New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 196
  1. - Top - End - #61
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Kurald Galain's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    Quote Originally Posted by kyoryu View Post
    But they can't. That's the point of it being *situational*. If they can use the same situation in every case, it's not a situation any more.
    Precisely.

    If a player can seriously come up with a different creatively situational approach for every single combat, then he deserves the extra damage. Note that numerous RPGs already do precisely that (e.g. OTE, Exalted, Wushu), and this simply encourages players to make awesome descriptions. I consider that a good thing.

    And, of course, the player who can do this every single round is a hypothetical example, and an appeal to absurdity fallacy. The reality is that players will use it every now and then, and that it won't always work for them either.
    Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.

    "I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
    Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!

  2. - Top - End - #62
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2010

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    Quote Originally Posted by Kurald Galain View Post
    Precisely.

    If a player can seriously come up with a different creatively situational approach for every single combat, then he deserves the extra damage. Note that numerous RPGs already do precisely that (e.g. OTE, Exalted, Wushu), and this simply encourages players to make awesome descriptions. I consider that a good thing.

    And, of course, the player who can do this every single round is a hypothetical example, and an appeal to absurdity fallacy. The reality is that players will use it every now and then, and that it won't always work for them either.
    Actually, while I think that allowing double damage for description is a poor bolt-on to existing D&D, I also think it'd be a *fine* aspect of another game. But if you're going to go that route, it needs to be part of the core assumptions. Allowing for the possibility of doubling damage every round in 4e breaks the "game" aspect pretty badly.

    It's also a matter of what skills you want to reward. Different versions reward different skills - 3.x rewards build optimization and creative use of spells pretty heavily. 4e rewards tactical skill and build optimization (though build optimization less heavily than 3.x). A game that rewards player creativity overall is something that I'd be very much interested in playing, but it ain't 3.x or 4e.

  3. - Top - End - #63
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Kurald Galain's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    Quote Originally Posted by kyoryu View Post
    A game that rewards player creativity overall is something that I'd be very much interested in playing, but it ain't 3.x or 4e.
    Do you think it could be 5E?
    Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.

    "I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
    Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!

  4. - Top - End - #64
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2009

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    Quote Originally Posted by Crow View Post
    To the folks whining about "auto attacking":

    Has it occurred to you that the fighter and rogue may actually have *more* options? Now that the ruleset doesn't hold your hand and tell you specifically what you're allowed to do, you are free to use your imagination and do anything it doesn't explicitly forbid.
    +1, this is also my opinion on this.


    My brief opinion on looking at the playtest documents (my group hasn't responded yet to see if we are actually going to test anything) is that I don't see anything that drives me away, but I don't see anything that is super compelling either. I probably wouldn't expect too this early, however- at this early stage of 4ed I knew I wasn't interested (based on rumors of the casting and melee changes), and at this stage of 3ed I was pretty sure I was all over it (based largely on what of the d20 system had leaked).

  5. - Top - End - #65
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2010

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    Quote Originally Posted by Kurald Galain View Post
    Do you think it could be 5E?
    Could be. I doubt it, since so much of 5e seems to be about a return to D&D "form". I'd be fine with it, though, so long as the game was balanced around it.

    Also, double damage is a huge modifier - a smaller modifier would be much easier to shoehorn into a game without totally breaking it.

  6. - Top - End - #66
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    HeadlessMermaid's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    This vicious cabaret
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    I think that the "twist my sword to cause more damage" is a bad example, because damage is one of the things for which there ARE rules already. (You roll dice. There. )

    Here's another example (very simple, but more applicable): A party member and an orc are fighting on the edge of a cliff, and the player says "I try to push the orc off the cliff". Lacking more specific rules and relying on ability checks, the DM says "make a Strength check". The orc may try to push back (using Strength), or evade (using Dexterity).

    I believe that using ability checks is an intuitive system. Provided that the abilities themselves are well-defined, and everyone understands what they mean and where they apply exactly, it's not so hard to use them for any given situation. So, at least in theory, you'll end up with a coherent, all-encompassing system, without a lot of specific rules.

    There WILL be quibbling about the implementation, but I think that with proper guidelines, good will and trust (and a fair and reasonable DM), it can actually be an experience I'd personally enjoy. I understand it's not everyone's cup of tea, though, so I wouldn't try to convince anyone.

    P.S. Here's how I imagine a more complex situation (disregarding the advantage/disadvantage thingy, because I'm not yet sure how it works). The DM's arsenal in this case consists of ability checks and common sense. I wonder if 5e will be old school like that, or if I'm imagining it wrong.

