|
Post by jughead5187 on Jan 26, 2012 16:32:09 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by jughead5187 on Jan 27, 2012 11:01:12 GMT -8
There are a bunch of interviews coming out.
Biggest controversy so far: the current playest has Vancian spellcasting again.
Thoughts?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2012 4:51:32 GMT -8
The Vancian system was always in the game, 4e just gave it to every class, a bad idea in my opinion. You will be able to spend a feat now to get an at-will ability, as a cleric/wizard; feats being now more like class abilities (talents) rather than the small bonusses in 3rd and 4th, from what I can tell. So you could probably make a wizard with a bunch of at-wills. Also more stuff: www.enworld.org/forum/news/317373-seminar-transcript-class-design-assassins-wizards.htmlEDIT: If that doesn't change I am sold.
|
|
|
Post by jughead5187 on Jan 28, 2012 12:58:21 GMT -8
Word. Forcing gms to give pcs loot almost EVERY SINGLE SESSION is mindless and trivializes magic items, especially if you want to play a low-magic campeign.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2012 17:01:44 GMT -8
Magic items are nothing more than a mechanic, which means in 4E I leave that all up to player decisions. It's at the point where I say "you found that 9th level thing you always wanted" and then we move on with the real story. Maybe WOTC will improve the game economy, too. Any time I tried to rationalize the extreme magic item economy, my brain hurt. "Ok, you buy a +4 deathsplosion battle axe. The merchant now has enough gold to hire, equip, and feed a mid-sized army for a year. He goes on to conquer the lowlands."
|
|
|
Post by jughead5187 on Jan 28, 2012 19:13:28 GMT -8
Lol well played.
I just hope that all their claims about balancing 5e somewhere between 3 and 4 come true.
Both have some great ideas that could play well together if done right.
I hope that their basic classes play something like essentials classes. Their upgraded melee classes are similar to 4e, but their casters end up near 3.5 ideals.
|
|
|
Post by whutaguy on Jan 29, 2012 12:35:11 GMT -8
Word. Forcing gms to give pcs loot almost EVERY SINGLE SESSION is mindless and trivializes magic items, especially if you want to play a low-magic campeign. One of the 4e Supplements (I think DarkSun) included a rule for "Inherent Bonuses". The idea here was to keep characters up on the math end without magic items, which are supposed to be rare in that setting. I'm not super familiar with the rules regarding this, but I believe there is an inherent bonuses check box on the DDI generator. Personally, I think magic items should be few but powerful, named, historical, and have personalities. Looking through the barrel of +1 swords at the village magic items shop is just wrong.
|
|
|
Post by jughead5187 on Jan 31, 2012 13:22:05 GMT -8
Yes it is called "inharent bonuses" It was implemented because WotC planned for everyone, everywhere to have magic itens starting during your second session, and a complete set shortly after lvl 13.
My dm actually informed me of his dilemma that he wanted a low-magic campeign and he only plays 4e. So i ended up showing him that magic check box...
But my.point is that WotC should have planned the other way. Most games i have played have been somewhat low magic. High magic is very rare fr my experience.
|
|
|
Post by whutaguy on Feb 1, 2012 3:09:33 GMT -8
Yes it is called "inharent bonuses" It was implemented because WotC planned for everyone, everywhere to have magic itens starting during your second session, and a complete set shortly after lvl 13. My dm actually informed me of his dilemma that he wanted a low-magic campeign and he only plays 4e. So i ended up showing him that magic check box... But my.point is that WotC should have planned the other way. Most games i have played have been somewhat low magic. High magic is very rare fr my experience. Most of my D&D experience has been pretty much the 4e way. D&D has very much been a set of equipment wielding a PC. Other Fantasy games less so. And for many years the tactical-skirmishing, mechanical cheese weasel, that I was, liked that just fine.
|
|
|
Post by jughead5187 on Feb 1, 2012 10:28:10 GMT -8
I am just thrilled that in "Next" (the term they are using for 5e) that WotC is heading back to pre-4e days in terms of items. Monsters and encounters are being calculated WITHOUT magic gear first. Then the dm can add on to the monsters defenses and atrack if the players are decked-out in magic gear
At least...thats what the alpha testers have reported so far
|
|
|
Post by jughead5187 on Feb 1, 2012 10:30:14 GMT -8
Another topic i would like to discuss is that currently, there are ZERO skills in the playtest. No stealth, perception, etc are listed.
We do not know if this is intentional or if this is the current plan for 5e.
What eould d&d be like with no skilld or skill points? Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Stu Venable on Feb 2, 2012 14:54:23 GMT -8
I don't remember skills in first edition.
Thieves had a series of skill tables for traps, lockpicking, etc. but that was about it.
Sent from my LS670 using ProBoards
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2012 15:50:39 GMT -8
What they've got to test with the family and friends rules is all the classes and spells/abilities. There's probably no skill system because it's still d20 and they've got the skills pretty much figured out.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2012 16:49:03 GMT -8
I don't remember skills in first edition. Thieves had a series of skill tables for traps, lockpicking, etc. but that was about it. It was so in ADnD 2nd as well, no skills before 3e. There were "non-weapon proficiencies" but those were something like "trained only" skills, like astrology, blacksmithing, tactics etc., the "themes" of 5e remind me of those. As for thieves I recall they had a "hide in shadows" ability and a "move silently"* one, but with my mage I would just tell the DM "I hide behind a rock and stand really still." without having to roll anything. *With my deep gnome thief I also had tunneling (at around 60%-70%) and dug a tunnel into the prison cell of another PC, that had jail time, to go out into the night to prove his innocence, and returned him to his cell every morning... good times. Oh, what happened to you DnD?? Now you're all skill chalenges and second winds and daily powers and 5 hour long combats...
|
|
|
Post by jughead5187 on Feb 3, 2012 6:44:33 GMT -8
Well, hopefully those super long combats go out the window. Back to skills- i was guessing that WotC was mainly testing the new com at systems. Probably why they did not include skills. Also, i wanted to bring it up here because it caused a HUGE hub-bub on their forums. In fact, the most vocal eople kept saying that there should be MORE skills and a MUCH longer skill list.
To be honest, i am glad that they consolidated the skills between 3- and 4e.
|
|