|
Post by inflatus on Sept 6, 2012 13:13:07 GMT -8
Is there anyone here still running or playing the playtest? I would like to give it a shot but alas I know no one who is running it.
If you are playing or running what are your views based on the newer release?
I have been on a nostalgic RPG kick lately and DnD 5E has triggered some interest in me.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Sept 6, 2012 14:38:22 GMT -8
Well if you're in the mood for a 0e flavour game then it'll be a cinch. I only say that because the playtest rules are still very sparse . . . being designed to test specific game elements with some degree of isolation from the whole. Therefore a lot of ad hoc rulings would have to made . . . like 0e . . . and they only offer basic character generation for the four prime archetypes (Fighter, Wizard, Cleric, Rogue) at the moment . . . again like 0e.
|
|
D.T. Pints
Instigator
JACKERCON 2018: WITH GREAT POWER COMES GREAT RESPONSIBILITY June 22-July 1st
Posts: 2,857
Currently Playing: D&D 5e, Pathfinder, DUNGEONWORLD, Star Wars Edge of the Empire
Currently Running: DUNGEONWORLD, PATHFINDER
|
Post by D.T. Pints on Sept 6, 2012 18:19:28 GMT -8
Downloading it now...even though I quit playing 4e and have moved on to Pathifinder, Savage Worlds, Warhammer Roleplay V3, Dark Heresy. I still can't help but want to keep the good ol' iconic ship that is D&D afloat.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2012 9:01:37 GMT -8
havent been running it, but I read through the whole thing. Other than Healing Surges/Hit dice and humans being BROKEN it seems like it might bring back a D&D system that is actually fun.
we'll have to wait and see if it's any good. The main draw (assuming the system is ok) is the IP's that other systems cant use like Beholder and Mind FLayers
|
|
HyveMynd
Supporter
Dirty hippie, PbtA, Fate, & Cortex Prime <3er
Posts: 2,273
Preferred Game Systems: PbtA, Cortex Plus, Fate, Ubiquity
Currently Playing: Monsterhearts 2
Currently Running: The Sprawl
Favorite Species of Monkey: None
|
Post by HyveMynd on Sept 7, 2012 22:35:27 GMT -8
Not to throw shit at the fan here, but I'm not seeing anything that really excites me about D&D Next. I like the Advantage/Disadvantage mechanic and the way Ability checks can be used to adjudicate actions. But that's it.
Mike Mearls and the other designers keep throwing around the phrase "story elements" and constantly talk about how they want mechanics to come from the fiction of the game. But I don't see how you can have story elements in your game when you don't have an establised setting.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Sept 8, 2012 1:48:12 GMT -8
Rather than create yet another setting I was under the impression that it's modular nature would allow you to use your setting of choice. D&D has so many already - Eberron, DarkSun, Forgotten Realms, GreyHawk, Etc etc
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2012 1:59:37 GMT -8
Mike Mearls and the other designers keep throwing around the phrase "story elements" and constantly talk about how they want mechanics to come from the fiction of the game. But I don't see how you can have story elements in your game when you don't have an establised setting. Merging of mechanics and fiction in DnD, whatever edition: Expectation: -I wanna be a brave knight who defends the weak! -Of course! There is the Sword Knight Of Cormirian Mountains for you! Reality: -Wow! This Sword Knight Of Cormirian mountains gains +5 to attack and damage 10 times per day! I wanna be one! -Whatever...
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Sept 8, 2012 2:56:11 GMT -8
Mike Mearls and the other designers keep throwing around the phrase "story elements" and constantly talk about how they want mechanics to come from the fiction of the game. But I don't see how you can have story elements in your game when you don't have an establised setting. Merging of mechanics and fiction in DnD, whatever edition: Expectation: -I wanna be a brave knight who defends the weak! -Of course! There is the Sword Knight Of Cormirian Mountains for you! Reality: -Wow! This Sword Knight Of Cormirian mountains gains +5 to attack and damage 10 times per day! I wanna be one! -Whatever... Yep I tend to agree, especially when M Merles keeps saying re: character classes - "We want to know if playing class xyz is awesome enough". The OSR/nostalgia perspective was that you were heroes rather than super heroes (this perspective contributed hugely IMHO to the wholesale rejection of a certain edition by many older players). But it's too early in the process to say as its still only a play-test with a lot of ground to go yet
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Sept 8, 2012 13:21:50 GMT -8
The whole thing was in the can at the time Monte Cook was allowed to depart on good terms.
My Spidey Sense tells me this is about controlling the news cycle until the anniversary launch; a dog and pony show far more about co-opting consumer pocketbooks and competing against Pathfinder than it is about satisfying the hobby and pleasing its enthusiasts.
|
|
|
Post by rickno7 on Sept 8, 2012 20:54:10 GMT -8
[quote author=hyvemynd board=dnd5e thread=1094 post=8800 time=1347086127
Mike Mearls and the other designers keep throwing around the phrase "story elements" and constantly talk about how they want mechanics to come from the fiction of the game. But I don't see how you can have story elements in your game when you don't have an establised setting.[/quote]
Actually I think he is talking about fitting story elements into why or how characters are what they are. The combination of backgrounds, traits, and specialties are pretty effective to get some "story" elements into the game rules. They are not story specific, but they are just as much a story enhancer as Traveller. Traveller seems to get a lot of praise when working backgrounds into mechanics.
Setting books will probably have their own sets of backgrounds and specialties that will tie in more closely to what you are talking about.
|
|
jfever
Journeyman Douchebag
FEVAH!!!!