    Spoiler
    Show
    PLAYER1: I try to push the elephant off the cliff!
    DM: Wait a minute. That thing is huge, you can barely reach its knee. No matter how strong you are, you can't move it. You can try a strength check to push one leg, but all you'll accomplish is make it temporarily lose control of said leg.
    P1: Aright, me and Player 2 are both ridiculously strong, so we'll both spend our action this round to push one side leg each, and then we'll move back. I go first, he goes second. That way, the elephant will fall, right?
    P2: Yeah, that's great!
    DM: (*checks their character sheets, verifies that their intelligence is not in the nether regions*) If you both succeed, the elephant will fall on Player 2. Are you sure you want to do this?
    P2: Can't I try to evade the falling elephant with a dexterity check?
    DM: Sure you can try, but it's risky.
    P2: I'll risk it!
    DM: OK, roll your strength checks Vs the elephant's strength - it's not used to evading medium creatures, so it tries to push back.
    P1: I succeed, yay! I now move back!
    P2: I succeed, yay! I...
    DM: OK, the moment P2 pushes the second leg, the elephant falls sideways. It's going to crush you, P2! Make a dexterity check Vs DC [depends on the guidelines].
    P2: Aww, I failed.
    DM: Ouch. You take damage (*checks rules for damage from falling objects, using a third of the elephant's weight, because it didn't entirely fall on him - frankly, he eyeballs it*), and you can't move. On the elephant's turn, it tries to get up, but doesn't quite manage. Next round, what do you guys do?
    "We need the excuse of fiction to stage what we truly are." ~ Slavoj Žižek, The Pervert’s Guide to Cinema
    "El bien más preciado es la libertad" ~ Valeriano Orobón Fernández, A las barricadas
    "If civilization has an opposite, it is war." ~ Ursula K. Le Guin, The Left Hand of Darkness

    Roguish | We Were Rogue | [3.5] Greek Mythology Variant | [3.5] The Fey Compendium

    Avatar by Michael Dialynas

  7. - Top - End - #67
    Banned
     
    Griffon

    Join Date
    Feb 2011

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    Quote Originally Posted by Dienekes View Post
    Which requires the game to run on DM fiat instead of hard rules, which could, depending on the DM in question completely screw them over or make them absolute combat monsters. As a generally non-trusting person, I don't like when a classes entire ability to be interesting is determined by someone else interpreting what I can do.
    Agreed. This was something that bothered me about 2E that I'm glad 3E corrected. Obviously the DM runs the game, but there is such a thing as too much control. It's annoying to have to ask the DM for permission for "everything". Skills and feats provided defined parameters. Players know what their characters can and cannot do. DM interpretation is then only necessary for the inspirational imaginations of coolness.

    However, maybe this concept of needing the DM's permission for everything is their on purpose inclusion of pre-3E D&D for their modular something from every edition.

  8. - Top - End - #68
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    HeadlessMermaid's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    This vicious cabaret
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    Quote Originally Posted by navar100 View Post
    Agreed. This was something that bothered me about 2E that I'm glad 3E corrected. Obviously the DM runs the game, but there is such a thing as too much control. It's annoying to have to ask the DM for permission for "everything". Skills and feats provided defined parameters. Players know what their characters can and cannot do
    I understand these concerns. And I would be wary, too, of trying this with an unknown DM. Letting him decide almost everything is a recipe with the potential for disaster, or greatness, or anything in between. But I don't do unknown DMs anyway, I play with people I trust. And I trust them to handle this wisely.

    Even in 3.5, I've had the most fun with DMs who'd bend the rules all the time: introducing parameters that weren't written and disallowing things that were, sometimes to our mechanical advantage and sometimes to our mechanical disadvantage, but always, ALWAYS serving immersion and a more rewarding game. They weren't out to get us. I bend the rules beyond recognition, too. And the least fun I've had was hearing the phrase "there's no rule for that".

    Fortunately, I haven't heard that in a long time. So I'm fairly confident that the people I play with (and I) can pull it off - possibly after fumbling a bit with the new rationale.

    But it isn't new, is it? It's old.

    Quite unexpectedly, this whole thing has filled me with nostalgia for 2E. I just now realized how much I'd missed trying something in game and not knowing what will come of it. Oh dear, I missed it so much!

