can reroll a d20, if you roll below 10 add +10 to the roll. Players earn Hero Points for setbacks and complications (rolling natural ones are usually where the GM interjects with a complication). It really makes for a more dynamic game.
The only new idea I've seen so far in D&D Next that I really liked was the backgrounds system that brought the character's past life experience into play. While Pathfinder has traits, the D&DN background traits tend to go that extra bit further in unique abilities rather than +1 here and there as well as generally feeling more RP-orientated.
Nothing from D&D next.
People are going to hate me for saying this, but hit location charts, notable from rolemaster or perhaps D&D2e combat and tactics (also weapon vs armor types from 2e). Another is damage to weapons and armor, oh boy am I pushing it, but I would like to see equipment become worn and less effective as the adventure progresses. A stamina system, I want combat to tire people out making it harder to attack/defend/cast spells etc. Exploding damage dice (you heard me). Vs die rolls from Palladium in lieu of a static armor class, and armor that absorbs damage. 1st & 2nd editions style multi-classing (just liked it better).
Wait, I just thought of something from D&D next. The proposed three pillars of play (exploration, roleplaying, and combat) would have been a cool idea, but didn't really seem to pan out. But, if pazio's could do it right.
Ultimate does have the rules for Exploration now, and it sounds like in the next two APs (WotR and TMM) are going to have some Hexcrawls in them.
I'm so stoked to see Hexcrawls come back. :)
Ultimate does have the rules for Exploration now, and it sounds like in the next two APs (WotR and TMM) are going to have some Hexcrawls in them.I'm so stoked to see Hexcrawls come back. :)
Seriously? Like, Isle of Dread-style hexcrawls? :D
Seriously? Like, Isle of Dread-style hexcrawls? :D
Ultimate does have the rules for Exploration now, and it sounds like in the next two APs (WotR and TMM) are going to have some Hexcrawls in them.I'm so stoked to see Hexcrawls come back. :)
Similar enough. Obviously more Pathfinderized. It's a lot like their rules in Kingmaker AP, but a bit more refined.
Check it out on the PFSRD here!
And if you feel like buying the rulebook, they are in Ultimate Campaign.
Similar enough. Obviously more Pathfinderized. It's a lot like their rules in Kingmaker AP, but a bit more refined.
Seriously? Like, Isle of Dread-style hexcrawls? :D
Hadn't had the chance to read through that part of Ultimate Campaign yet (I have to admit I got it for the Kingdoms and War rules more than anything else and skipped straight to that chapter) - but doing so now and it's looking good! Really hoping we get to see it in practice in the upcoming APs.
I wrote a hexmapping application a few years back, now I finally have the excuse to go dig out the source code and update it!
No prob! Just from what my dad told me, the hexes in the olden days were smaller (6 miles corner to corner?) than the PF ones (12 mi corner to corner). Keep that in mind when keying things in.
|
I always liked the minion idea from 4th; it helped make the game feel larger without killing the players with overwhelming numbers. For those who don't know, they are 1 hitpoint monsters with attacks that do fixed damage. They rate at about 1/5th the xp of a full monster of a particular level.I love the idea of minions, although I haven't utilized them in my Pathfinder game. Maybe it's time to rethink it, but I'm never sure how my players will react to new ideas, hahaha.
Legend had a similar idea, where horse of minions were stated up like swarms, or one critter with multiple bodies.
I like D&D next's rules for fighters, so that could be something.
No prob! Just from what my dad told me, the hexes in the olden days were smaller (6 miles corner to corner?) than the PF ones (12 mi corner to corner). Keep that in mind when keying things in.
Oh, way to make me feel old! :D And yep, there's actually a reproduction of the old 6 mile Isle of Dread maps in the D&D Next playtest packets if you have access to those.
Thanks again :) My day just got more exciting knowing I have to still read through Ultimate Campaign properly, plus it inspired me to throw a wilderness encounter map in something I'm writing at the moment!