Posts: 218
|
Post by jfever on Sept 23, 2012 17:10:52 GMT -8
What I like about D&D Next so far is how they are approaching character classes. I enjoy how they have the class, background, and specialty parts of the character. For those that don't know, you basically pick you class, and specify the direction you want to take that class witha background and specialty. The background and specialties give you skill and feat bonuses as well as a flavor focused advantage. I.E. as a Knight background, you are given pull over lower ranking knights in your order.
Also, humans are not broken. They allow for what D&D has always wanted humans to be: adaptable to any class. The other races have different bonuses and special features that make them a better fit for certain classes, but not as "pigeon holey" as 4E. I have two players that made a human and a high elf. The high elf is a warlock, and the human is a fighter. While the human fighter is competent, I'm seeing a significant advantage for the high elf, that was provided bonus spells for being a high elf, and picking a background, magic user (they need to work on some of these names!). The main thing is that the advantage is not from math. Their attack bonuses are the same. The big difference is the arsenal of minor spells that the high elf has.
With all that said, I'm not sold yet. I know that WOTC is holding a bunch of info and development close to the chest, and I'm curious to see if D&D Next spirals out of control even before it's hit print.
We'll see. . . . . . .
|
|
HyveMynd
Supporter
Dirty hippie, PbtA, Fate, & Cortex Prime <3er
Posts: 2,273
Preferred Game Systems: PbtA, Cortex Plus, Fate, Ubiquity
Currently Playing: Monsterhearts 2
Currently Running: The Sprawl
Favorite Species of Monkey: None
|
Post by HyveMynd on Sept 24, 2012 4:21:49 GMT -8
I hate to say it, but I'd be more impressed with the Background/Specialty/Class combinations of D&D Next if I didn't feel as if I'd seen it before in other systems. I'm not saying that WotC has to come up with completely new mechanics and systems for their game, but it feels like they're saying "Hey look at all this great new stuff we're giving you!" when we've kind of already seen it in various other forms before. Plus, they've come out and said that there will be ways to break up the package of skills and abilities that make up a Background. So why even do it?
I'm still questioning the huge attribute bonuses humans get. WotC's already taken steps to make sure that any race can be any class and still be effective by attaching an attribute bonus to the class. At first I thought that was dumb, but now I like it.
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Sept 24, 2012 4:56:40 GMT -8
Kill skills. They're useless to a "collaborative" and social game. Let player dialogue reign here. Kill Feats. Give players some credit for imagination in a game relying on imagination. Suggest ways to work "feats" like meta-magic and cleave into the imagination without resorting to blocking players with railroady "power progressions." Go back to the Thief and Assassin roles having the only "skills" and stop every race from being a Ditz clone by ruling "race as class" as the suggested baseline. Scrub out the spell school divisions. Remove Dex bonus from initiaitve and focus more on player unity by rolling one initiative die for the whole party. Audaciously include a 3-minute timer with every game with the suggestion that rounds be run in the time it takes to hard boil an egg.
Also have "the rules" state such things have no place above the head of the GM. And re-own the statement: Douchey players exist in our game. Get rid of them. Rules won't help you.
Then I will consider it.
|
|
jfever
Journeyman Douchebag
FEVAH!!!!
Posts: 218
|
Post by jfever on Sept 24, 2012 12:32:08 GMT -8
It seems that by "Kill skills" you mean "kill social skills", right? Because you're saying player dialogue should reign? I completely agree with you, and that is why I rarely ask for social rolls in my home games. Still, there are groups of people out there that hate role playing and just want to get together and kill shit. Those people need those social skills (see what I did there?). In terms of the use of skills, they just provided bonuses to certain actions you do because you're character has training in that action. It's not like you cannot do that action at all if you don't have the right skill.
I don't know why you would kill feats. I have never played a D&D game where I felt that my imagination was being impeded by feats. It's just a way for D&D to give another form of progression to characters. Some of those feats are handed to you in your class, some are available to choose freely once you've leveled. It still matters what addition you're playing, but we're talking about D&D Next and they haven't provided that info yet.
Pertaining to your second paragraph, I'm very confused. If you think skills are useless, why would you then encourage it to be given to only two classes in the entire game? Also, I know I pointed out that certain classes do better with certain races (sans human), but I would not go as far as to say that D&D Next has "race as class". Not even close. Also, we haven't seen how the spell schools work yet, so none of us can comment on that.
Pertaining to the rest of your second paragraph, that all looks like house rule stuff to me. I can't think of a single game system that has an initiative mechanic that you can't house rule to say, "Instead of individual initiative, lets just do a party initiative." I am doing something very similar to the 3 minute time limit in my 4th Ed game I'm running. I run a minute timer, and if they haven't rolled the dice for their action by the end of the minute, then they lose their turn. That is not in the 4th Ed rule book. I made that up myself.
Also, what rule book says "Douchey players exist in our game. Get rid of them. Rules won't help you". If that statement is required for you to consider playing it, then how do you play any table top RPGs at all?
Ultimately, it sounds like you're putting way to much on the shoulders of the system. I can't think of a game I've played where I haven't house ruled something in it to fit the dynamic of our group. If you don't like D&D at all, then don't sweat D&D Next. I can completely understand someone skipping it. Hell, I almost did myself out of rage for what they have done with 4th Ed.
Creative Cowboy, I usually like you're posts and all, so please don't take this as an attack. Just a fellow HappyJackoff throwing in (as JiB would say)my krupplenicks on the subject.
Now, there is a chance that I am not picking up on sarcasm or something. In that case, fuck my ass and call me Shirley.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2012 13:47:19 GMT -8
jfever the answer to all your questions is 1e D&D. CC uses a heavily modified version of it and the majority of his posts pertaining to game systems and mechanics always relate back to it.
|
|