    Suppose you're playing 3.5 and say "I bull rush the orc, trying to push it off the cliff". You know exactly what will happen if you win the opposed roll, and exactly what will happen if you lose. And now, just for a moment, imagine that you really ARE on that cliff. Forget the game rules. Imagine that within reason (the laws of physics and magic in this world), ANYTHING can happen.

    The DM may roll and say: "Surprise, as you push the orc, he manages to grab your wrist. He won't let go! He takes you down with him as he falls! You try to hold back? OK, roll... you succeed partially: you don't fall off, but you can't stay on your feet either. You're now face down on the cliff, one hand grabbing the rock and one hand dangling helplessly off the edge, with an orc holding on to it for dear life! What do you do?"

    Is that fair? Frankly, I don't give a damn. It's unpredictable, it's exciting, it feels real and at the same time extraordinary, it's not freeform (there were rolls involved, and stats affected the results)... what more do I want?

    (I know, I know, other people don't want that at all. Again, I'm not trying to convert anyone. And frankly I don't know if I'll dig the new edition in the end, there are a lot of things to consider. I'm just explaining how I see it.)
    "We need the excuse of fiction to stage what we truly are." ~ Slavoj Žižek, The Pervert’s Guide to Cinema
    "El bien más preciado es la libertad" ~ Valeriano Orobón Fernández, A las barricadas
    "If civilization has an opposite, it is war." ~ Ursula K. Le Guin, The Left Hand of Darkness

    Roguish | We Were Rogue | [3.5] Greek Mythology Variant | [3.5] The Fey Compendium

    Avatar by Michael Dialynas

  9. - Top - End - #69
    Orc in the Playground
     
    BardGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    The Chosen Spot
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    Maybe one option in their stated modular system will be the more free form way and another option will be more rules defined with a detailed skills system.
    Frolic and dance for joy often.
    Be determined in your ventures.
    -KAB

  10. - Top - End - #70
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Zagreb

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    Quote Originally Posted by HeadlessMermaid View Post

    Suppose you're playing 3.5 and say "I bull rush the orc, trying to push it off the cliff". You know exactly what will happen if you win the opposed roll, and exactly what will happen if you lose. And now, just for a moment, imagine that you really ARE on that cliff. Forget the game rules. Imagine that within reason (the laws of physics and magic in this world), ANYTHING can happen.
    In 3.5 there is unpredictability, though it is governed by the dice rather then the GM. In your bull rush example, dependant on how much you beat the orc you push him back a certain distance.

    If you don't have the improved bull rush feat, he can take a AoO, and if the GM is crafty enough he could have tried to grapple the PC so that they fall together.

    The point is that rules for common situations allow the GM more freedom and impartiallity. You don't have to make a GM decision on the spot, that may or may not be impartial. If you know the rules you can adapt them to the situation at hand, and resolve the action within the rules.

    When you have (well designed) rules, I find that you get more immersed in the role play. You are more aware of what your character can and cannot do, and resolving actions is not a magical tea party, but you as a player choosing course dependant on what your character can do.

    I don't think that there should be a rule for every situation that could come up, but there should be rules for common situations adventurers could find themselves in. Even better there should be a system of guidelines to resolve things the rules do not cover.

  11. - Top - End - #71
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    BardGirl

    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Wadham, Oxford
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    Quote Originally Posted by HeadlessMermaid View Post
    I believe that using ability checks is an intuitive system. Provided that the abilities themselves are well-defined, and everyone understands what they mean and where they apply exactly, it's not so hard to use them for any given situation. So, at least in theory, you'll end up with a coherent, all-encompassing system, without a lot of specific rules.

    There WILL be quibbling about the implementation, but I think that with proper guidelines, good will and trust (and a fair and reasonable DM), it can actually be an experience I'd personally enjoy. I understand it's not everyone's cup of tea, though, so I wouldn't try to convince anyone.

    P.S. Here's how I imagine a more complex situation (disregarding the advantage/disadvantage thingy, because I'm not yet sure how it works). The DM's arsenal in this case consists of ability checks and common sense. I wonder if 5e will be old school like that, or if I'm imagining it wrong.