No prob. I've pretty much been doing that with my current campaign. Took some inspiration from Isle of Dread and made it into a Caribbean-style Kingmaker game. Much fun was had.
Though if you do that, allow the players to build farms on jungles. I know it says they can't, but A) they'll need it and B) having been to Puerto Rico enough times, they exist!
Happy gaming!
Also, Jason Bulhman has rules for minions in his 3PP called Rule Zero: Underlings. It's really good. Check it out.
I have been following the play test packets. Sadly for DnD Next, it is not more compelling to me than pathfinder. But they do have a few great innovations that are lacking in pathfinder, and that would be, if the rest of the system was excellent, cool enough to get me to switch my campaign over to DnD Next. Here they are:
1. reletavily flat powering up across levels. A CR 1 monster has a chance to hit a CR 20 fighter. A horde of orcs could kill a high level fighter just because that fighter's AC will proabably not be obscene.
This is great! It lets a 10th level fighter battling through a horde of skeletons be a meaningful battle.2. The new spell system, where mages get 1 spell per spell level, and then multiple slots, but only 1 slot at 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th. This makes high level spells quite special, and feels Vancian in the original sense.
3. Magic item rarity is awesome.
4. Crafting is made more time consuming and difficult, though a mage can maintain 1 pre-completed magic item that, due to its unfinished nature, is only available to the creator.
How does the magic item rarity work?
Nothing from D&D next.People are going to hate me for saying this, but hit location charts, notable from rolemaster or perhaps D&D2e combat and tactics (also weapon vs armor types from 2e). Another is damage to weapons and armor, oh boy am I pushing it, but I would like to see equipment become worn and less effective as the adventure progresses. A stamina system, I want combat to tire people out making it harder to attack/defend/cast spells etc. Exploding damage dice (you heard me). Vs die rolls from Palladium in lieu of a static armor class, and armor that absorbs damage. 1st & 2nd editions style multi-classing (just liked it better).
Wait, I just thought of something from D&D next. The proposed three pillars of play (exploration, roleplaying, and combat) would have been a cool idea, but didn't really seem to pan out. But, if pazio's could do it right.
Ahem. Several things you might, or might not, like about DDN.
They are doing a book / module on tactical combat which was described by Mike Mearls as looking like Player's Option: Combat and Tactics.
They are also working on a downtime rules module which would include running a domain, managing businesses, training, combat on the domain level, etc. A dramatic storytelling module in which the players and DM work together to create the story / world is in the works. And a module with enhanced character customization.
There's something to like for most of us there.
It's in the 9/23 legends and Lore column:
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20130923
Some of this has been done by Paizo (and or 3PP) but seeing a different take on it sounds good. And some of it hasn't been done. Should be entertaining...
|
|
Ahem. Several things you might, or might not, like about DDN.They are doing a book / module on tactical combat which was described by Mike Mearls as looking like Player's Option: Combat and Tactics.
They are also working on a downtime rules module which would include running a domain, managing businesses, training, combat on the domain level, etc. A dramatic storytelling module in which the players and DM work together to create the story / world is in the works. And a module with enhanced character customization.There's something to like for most of us there.
It's in the 9/23 legends and Lore column:
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20130923
Some of this has been done by Paizo (and or 3PP) but seeing a different take on it sounds good. And some of it hasn't been done. Should be entertaining...
To be fair you are right, the Wotc guys said they would be adding in more complexity later. Call me silly, but I just didn't like the the base system to begin with. I really dislike flat math (feels anti-heroic and doesn't actually solve the problem if you go into epic), and I'm very disappointed in the skill system. Likewise advantage/disadvantage is fine for some, but I don't want it, and would have liked an alternative early on in the play-test. And well, this isn't a nice thing to say, but I don't care for any of Mike Mearls earlier work. This has left me with a non-trusting attitude towards the direction he's taking the game. Lastly I'm downright phobic of rules light, and my personal take is that most people using this system have a definitive lean towards a lighter rules system, I might as well stick with pathfinder since people already know what to expect (both heavy crunch and fluff).