    Spoiler
    Show
    PLAYER1: I try to push the elephant off the cliff!
    DM: Wait a minute. That thing is huge, you can barely reach its knee. No matter how strong you are, you can't move it. You can try a strength check to push one leg, but all you'll accomplish is make it temporarily lose control of said leg.
    P1: Aright, me and Player 2 are both ridiculously strong, so we'll both spend our action this round to push one side leg each, and then we'll move back. I go first, he goes second. That way, the elephant will fall, right?
    P2: Yeah, that's great!
    DM: (*checks their character sheets, verifies that their intelligence is not in the nether regions*) If you both succeed, the elephant will fall on Player 2. Are you sure you want to do this?
    P2: Can't I try to evade the falling elephant with a dexterity check?
    DM: Sure you can try, but it's risky.
    P2: I'll risk it!
    DM: OK, roll your strength checks Vs the elephant's strength - it's not used to evading medium creatures, so it tries to push back.
    P1: I succeed, yay! I now move back!
    P2: I succeed, yay! I...
    DM: OK, the moment P2 pushes the second leg, the elephant falls sideways. It's going to crush you, P2! Make a dexterity check Vs DC [depends on the guidelines].
    P2: Aww, I failed.
    DM: Ouch. You take damage (*checks rules for damage from falling objects, using a third of the elephant's weight, because it didn't entirely fall on him - frankly, he eyeballs it*), and you can't move. On the elephant's turn, it tries to get up, but doesn't quite manage. Next round, what do you guys do?
    Very much agreed with this, and it's something I'd personally love to see return to a modern D&D edition. That hypothetical situation looks like a load of fun to be involved with. Ability checks as one of the main resolution possibilities seem interesting and a good way of streamlining characters, though I'm sure there may be some difficulties involved with arbitration.

    I suppose this edition does look like it requires a relatively intelligent and creative DM to go with your players, but the rewards seem enormous.

    Otherwise ... I'd like a bit more info on skills. So far we know that they can give bonuses to your checks, but not a lot else. There was a background which gave some skill bonuses to various Lore-types, though. Hm...

    Incidentally, speaking of backgrounds, I was amused by the little piece of advice on a character sheet which says (paraphrased) 'If you want to be old-school, go ahead and chuck out the background and theme ideas.'

  12. - Top - End - #72
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    HeadlessMermaid's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    This vicious cabaret
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    Quote Originally Posted by Tehnar View Post
    In 3.5 there is unpredictability, though it is governed by the dice rather then the GM.
    Actually, it's governed by the dice and the game's designers. Its unpredictability applies only to the things that the designers, well, predicted. If they didn't predict it, you can't even try it. (For example, there are no rules for mutilation in combat, therefore you can't attempt to chop off a foe's limb with your greataxe. Isn't that limiting?)

    Now, about the "magical tea party" you mentioned (with contempt, I gather?)... that's not at all what I had in mind. I expect the DM to be reasonable, I expect his decisions to make sense, and I don't expect him to pull random and conflicting rules out of his behind. I expect dice, stats and relative modifiers to determine each outcome. No tea parties of any kind.

    In the end, I trust my own DMs to make informed decisions on the spot more than I trust a bunch of game designers to fulfill the noble but impossible quest of Predicting Everything We'll Ever Need.

    The designers of 3.5 tried to do that, and also tried to provide rules that are complicated yet internally consistent, and which make sense for Everything We'll Ever Need. So how did it go? To answer that, I'd simply count the threads of "RAW Vs RAI", "RAW Vs Common Sense", and "is that RAW? the rules aren't clear..."

    (Disclaimer: I play 3.5 exclusively lately, I really like it - without being blind to its faults - and I just happened to be consumed by a surge of nostalgia today. I may be over it by midnight. Also note that using ability checks often doesn't necessarily mean that 5e will end up like 2E, so it's possible that none of the above will even apply. We'll see.)

    I don't think that there should be a rule for every situation that could come up, but there should be rules for common situations adventurers could find themselves in. Even better there should be a system of guidelines to resolve things the rules do not cover.
    Oh, I agree with that in principle. We obviously imagine the ideal implementation differently, that's OK. :)
    "We need the excuse of fiction to stage what we truly are." ~ Slavoj Žižek, The Pervert’s Guide to Cinema
    "El bien más preciado es la libertad" ~ Valeriano Orobón Fernández, A las barricadas
    "If civilization has an opposite, it is war." ~ Ursula K. Le Guin, The Left Hand of Darkness

    Roguish | We Were Rogue | [3.5] Greek Mythology Variant | [3.5] The Fey Compendium

    Avatar by Michael Dialynas

  13. - Top - End - #73
    Spamalot in the Playground
     
    Psyren's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    I also downloaded the files, and somehow knew that Saph would have a way better write-up in place than I ever could.

    I definitely agree with Ur-Priest and Person_Man. Freeform is well and good, but I'm of the school of thought that rules encourage creativity more than they stifle it, and more importantly prevent arguments/resentment during a session when the DM can easily say yes or no.

    As far as the rules, I agree also that they're pretty bare right now, particularly for fighters and rogues. I'll reserve judgement on the new Fighter until the maneuvers system drops. For now, I'm glad enough that spell levels are back that I'm cautiously optimistic about the rest.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Plague Doctor by Crimmy
    Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)

  14. - Top - End - #74
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Zagreb

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    The thing that bothers or worries me is the following, and why I consider it a magical tea party is that in 5E you basically have to ask the GM if your character will get a bonus or how a situation will be resolved. Its very loosely defined how to go about with that. Your success, or even the attempt at a action is dependant on the GM's whim, not your characters abilities or your inginuity.

    Take the bull rush example (the orc or the elephant it doens't matter). Even with a normal, reasonable, experienced GM things will vary from session to session, or even during the same session. I know when I GM I can't keep the same focus during the first few hours and at 2 am, after 4 beers. The answer to the question "what do I throw to bull rush that orc?" can vary with the same GM, let alone different ones.

    And if you find that you are bullrushing often enough and come with a compromise with the GM on the exact mechanics, well guess what, you just houseruled it. Only its a standard common only to your group, and you let the designer off the game scot free for being lazy and not coming up with it in the first place. For a product you paid for.

    I also play a lot of 3.5/pathfinder and I saw the RAW debates. Most things are so silly that any sane GM would just say "no, you can't." Still it was not a perfect system and could use improvement. I think the additional rules (even if flawed) did more the fewer rules of ADnD did. From the simple fact that a vast majority of people switched to 3.5 and that they keep playing it even after 4E came out.

  15. - Top - End - #75
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Planetar

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    London, England.

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    I also downloaded the files, and somehow knew that Saph would have a way better write-up in place than I ever could.
    Aww, thanks.

    We've got our game scheduled for Saturday, so we'll get a proper look at the mechanics then. From my readthrough of the Caves of Chaos module it seems VERY combat-heavy. I read somewhere that this is the same module they've used for playtesting the earlier editions . . . if it's true it might explain some things!
    I'm the author of the Alex Verus series of urban fantasy novels. Fated is the first, and the final book in the series, Risen, is out as of December 2021. For updates, check my blog!

  16. - Top - End - #76
    Troll in the Playground
     
    QuidEst's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2011

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    Looks interesting from what I've read here. I think the Intoxicated condition (DR and disadvantage) is a rather neat representation, for instance.

    Not sure how I feel about wizards being still squishier, but hey… having cool blasty/warpy magic to make up for it will be nice.

    For now, I have Pathfinder to keep me entertained.

  17. - Top - End - #77
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Kitchener/Waterloo
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    To the various suggestions of ability checks: that's precisely what I'm talking about. If the book says "if the players want to do something creative, call for an ability check!" then the game has rules for those situations. Recall the original 3.5 example of someone pushing a goblin into a fire. Some DMs would call it a Strength check, others a Bull Rush, others an Unarmed Strike. Each option has a different chance of failure and makes the "creative" move either encouraged or discouraged. Having a unified way to handle this sort of thing is a step towards rules and away from DM control, and it seems to be how 5e is going.

    I think we could even have more detail, actually, and still satisfy the fiat-favoring of this thread. Many games have a game mechanic called something like Complications. When a player fails a task, rather than dying (you push the orc off, he grabs your arm, you can't shake him off, you fall and die), the DM introduces a complication (you can't shake him off, now you're lying facedown in the dirt, hanging off the cliff). Basically, the game should have guidelines for how many complications to attach to an action (The orc example was already fairly long, and would likely start annoying the players left out of the spotlight, especially if this was a new group that took awhile to roll everything. Any longer and it's going to ruin others' fun.), and how much risk should be attached to those complications (At what point might the character actually die? Should the character take damage?). Balancing those concerns out and working out the game theory, the game designers should be able to come up with a system that encourages creativity and provides for precisely the sort of situations you guys seem to want.

    Think about it like this: a good DM might do that whole orc scenario on their own. Most DMs will do something else: the orc will just fall with no complications, the orc will grab your arm and you'll die, nothing will happen because the orc is not a moron and isn't going to stand there while you try to push him off the cliff. Remember, 75% of DMs are incompetent in one way or another, just as in every hobby and every occupation ever. If we can get those 75% of DMs coming up with cool scenarios by putting balanced tools to create them in the rules then we widen the play experience.
    Lord Raziere herd I like Blasphemy, so Urpriest Exalted as a Malefactor

    Meet My Monstrous Guide to Monsters. Everything you absolutely need to know about Monsters and never thought you needed to ask.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mithril Leaf View Post
    One of the unwritten rules of Giantitp is that Urpriest is always right.
    Trophy!
    Spoiler
    Show


    original Urpriest (by Andraste)

  18. - Top - End - #78
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Person_Man's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    Quote Originally Posted by prufock View Post
    It's been mentioned that fortitude, reflex, and will saves have been replaced with the relevant ability checks to resist. However, I didn't see mention that there are now also strength, intelligence, and charisma resist checks.
    I noticed this, and mentally began writing my 5E Wizard's Handbook. Step 1. Identify spells that target each of 6 attributes, and keep a list of the weakest attribute for each creature.

    Above and beyond the Action Economy problem I described earlier in the thread, this is going to be another major balance issue. If a Fighter can only target AC (and maybe Dex and Con with certain Feats) but a Wizard can target every attribute, then the Wizard will almost always hit his enemies more reliably then the Fighter.

  19. - Top - End - #79
    Orc in the Playground
     
    BardGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    The Chosen Spot
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    Quote Originally Posted by Person_Man View Post
    If a Fighter can only target AC (and maybe Dex and Con with certain Feats) but a Wizard can target every attribute, then the Wizard will almost always hit his enemies more reliably then the Fighter.
    Aye. I'm hoping that if spell casters can target all six attributes plus AC that the game designers will give the non-spell casters ways to attack all six attributes plus AC.

    Hopefully we'll see that when the more complete (complex?) non-spell caster material is released. Something like (just making these up on the fly)...

    STR - bull rush ability
    CON - body slam ability
    DEX - tripping ability
    INT - tactics ability
    WIS - feint ability
    CHA - intimidate ability

    Or something.

    Someone else mentioned it but possibly giving the non-spell casters a way to chain abilities like grapple someone (STR) then squeeze them (CON). Use one ability to set up another.

    I think if they can get all the classes to fall somewhere around Tier 4 (lower powered game) and Tier 3 (higher powered game) things could be fairly decent.
    Frolic and dance for joy often.
    Be determined in your ventures.
    -KAB

  20. - Top - End - #80
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Jerthanis's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Tempe, Arizona
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    Another issue I have with the way 5e seems to do DM Fiat stuff too is that because the difference between the weakest PC and the strongest monster is a difference of 5 points. This means that in a straight up contest, that Cleric will shove that Ogre off the cliff something like 30% of the time. There's just not enough granularity in Ability check vs Ability check and too much is based on the outcome of a linearly scaling probability die roll.

    It's like, I really like the rule for Jumping in 5e because it's a consistent result of something you'd expect a certain degree of consistency from. You don't have a difference of like, 15 feet from your shortest jump to your longest, you pretty much jump about the same distance MOST of the time. So having static jumping distances makes a lot of sense. I would imagine contests would go somewhat the same, where you get a certain sense of consistency with the results.

    Perhaps there could be a certain quality that you can have when entering a Contest, similar to having Advantage or Disadvantage, perhaps called Routine or Prepared or something, where the action is something where you could expect somewhat consistent results, like wrestling (where the significantly bigger and stronger has a consistent ability to expect to win such a contest) where it treats the rolls like a Rogue's Skill Mastery, and all rolls below 10 are treated as 10s. Maybe this is too complicated or powerful but it seems distinct enough from Advantage and Disadvantage to be its own thing. Since a guy with 18 strength wrestling a 9 strength guy already has an advantage, and saying "He has Advantage" doesn't really make sense, but having a larger degree of consistency to their outcomes might make some kind of sense. But perhaps this would create situations where grapples were pretty much inescapable and a 9 strength would never ever be smart to try contesting an 11 strength since it would go from 45% success to something like 20%.

    So maybe I'm crazy, but does anyone else sort of think the die result being so important, and in many ways more important than the character's attributes, might make absurd situations like a wizard pinning a dragon occur with some regularity, or am I blowing this way out of proportion?
    A review of the best scifi/fantasy book you will have read, and a review of the even better sequel.
    Spoiler
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle_Hunter View Post
    You do your avatar proud

    Member #29 of the Tin-foil Hat Alliance

  21. - Top - End - #81
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2010

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    Quote Originally Posted by Urpriest View Post
    I think we could even have more detail, actually, and still satisfy the fiat-favoring of this thread. Many games have a game mechanic called something like Complications. When a player fails a task, rather than dying (you push the orc off, he grabs your arm, you can't shake him off, you fall and die), the DM introduces a complication (you can't shake him off, now you're lying facedown in the dirt, hanging off the cliff). Basically, the game should have guidelines for how many complications to attach to an action.
    I think this is a reasonable idea (play Burning Wheel much, btw?). A simple chart could give appropriate types of compliations based on degree of failure - a simple failure would result in a minor complication, while an epic failure could result in death.

    There's a few scenarios where while the task might not be complex, the consequences of failure are - navigating a tightrope over a net isn't inherently more difficult than doing the same over lava (psychological factors aside). But, this could be combatted with having something like three charts for "consequence severity", leaving the core idea intact. I'm totally not sure this is necessary.

    This would leave the DM some room in both assigning the specific complications that occur, as well as in setting the difficulty of the initial test.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerthanis View Post
    It's like, I really like the rule for Jumping in 5e because it's a consistent result of something you'd expect a certain degree of consistency from. You don't have a difference of like, 15 feet from your shortest jump to your longest, you pretty much jump about the same distance MOST of the time.
    Perhaps, in a static, prepared environment, under no stress (apart from doing a good jump), and consistent footing.

    One of the things that the randomness of dice is supposed to represent is not only variance in your performance, but the variance in the environment that aren't necessarily reflected as discrete game elements.
    Last edited by kyoryu; 2012-05-31 at 12:36 PM.

  22. - Top - End - #82
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Zagreb

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    Based on this playtest/preview, I predict that the optimal way to generate characters will be to have a single high ability score and others low to moderate.

    First its very stupid that saves are ability checks. Ability checks like they did them from 3.0 onwards are very stupid, since the deviation you can get on the dice you roll is many times greater then the modifier to that same roll. If you remember drowning rules from 3.5 and how dreadful was it to make those DC 10 constitution checks (they also screwed up the DC system for that). A substantial difference in ability score (lets say 6) did not really help you much with making or failing the check. The roll of the dice matters more then the ability score.


    The old school ADnD system was much better. Roll a D20 and you pass if you roll equal or less. There a high ability score had a much bigger effect then in 3.0+.

    Therefore, since your ability scores don't matter (as) much when making saves (and other ability checks), spreading out your stat points will not be a good move. Focusing on your primary "attack" ability will be the preferance of a lot of people, since if you kill it faster you won't have to take as many saves after all.

    Compound to that the fact that in the playtest there are no spells that target STR, INT or CHA, a lot of skills / situations are DEX/WIS based, I think we will see classes whose primary ability scores are DEX/WIS as the strong (overpowered) ones.

    Even with the playtest rules it is clear that a DEX focused fighter (if you created one) is much better then a STR focused one.

  23. - Top - End - #83
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Jerthanis's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Tempe, Arizona
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    Quote Originally Posted by kyoryu View Post
    Perhaps, in a static, prepared environment, under no stress (apart from doing a good jump), and consistent footing.

    One of the things that the randomness of dice is supposed to represent is not only variance in your performance, but the variance in the environment that aren't necessarily reflected as discrete game elements.
    Well, would those elements represent a difference of 19 feet between the longest jump and the shortest jump? If it did, does that mean a roll of a 1 means you tripped over a stone that wasn't there before and stumbled? Sure, a million things can go wrong, but if the die roll is representing the chance that things go wrong doing your consistent jump ability, doesn't it make more sense to check for "things going wrong" rather than say, "Based on your stat, how far do you jump today, 5 feet or 25 feet?"

    Like, if the footing is uneven, Dex check or halve your distance jumped maybe? If you're under more stress than usual, Wis check to clear your mind and focus?

    Doesn't that make more sense than "Strength Check to see if you overcome what I'm sure are a ton of hindering obstacles to manage to jump your full distance in spite of them... oh, medium roll, you're somewhat hindered, but you make the best of it, but you could jump twice this far if you faced less hindrances next time by random chance"?
    A review of the best scifi/fantasy book you will have read, and a review of the even better sequel.
    Spoiler
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle_Hunter View Post
    You do your avatar proud

    Member #29 of the Tin-foil Hat Alliance

  24. - Top - End - #84
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Morty's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Poland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    To detract a little from the discussion about spontaneity versus rules - do we know just what weapons are "finesse"? Was there any longer list of weapons in the playtest, or just the ones the pre-gen characters used?
    My FFRP characters. Avatar by Ashen Lilies. Sigatars by Ashen Lilies, Gullara and Purple Eagle.
    Interested in the Nexus FFRP setting? See our Discord server.

  25. - Top - End - #85
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    bokodasu's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2010

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    Quote Originally Posted by Morty View Post
    To detract a little from the discussion about spontaneity versus rules - do we know just what weapons are "finesse"? Was there any longer list of weapons in the playtest, or just the ones the pre-gen characters used?
    There's an equipment list and it has a sampling of weapons, but I wouldn't be surprised if they all changed before too long. Anyway, it's pretty much what you'd expect (dagger, rapier, scimitar, short sword) - plus the quarterstaff.
    6-Cha Druid avatar by Savannah!

  26. - Top - End - #86
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    BardGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2011

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerthanis View Post
    Well, would those elements represent a difference of 19 feet between the longest jump and the shortest jump? If it did, does that mean a roll of a 1 means you tripped over a stone that wasn't there before and stumbled? Sure, a million things can go wrong, but if the die roll is representing the chance that things go wrong doing your consistent jump ability, doesn't it make more sense to check for "things going wrong" rather than say, "Based on your stat, how far do you jump today, 5 feet or 25 feet?"

    Like, if the footing is uneven, Dex check or halve your distance jumped maybe? If you're under more stress than usual, Wis check to clear your mind and focus?

    Doesn't that make more sense than "Strength Check to see if you overcome what I'm sure are a ton of hindering obstacles to manage to jump your full distance in spite of them... oh, medium roll, you're somewhat hindered, but you make the best of it, but you could jump twice this far if you faced less hindrances next time by random chance"?
    PCs generally aren't on a long jump track, so they will usually be facing multiple complicating situations(uneven ground, life-or-death stress, obstacles, etc.). While it may make sense to deal with each complication individually, doing so would make jumping take several die rolls, slowing down gameplay significantly.

  27. - Top - End - #87
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Morty's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Poland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    Quote Originally Posted by bokodasu View Post
    There's an equipment list and it has a sampling of weapons, but I wouldn't be surprised if they all changed before too long. Anyway, it's pretty much what you'd expect (dagger, rapier, scimitar, short sword) - plus the quarterstaff.
    Well, that's progress. Still too short of a list, though.
    My FFRP characters. Avatar by Ashen Lilies. Sigatars by Ashen Lilies, Gullara and Purple Eagle.
    Interested in the Nexus FFRP setting? See our Discord server.

  28. - Top - End - #88
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Planetar

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    London, England.

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    Quote Originally Posted by Morty View Post
    Well, that's progress. Still too short of a list, though.
    One effect of this is that the most effective sneak-attack weapon in 5e is currently a staff.

    Still, the poor old quarterstaff has been practically useless in every previous edition of the game, so maybe it deserves a little love.
    I'm the author of the Alex Verus series of urban fantasy novels. Fated is the first, and the final book in the series, Risen, is out as of December 2021. For updates, check my blog!

  29. - Top - End - #89
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Blackdrop's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Endicott, NY
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    I'm confused where people are seeing where only finesse weapons can be used for sneak attacks. Was it in article or something? Because the Blurb on the sheet just says you need Advantage.
    Add me on Steam!
    Steam ID: tfblackdrop

    Spoiler
    Show

    Homebrew:
    Spoiler
    Show

  30. - Top - End - #90
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2010

    Default Re: D&D Next/5e Playtest Summary & Campaign Journal

    Quote Originally Posted by theNater View Post
    PCs generally aren't on a long jump track, so they will usually be facing multiple complicating situations(uneven ground, life-or-death stress, obstacles, etc.). While it may make sense to deal with each complication individually, doing so would make jumping take several die rolls, slowing down gameplay significantly.
    That's pretty much where I'm at with it. If you accept that the max length is determined by strength (which I'm not, at least entirely), then given the number of times this actually comes up, and the overall importance of it in the game, I'm happy with the simplification for the sake of gameplay.

    Yeah, we could write an entire jump subsystem that had separate checks and modifiers for all the possible confounding factors, but a) that's a lot of stuff to keep track of and b) in most cases, the quick 'n' dirty version is probably good enough anyway.

    Of course, that gets a little bit into a philosophical point, where on one hand you have the idea of "roll the dice for the result, and then describe what happened" and on the other hand you have a more simulationist approach that wants to factor every iota into the calculation beforehand. They're both valid, but I'm pretty sure you can figure out which side I stand on.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •