Export thread

D&D 5 Playtesting.

#1

Dave

Dave

Looks like I've been chosen to be a playtester for D&D 5. I already have the playtest docs and would like to start a game.

The biggest issue is that I am under an NDA and each member of the group would need to sign up at D&D Next as playtesters to be able to participate.

So let me know if you are interested.


#2

Ravenpoe

Ravenpoe

When will the sessions be? If it's a time I can play, I'll totally be down for it


#3

Dave

Dave

No idea right now. I'm gauging interest at this point.


#4

Allen who is Quiet

Allen who is Quiet

depends on the when and the how


#5

Dave

Dave

When depends on who will be participating. How will be determined soon.


#6

MindDetective

MindDetective

interested, but I imagine it is in a very raw stage, right?


#7

sixpackshaker

sixpackshaker

Interested, likely can't participate.

Just how old is 4 anyway?


#8

Hylian

Hylian

Would I need any prior knowledge on how to play? I ask cause although I have always wanted to play D&D I have never gotten the opportunity to play.


#9

MindDetective

MindDetective

I wouldn't think so.


#10

Allen who is Quiet

Allen who is Quiet

Hylian said:
Would I need any prior knowledge on how to play? I ask cause although I have always wanted to play D&D I have never gotten the opportunity to play.
Click to expand...
brand new edition in playtesting, so nobody has any prior knowledge how to play


#11

Hylian

Hylian

As long as I don't need to know how to play I would be all for it at least depending on the chosen times.


#12

Allen who is Quiet

Allen who is Quiet

If you play, at least give the rules a scan. Don't worry about learning everything. A lot of it you'll pick up as you go along.


#13

Hylian

Hylian

I would of course scan the rules I just meant as long as I didn't have to know everything inside and out


#14

Allen who is Quiet

Allen who is Quiet

Oh god no. Knowing everything is basically impossible. All you need to know is the vocabulary, how to calculate things, and what your character can do. And most of that should be written down beforehand.


#15

Dave

Dave

I'm looking at using this:

http://itabletop.com/

If I get the $30 version I can have up to 7 players. I won't, but I could.


#16

MindDetective

MindDetective

Why not just use MapTool?


#17

Dave

Dave

MindDetective said:
Why not just use MapTool?
Click to expand...
Dunno. That's an option, I guess. I haven't settled on a VT yet.


#18

MindDetective

MindDetective

A bunch of us already have MapTool installed and like it pretty well, is all. :)


#19

Allen who is Quiet

Allen who is Quiet

Dave, invent time travel and go back in time to back roll20 on kickstarter, allowing you to be a gm on that while it's in closed beta. That system is nice.


#20

Jay

Jay

Hey Dave, I'd be very interested to participate regardless of time and date.

Don't they have a built in campaign thing yet? I thought they were testing that last year?

If not, there's always MapTools.


#21

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

Moderate level of interest.


#22

Dave

Dave

The VT from Wizards I understand is broke as hell. I'll try and find some more in-depth information on it.

And you're right - I think I have used Maptools. I guess I just wasn't as big a fan as you guys.


#23

Jay

Jay

hc was a pro in it


#24

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

Do you actually need a table top?


#25

Dave

Dave

HCGLNS said:
Do you actually need a table top?
Click to expand...
It helps for visualizing strategic battles.


#26

KCWM

KCWM

I might be interested, depending on when and how frequent the games are and how they go down.

My Pathfinder group has slowed down and turned more towards Warhammer 40k, so it'd be nice to get some RPG stuff in.


#27

Jay

Jay

Any news?


#28

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

I signed up and got the download pack. Looks good so far, as long as everyone sticks to crunching the rules and not the PC's it should be very easy to do and we should be able to do it without a virtual table.


#29

Jay

Jay

Whoever leads this, I want in.


#30

Ravenpoe

Ravenpoe

Jay said:
Whoever leads this, I want in.
Click to expand...
Ditto


#31

Ravenpoe

Ravenpoe

So, I tried to download the playtest packet, and first I had to create a WotC account. No problem, right?

-This email and username is already in use-

Oh? I guess I already have an account, not surprising. I'll just log in using what my password should be...

-We are not able to log you in using this email and password.-

Oh, did I use something different? No problem, I'll just click forgot password and answer my security qu-

-We are unable to process your forgot password request at this time. Please contact customer service for further assistance-

....


#32

Dave

Dave

BRILLIANT!

I'm looking at the stuff today. I'll probably make a decision on Thursday.


#33

Ravenpoe

Ravenpoe

Whelp, I finally got it taken care of. Calling into customer service revealed that I made an account several years ago, and during some conversion of their databases or another, my information became corrupted.

It's fixed, and I'm now signed up.


#34

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20120528


#35

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

I'd be interested in this, but what exactly do I need to do?


#36

Dave

Dave

Interesting. I thought we couldn't talk about it. Maybe I will a bit more then in a little while. Tuesday back at work after a holiday is just nucking futs.


#37

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

AshburnerX said:
I'd be interested in this, but what exactly do I need to do?
Click to expand...

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/DnDNext.aspx

Sign up.
Validate Account.
Download Content.
Read
Play
Review


#38

fade

fade

I wouldn't mind doing this.


#39

Jay

Jay

HCGLNS said:
Download Content.
Click to expand...
I get to this part then the link I get by e-mail asks me over and over again to sign up to the next beta test.

The fuck?


#40

Jay

Jay

Found a link in the forums.


#41

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

Same with me, I have legally signed up and downloaded the content and lots of emails but can't log into the forums? WTF?


#42

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

Signed up and received my stuff as well.


#43

Jay

Jay

I'm calling shotgun on the rogue halfling...

I say... I may even have the lout's name....


#44

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

Um, Halfling rogue #1, #2, #3....


#45

Dave

Dave

Oh, and I get paid Friday, not Thursday. Dave apparently thought Sunday was Saturday, Monday was Sunday...


#46

Frank

Frank

How is the system so far for anyone that's read the materials?


#47

Jay

Jay

I'll have time to read it tomorrow night I hope.


#48

Frank

Frank

It's simplified 3.5 edition. Straight up.

Honestly, I like how the saves are determined.


#49

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

It's 3.5, with the addition of a few of the more popular elements from 4.0.


#50

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

I don't think that it is constructive to describe the game in terms of previous editions. I would suggest concentrating on analysing the system as written.

I like how Initiative is set up with regards to surprise, though I have reservations that new players especially those who are young will struggle with the idea of negative numbers.

I like the advantage/disadvantage system. It is clean and removes math from rolling. Plus rolling more dice is fun!

I do not like the critical hit system as written. It does not feel special enough for a critical hit.


#51

Dave

Dave

It's 3.5. I swear it is. I think they learned the lesson that 4e sucked.


#52

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

:facepalm:


#53

Reverent-one

Reverent-one

Really, it's an amalgam of old school D&D, 3.5, and 4e, with some new mechanics mixed in as well. Which is not surprising given their stated intentions of bringing together the D&D player base.


#54

fade

fade

I really don't think it's possible to evaluate this without comparing it to what you already know. I don't particularly see the problem with that either. After all, presumably they came out with a new edition to address things about the old. I think that makes it quite constructive.


#55

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

It is in reality almost a reprint of the Griffons RPG from the late 80's


#56

fade

fade

I like it. They managed to make it a bit more realistic by giving hit points a good explanation, and by moving minor spells that almost everyone is going to take to at-will actions. I would like to play the human cleric.


#57

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20120604

^This is awesome and a long time in coming.


#58

Dave

Dave

The VTT platform we will be using is called Roll20. It looks bloody amazing.

I will be posting a link to the campaign tonight when I get home so people can come in and take a look and we can play around. Once we get our core and figure some stuff out, I'll set about finalizing the roster and characters - possibly even going so far as randomizing who plays what character if more than a few want to play the same guy or gal. Please note that while this has video integration, if you do not want to log in using a webcam you will not be required to, although a microphone of some sort would be preferred.

So game? Check.
VTT? Check.
Players? Getting there.
Game time? Unknown until we finalize the player roster.

Looking to start the campaign as early as next week.


#59

Allen who is Quiet

Allen who is Quiet

Roll20 is amazing. It's the best.


#60

Jay

Jay

I'm iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiin.


#61

Dave

Dave

*snip*

I'm in checking a few things now.


#62

sixpackshaker

sixpackshaker

Just signed up. I'll download the stuff tonight.


#63

ncts_dodge_man

ncts_dodge_man

Love to play, but am unsure about free time - my wife works a lot of nights so I'm watching my 3 and a half year old by myself.

Maybe the next round.


#64

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

I just need to know about it in advance, so I can finish reading up the new rules.


#65

Jay

Jay

Same


#66

Ravenpoe

Ravenpoe

^What they said. But awesomer, because it's from me.


#67

Jay

Jay

oAFbf.gif


I just wanted to bump this thread....

and wanted to make you not forget this bump.


#68

Dave

Dave

Wow. That's a hell of a bump. Okay, if you are interested, PM ME the following:

Day of the week preference.
Time preference - I'm initially looking at 7-10 pm CT. I can move the times an hour or two if need be. Maybe shorten it to 2 hours. Whatever.
Will you be using a headset to talk? Yes/No
Will you be on a webcam for video interaction? Yes/No

By the way, the webcam is NOT necessary, but the microphone certainly is.

What race/class of character do YOU prefer? I will look at this and get as close as I can.

If I get more than 5 people interested, I'll hold some sort of random thing to pick the five that will play in the campaign. For the playtest, we can have more as I'll be testing certain aspects of the game before we start an actual campaign.

Please note the software platform I'll be using does NOT require a download of any sort, but you will need to be signed up for the beta to play and have downloaded the pdf files from the source.

I think that's about it. MY preference is either Tuesday or Wednesday nights. But I'm flexible for a time. My comedy group does rehearse on Thursday nights when we have a gig coming up but that's not until September or October at this point.


#69

Jay

Jay

PMed!


#70

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

Same.


#71

Dave

Dave

Looks like the game will be Fridays at 7:30 CT (8:30 ET). Sorry to all you guys overseas. We do have space for one more comfortably.


#72

MindDetective

MindDetective

Hmmm...I might be able to do that, actually.


#73

MindDetective

MindDetective

Does it take a while for the registration e-mail to arrive?


#74

Dave

Dave

Mine was pretty fast.


#75

MindDetective

MindDetective

Hmmm...still haven't gotten it. :-\


#76

Dave

Dave

Well, I've added you and we don't start for a week so no worries, man. Don't stress it.


#77

@Li3n

@Li3n

What i want to know is if you can do this:



#78

Dave

Dave

No, because it's stupid. A bear cannot be a character class. But let 4chan tell you their humorous bullshit stories.


#79

@Li3n

@Li3n

Dave said:
No, because it's stupid. A bear cannot be a character class. But let 4chan tell you their humorous bullshit stories.
Click to expand...
You're not the DM of me... :p


#80

Covar

Covar

@Li3n said:
What i want to know is if you can do this:

Click to expand...
Funnier on Animaniacs.


#81

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

Dave said:
No, because it's stupid. A bear cannot be a character class. But let 4chan tell you their humorous bullshit stories.
Click to expand...
It could if it was a human suffering from a Baleful Polymorph or other involuntary/voluntary shape change. It just couldn't use weapons (unless a specially designed fist weapon), tools, and would need specially made armor. Basically, it could be done but it would be a pain in the ass. It would be really, really stupid.

But yes, it's based on a sketch from Animaniacs.


#82

@Li3n

@Li3n

Covar said:
Funnier on Animaniacs.
Click to expand...
But this end so much better... poor chicken.



Also:

reddit said:
play as half dragon monk
silver scales on belly/underside
DM being ultimate dick throws lycanthrope at us, nothing we do seems to even dent the fucker.
Grapple-check passes.
Monks allowed to use ANY part of body as weapon.
Hump/pelvic thrust lycanthrope to death with silver scales on crotch.
I'm a terrible storyteller I know, but damned if I don't find a way to WIN.
Click to expand...


#83

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20120625


#84

@Li3n

@Li3n

AshburnerX said:
It could if it was a human suffering from a Baleful Polymorph or other involuntary/voluntary shape change. It just couldn't use weapons (unless a specially designed fist weapon), tools, and would need specially made armor. Basically, it could be done but it would be a pain in the ass. It would be really, really stupid.
Click to expand...
Or: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monstersAsRaces.htm


#85

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

HCGLNS said:
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20120625
Click to expand...
I kind of agree with them about Cleric healing. If my choices are between healing a measly 1d8 points of damage with Cure Light Wounds or using Searing Light to kill a guy so you don't get damaged in the first place, I'm always going to use the Searing Light unless your in pretty desperate straits. This is especially true considering how many Hit Dice we get to use and how easy it is to get them back.


#86

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

AshburnerX said:
This is especially true considering how many Hit Dice we get to use and how easy it is to get them back.
Click to expand...
Could you elaborate please?


#87

Hailey Knight

Hailey Knight

HCGLNS said:
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20120625
Click to expand...
I think that the feedback so far points out that the rules need to supply several options for DMs. My sense is that the game's lethality has a strong tie to a DM's sense of what D&D should feel like, especially when looking at a specific campaign. A DM who wants to run a swashbuckling campaign inspired by The Three Musketeers has very different needs than one who wants a much more lethal campaign where combat is always a bad idea unless you have an overwhelming advantage. Embracing that idea is going to be key to giving people the rules they want.
Click to expand...
This is an example of understanding their costumers. I approve, even though the dozen or so 4th edition books my wife has in the closet are about to be pointless.


#88

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

HCGLNS said:
Could you elaborate please?
Click to expand...
It's sort of like Healing Surges from 4th.

OK, you get 2 of your hit dice at level 1. These are the same dice you would use to roll for your HP. However, you can also use them to recover HP by taking a Short Rest action, if you have a healing kit (or someone shares theirs). It takes 10 minutes, uses up a use from your healing kit, but it lets you roll as many Hit Die as you want (up to your max) to recover HP. So for instance, if you had 2d8 for Hit Die, you could roll 1d8+your Con modifer to recover that many HP and then roll ANOTHER 1d8+Con Mod if you still needed to recover more. It's sort of like having almost free, personal healing spells that you can use between fights. But once you've used up a Hit Die, it's gone till you've spent a Long Rest.

A Long Rest is 8 hours long. Doing this gives you back ALL of your lost HP, plus your spent Hit Dice and lets you re-memorize your spells. You can only do it once during a 24-hour period.


#89

Jay

Jay

I like what they wrote. We'll see how things pan out in a month or two.


#90

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

AshburnerX , I meant elaborate on why you think that self healing is a lot of healing. In 4E you could self heal a average minimum of 175% of your health every day, in this iteration your average minimum is now about 40% and the most min maxed pc only ever caps out at 133% self healing. So until we have a fair assessment of how much damage our PC's take on average how can you make a statement that self healing is enough?

Right now our characters have an HP pool of 86 hit points and can self heal and average 33% of that. If we use magic, that total rises to 57%.

No one wants clerics to be come statistical heal bots, but right now the mechanics don't suggest they should be anything else, especially the cleric of Pelor.


#91

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

See, I haven't played an actual game of 4th yet. I wasn't aware of just how many surges you got and how much healing that meant. I only knew it was a similar concept. Are your calculations taking into account the fact that you get to add your Con modifier to each additional Hit Die? I think that would skew the percentage a bit higher.

I think we're gonna need to see how it works when we fight an actual tough battle. 3/3.5 didn't have healing surges, but using your healing spells in it was just about the worst choice you could make as a cleric. It was almost always a better idea to use your spells to disable and kill the enemy because it was simply easier and more efficient to do so. Then again, now that Clerics have a powerful Orison attack spell, it might not be so necessary.

I actually think Radiant Lance is too good, especially compared to Shocking Grasp. It's about the same damage, but being ranged it's a much safer bet. It kinda makes me wonder why Pelor carries a weapon at all, as I'd always use the spell unless firing into a mixed melee of enemies and allies or was silenced in some fashion.


#92

Frank

Frank

That spell kind of goes against how I've come to see the 9 levels of magic (this is mostly Pathfinder's doing). Divine offensive magic is generally a step behind Arcane (a 3rd level arcane offensive spell would be comparable to a 4th level divine, etc).


#93

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

The difference between divine and arcane casting is divine knows fewer spells, can cast fewer spells but can cast any spell they know. Arcane know more spells, cast more spells but must select them at the start of the day.


#94

Frank

Frank

That's the difference between spontaneous (sorcerer, oracle (pathfinder), I think favored soul in 3.5) and memorized (wizards, clerics) casters.


#95

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

So far in the playtest clerics are spontaneous casters now. Before they used to be memorized but could sub in CLW etc instead.

One thing that really bothers me from the article is this

For clerics, we're looking at moving healing out of the spell list and making it easy to cast a healing spell and do something such as attack during your turn. We hope that this move lets clerics feel like they have more options than just patching up the rest of the party, while they can also prepare spells such as bless or cause fear with the chance to actually use them, rather than cash them out for healing.​
Click to expand...
To me it implies that they are devising a way for a cleric to heal and take an action on their turn. Solidly against that idea, it's a slippery slope to me of becoming the disaster that has befallen 4E. I would much rather prefer that they stick with Action/Movement and stay as far away from including other pseudo-actions as they can.

What I like about CLWs is that it is a HitDie less healing and costs a spell slot. HitDie less healing should have a steep price. I am also open to a cantrip for clerics that allows for HitDie healing. ie: You call out to your gods to heal your comrade and they can spend a hit die and gain some other bonus.


#96

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

Yeah, I could get behind that. Make the "free" healing cost a spell level, but make the orison version go off hit die and give the option of using the Cleric's wisdom bonus instead of the target's Con bonus if it's higher. Make sure it can only be used in battle so Clerics don't pop it off instead of using a short rest.

And it looks like they want to make the healing a class ability instead of a spell.


#97

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

Read an idea of making it a Reaction. So if someone takes damage you cast the reaction spell instantly and allow them to use a HD + your Magic Modifier. Would be slightly better than out of combat healing and as a reaction would not be allowed out of combat.

Lots of pitfalls to healing mechanics, make it too much player based it alienates the pc, make it too easy to obtain and it trivializes combat, make it too abundant and it lengthens combat to the point of boredom. It's something 4e got very wrong, the made self healing powerful and assisted healing powerful hoping to make for exciting, quick and frequent combat, it ended up in trivial combats or incredibly long combats and a massive reliance of assisted healers. Since your unfamiliar with the 4e mechanics, each player has a set number of surges they can use per day, average is 7. Each surge is 25% of your health, you can self heal 1 surge per encounter or every 5 minutes outside of combat. Assisted healing is surgeless (rare) or use a surge, gain its value +X from the healer. And then they slap booked the crap out of it and made is silly. My bland fighter can self heal 450% of their health each day or when assisted over 700%, resulting in very long combats of average damage or very fast combats of massive damage and my healer spamming us every round with straight heals and combo heals and zone heals .....


#98

Jay

Jay

That's because GMs never took advantage of draining people's healing surges. When I had mobs who did that, my players went... whoa whoa...... we got to stop this monster ASAP.

Some things in 4th edition didn't work. Some classes simply had too many healing surges. I always contemplated the half the surges idea but I wasn't sure how the players would take it... so I made combat always hard for them.

But it doesn't have to be the complete opposite in 5th.

I never liked the fact a healer was forced to heal in earlier editions... no one wants that, no one would want to play a healer but if they are given special considerations to their actions, we used to have that... it was called Minor Actions and very little could be used in that... a Rogue can definitely take advantage of that to try to hide as well.

I don't particularly like the concept of 2 options in combat with no OA. That's just me though.


#99

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

Jay said:
Minor Actions and very little could be used in that... a Rogue can definitely take advantage of that to try to hide as well.

I don't particularly like the concept of 2 options in combat with no OA. That's just me though.
Click to expand...
The fewer actions for me the better. My tabletop campaign takes 20 minutes per round. They are filled with people with long faces waiting for their turn as people take an action then a minor action then a minor action as a move action then an action point then an immediate action before ever getting to OA, and none of the minor actions are inconsiderate. Move and act, and possibly react. Clean and simple.

As it stands right now, hiding as anything other than an action is too powerful. Hiding is a defensive action, but grants the rogue offensive abilities. If you were to hide and attack each round, monsters go from being able to hit you 40% of the time to 7%, your ability to hit increases 19% and your ability to crit almost doubles, your average damage increases by at least 33% and to me theatrically does not make sense.


#100

Frank

Frank

HCGLNS said:
So far in the playtest clerics are spontaneous casters now. Before they used to be memorized but could sub in CLW etc instead.
Click to expand...
Oh, that's my mistake then. I never did get around to reading the classes in the playtest stuff before I went wandering. I just assumed it was so much like 3.5 they would have left the cleric, the undisputed most powerful class, relatively alone.


#101

Jay

Jay

HCGLNS said:
The fewer actions for me the better. My tabletop campaign takes 20 minutes per round. They are filled with people with long faces waiting for their turn as people take an action then a minor action then a minor action as a move action then an action point then an immediate action before ever getting to OA, and none of the minor actions are inconsiderate. Move and act, and possibly react. Clean and simple.

As it stands right now, hiding as anything other than an action is too powerful. Hiding is a defensive action, but grants the rogue offensive abilities. If you were to hide and attack each round, monsters go from being able to hit you 40% of the time to 7%, your ability to hit increases 19% and your ability to crit almost doubles, your average damage increases by at least 33% and to me theatrically does not make sense.
Click to expand...
But it's boring to play!


#102

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

Jay said:
But it's boring to play!
Click to expand...
I would rather do less things more often than do more things less frequently.

Unless you were referring to the Rogue/hide scenario. It shouldn't take a "I'm going to give myself +6 to AC, +4 to hit and double damage for no significant reason" button to make it interesting to play a Rogue.


#103

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

They are already talking about adding "maneuvers" to Fighters to make their role more interesting. They are probably going to do the same for Rogues.


#104

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

AshburnerX said:
They are already talking about adding "maneuvers" to Fighters to make their role more interesting. They are probably going to do the same for Rogues.
Click to expand...
I'm kind of torn on this. I like the idea of non-core modules that can be selected for games. I would rather this than the inevitable creep that sets in.

But my gut reaction feels different. 4E as a game was very good at telling you what you can do in combat. Yet in doing so, it was very bad at getting you to do more than what they told you. I like the open endedness of the system so far, I had no power card to tell me I could tackle the kobold chieftain, yet I did it.

Soon I want to try:

- putting my shoulder behind my shield and pushing an enemy away from another PC.

- using my short stature and high strength to chop-block a target

- throwing dirt into a targets eyes to grant advantage to other pc's attacks


#105

Jay

Jay

+4 to hit? Double damage? eh?


#106

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

Attacking while hidden grants you advantage, which on average grants you +4 to hit (+3.8....) and you get to apply your sneak attack damage for 1d6 at first, 2d6 at second, 3d6 at third... combined with your increased chance of critical hits with advantage your average damage should at least double.


#107

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

HCGLNS said:
I'm kind of torn on this. I like the idea of non-core modules that can be selected for games. I would rather this than the inevitable creep that sets in.

But my gut reaction feels different. 4E as a game was very good at telling you what you can do in combat. Yet in doing so, it was very bad at getting you to do more than what they told you. I like the open endedness of the system so far, I had no power card to tell me I could tackle the kobold chieftain, yet I did it.

Soon I want to try:

- putting my shoulder behind my shield and pushing an enemy away from another PC.

- using my short stature and high strength to chop-block a target

- throwing dirt into a targets eyes to grant advantage to other pc's attacks
Click to expand...
That last one sounds more Rogueish.


#108

Frank

Frank

HCGLNS said:
I'm kind of torn on this. I like the idea of non-core modules that can be selected for games. I would rather this than the inevitable creep that sets in.

But my gut reaction feels different. 4E as a game was very good at telling you what you can do in combat. Yet in doing so, it was very bad at getting you to do more than what they told you. I like the open endedness of the system so far, I had no power card to tell me I could tackle the kobold chieftain, yet I did it.

Soon I want to try:

- putting my shoulder behind my shield and pushing an enemy away from another PC.

- using my short stature and high strength to chop-block a target

- throwing dirt into a targets eyes to grant advantage to other pc's attacks
Click to expand...
So, bullrush, trip and dirty trick?


#109

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

Actually that's the opposite of what I want. Though I believe WoTC will have something like that for their combat module, by defining the manoeuvre you are limiting it before I ever attempt it.


#110

Jay

Jay

All this play testing has gotten me.... motivated.... I missed playing a good game of D&D....

So that I can create more epic videos like this.



Watch in HD!


#111

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

AshburnerX said:
They are already talking about adding "maneuvers" to Fighters to make their role more interesting. They are probably going to do the same for Rogues.
Click to expand...
http://community.wizards.com/dndnext/blog/2012/06/27/modularity_and_combat_subsystems


#112

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

So maneuvers are basically just effects you can add to attacks for a penelty (except Fighters, who don't have the penalty)? That works. It's simple and you know it'll do, but you can fluff it any way you want. Plus it's easy to homebrew new ones.


#113

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

Happy Canada Day!

Don't say I never gave you anything for it!

http://donjon.bin.sh/d20/dungeon/


#114

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

http://wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20120702


#115

Dave

Dave

Thoughts on what I like and what I do not.

  • I think there still needs to be attacks of opportunity. Being able to run through a gauntlet of enemies without fear of reprisals just seems to be idiotic. At the very least it can be a free attack with disadvantage. They'll probably miss but the attack still happens.
  • The fact that certain skills are based the way they are make no sense. For example, the Rogue's main skills are brought about using WIS. Now, I don't know about you, but being a thief means that you probably lack that little voice in your head that says, "Stealing that is a bad idea." Most rogues in literature would have had excruciatingly bad WIS scores. I know that this can be argued and debated, but finding/removing traps should be INT based. It's not like you are just seeing something out of the corner of your eye - you are actively looking for signs of a trap; a slight indentation in the wall, a telltale discoloration of a lock that may mean a poison needle. Things like that. So it is now INT.
  • So let's look at what that means for our little thief guy. If he has training in a thieving skill, every check he makes is automatically going to be at LEAST a 14. That's not even counting a stat bonus. This means an automatic success on trivial-moderate level traps. All traps would have to be advanced or above, and even then his lowest chance to succeed in advanced is 80%. Extreme is 60-75% success and Master level is 40-55%. Hell, even Immortal level DCs start at 35%success rate and don't hit 0% until the DC hits 34! Throw in a skill bonus and that makes these even more ridiculous. So do I think the thief is broken? Yes. But not in the way that Jay thinks. At 2nd level it gets even worse because of the Knack ability. So the fact that he's not that great in combat does not bother me. Does this mean there's no real good combat rogue? Maybe, maybe not. We haven't seen a lot of the other themes or backgrounds. But if Jay wants a combat oriented rogue I'll work with him, but he'll lose the Skill Mastery ability.
  • Fighter remains unchanged.
  • Cleric of Moridin remains the same.
  • Cleric of Pelor is overpowered but I'm not sure how to dial him back without totally nerfing him. He has one almost certain killing attack but he can only use that twice per day - Searing Light. But he also has one that he can use at will from 50 feet away that does more damage than any other attack in melee with the exception of the fighter's greataxe. If I nerf anything, it'l be the damage of the Radiant Lance. Make it d6+ability damage instead. It will do double damage against undead as it's radiant.
  • Wizard remains pretty much the same.
Okay, so what about making of characters? Well, use the stats I gave you in the PM & place them where you want. For right now let's leave the other stuff where it's at - themes, etc. We don't have enough to go on to make a call either way for those. If you want to get different skills you can by swapping out the ones you've got for ones in the list.
Questions?


#116

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

The change to Radiant Lance sounds fine to me. It actually gives me a reason to use my melee weapon now. And Searing Light is balanced by it using the same pool as Cure Light Wounds, which (as the last battle indicated) can be the difference between living and dying. It sort of a "last resort" spell, it seems.

Are we doing the full hit die at level one thing, or do you want us to roll the hit die? Remember, your HP at level 1 is Con + Hit Die, not Hit Die + Con Mod.

Can we switch spells for others on our spell list? For instance, I know I wanted Command instead of Spiritual Hammer, mainly because I could see a reason to use it (I don't want to kill someone), where as I really don't see the point of Spiritual Hammer.

Otherwise, I'm basically ready to turn in a character sheet.


#117

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

Well Spiritual Hammer makes a melee attack as if it were you, so terribly. Might be more effective if it used your magic modifier instead of Str to attack.

The changes to Radiant Lance won't do much at all, the 18 Wis is the big factor in that spell.


#118

Dave

Dave

As long as the spells stay the same level you are fine.

I like the magic mod on magical melee attacks.


#119

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

HCGLNS said:
Well Spiritual Hammer makes a melee attack as if it were you, so terribly. Might be more effective if it used your magic modifier instead of Str to attack.
Click to expand...
Which would still make it less effective than a Searing Light, except against several enemies you could kill in a single hit. Basically, it's worthless.

HCGLNS said:
The changes to Radiant Lance won't do much at all, the 18 Wis is the big factor in that spell.
Click to expand...
Probably, thought I'd also point to the extra +2 that Wizards and Clerics get to their attack rolls on top of their modifier. No other classes get that extra bonus to attack, even Fighters (who would benefit from it the most). Maybe we should drop the extra +2 as well?

EDIT: K, Dave. Then I think my sheet is ready. Just need to know the details for HP.

Attachments



#120

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

AshburnerX said:
Probably, thought I'd also point to the extra +2 that Wizards and Clerics get to their attack rolls on top of their modifier. No other classes get that extra bonus to attack, even Fighters (who would benefit from it the most). Maybe we should drop the extra +2 as well?
Click to expand...
Fighters get an undocumented +3 and Rogues an undocumented +2, so clearly they want them there for some reason, so we should keep the magical ones.[DOUBLEPOST=1341540246][/DOUBLEPOST]I am OK with you learning Command so long as you use it to make a monster "Macarena!"


#121

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

HCGLNS said:
I am OK with you learning Command so long as you use it to make a monster "Macarena!"
Click to expand...
No no... it would be "Thriller!"


#122

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

Only if they are Undead though.



#123

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

Dave said:
  • I think there still needs to be attacks of opportunity. Being able to run through a gauntlet of enemies without fear of reprisals just seems to be idiotic. At the very least it can be a free attack with disadvantage. They'll probably miss but the attack still happens.
Click to expand...
They are looking to build upon the Reaction System to help with this.
http://community.wizards.com/dndnext/blog/2012/06/22/reacting_to_the_reaction
The goal is to clean up the game of reaction creep that 4th and 3rd had become.


#124

Ravenpoe

Ravenpoe

I'm not going to be able to play tonight. I've still got family in for the fourth weekend celebration.


#125

Dave

Dave

We'll call this a character building night. I have stuff as well, but can be there for a while.


#126

Jay

Jay

I made plans as well. Furthermore, posting this stuff on a Thursday night for the next night isn't optimal to discuss things properly... because we clearly didn't discuss things at all. I'm not even close to agreeing with what was decided in the post above regarding rogues.

The main issue was the terrible stat allocation for the rogue character, not to change how certain skill checks are done for all classes.... and not without further discussion regarding it and how it'll affect others. Wisdom has nothing to do with the fact rogues aren't wise but rather a personal choice on how they align and take advantage of others. In fact, they should have more wisdom than the norm.

To discuss unlocking traps/door and whatnot without even encountering one and making massive changes isn't advisable. Perhaps if players would take their characters a bit more seriously instead of blindly running into halls and getting flanked by three sides we could have worked on the non-combat mechanics of the game a bit but we clearly didn't. My character was obviously built for skill checks, others for combat. So why change the whole system?

Fighters can go in and hit enemies every turn for 15+ damage at the first level... the best a rogue can do is around 10. If they take a turn to hide, they can buff that a bit but the damage is no where close to the other classes with current hiding mechanics. So ummm yeah, that skill check advantage stays and DC checks should be in line for the character levels. No "Master locks" in newbie dungeon LVL 1 please. People have complained EXTENSIVELY in 4th edition how "all classes can do any skill check, no experts, 4th is lame" but the moment in 5th edition a class is specifically good at a specific skill of their trade, they want to destroy it? That's hypocritical at best. You can't have it both ways.

Lastly, there were no discussion about how ridiculous a 30 foot main radius of a sling is and how anything beyond that range is a disadvantage. So even if I use a turn to hide and then attack something at 35 feet away, I'm just wasting my time playing that night as my advantage gets nullified when clerics and wizards can cast spells clearly across rooms without any problems, some of them with auto-hit mechanics to their spells. If I waste a turn hiding for a sneak attack, odds are most enemies will move out of range. Broken.


#127

Dave

Dave

I posted it on Thursday night because that was when I finished it. It is a holiday week, ya know. There was stuff going on I didn't account for.


#128

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

Jay said:
Lastly, there were no discussion about how ridiculous a 30 foot main radius of a sling is and how anything beyond that range is a disadvantage. So even if I use a turn to hide and then attack something at 35 feet away, I'm just wasting my time playing that night as my advantage gets nullified when clerics and wizards can cast spells clearly across rooms without any problems, some of them with auto-hit mechanics to their spells. If I waste a turn hiding for a sneak attack, odds are most enemies will move out of range. Broken.
Click to expand...
We talked about that during the actual session (which you probably don't remember because you were pretty pissed at that point). We all agreed that was bullshit, and Dave was going to increase the range of the sling to something more reasonable. I think it was going to be like double the min range, so that would make it 60? That would put it over Radiant Lance, especially with the damage reduction we're giving that spell, but not over a bow or crossbow (which SHOULD have range advantage over a sling).

Jay said:
The main issue was the terrible stat allocation for the rogue character, not to change how certain skill checks are done for all classes.... and not without further discussion regarding it and how it'll affect others. Wisdom has nothing to do with the fact rogues aren't wise but rather a personal choice on how they align and take advantage of others. In fact, they should have more wisdom than the norm.
Click to expand...
There really isn't any point for a Rogue to have Str anymore, since they let you add your Dex Mod to damage in certain cases now. I think the only time you'd need it is if you were going to use a Mighty Bow or something. So yes, Stat allocation is crap for the test Rogue. You'll be able to do better when making your own.

Jay said:
Fighters can go in and hit enemies every turn for 15+ damage at the first level... the best a rogue can do is around 10. If they take a turn to hide, they can buff that a bit but the damage is no where close to the other classes with current hiding mechanics. So ummm yeah, that skill check advantage stays and DC checks should be in line for the character levels. No "Master locks" in newbie dungeon LVL 1 please. People have complained EXTENSIVELY in 4th edition how "all classes can do any skill check, no experts, 4th is lame" but the moment in 5th edition a class is specifically good at a specific skill of their trade, they want to destroy it? That's hypocritical at best. You can't have it both ways.
Click to expand...
I think we're losing sight of something: We're not entirely sure how skills improve (if they improve) as you level. This might not be an issue later on down the road, as a harder, better designed dungeon may simply be that much harder for a rogue to tackle. I think we should leave it alone for now and come back to it later if it does plainly become a problem.


#129

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

Slings through the editions

5E/D&DN
Regular range 30'
Maximum 120' with disadvantage

4E
Normal 50'
Long range 100' with -2 to hit

3.5
50' range increment with a -2 to hit for every additional 50'

2nd
Normal 150'
Long range 300' with -2 to hit
Extreme range 600' with -5 to hit


#130

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

So yeah. They just nerfed the sling for some reason. We'll just house rule it back to normal.


#131

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

They've changed it for each addition, so you can't say that it's nerfed.

If your target is 105' away
5e - can hit it with disadvantage (~ -3.8 to hit)
4e - can not hit it under any circumstances
3.5 - can hit it at -4 to hit
2nd - hits it normally


#132

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

Ironically, 2nd is probably the only realistic depiction.


#133

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

Sling is the only ranged weapon with a decreased normal range from 4th and it's the distance weapon assigned to a character most likely to use it. They must have done that for a reason. And they also gave it weird damage and bonuses to hit. It's almost like they want us to use the playtest characters and see how they work with the new rules.


#134

Ravenpoe

Ravenpoe

HCGLNS said:
Sling is the only ranged weapon with a decreased normal range from 4th and it's the distance weapon assigned to a character most likely to use it. They must have done that for a reason. And they also gave it weird damage and bonuses to hit. It's almost like they want us to use the playtest characters and see how they work with the new rules.
Click to expand...
That's crazy talk right there.


#135

Dave

Dave

As I stated before, the sling range was going to be moved to 50'. Nothing else combat-wise for the rogue is going to happen at this point because of his overpowering non-combat stuff. If we want to have a combat-oriented rogue (i.e. more combat abilities) then he'll lose the automatic 10 roll on the skill die.

It's only fair.


#136

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

Read, Review and Repent

http://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/comments/v2cu5/ama_mike_mearls_head_of_dd_research_and_design_at/


#137

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

New Survey out today!


#138

Jay

Jay

Did they fix rogues yet?


#139

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

Given that the entire play test is about the testing the essential mechanics of the game and has nothing to do with the characters used to test it, no the rogues are not fixed because they were never broken.


#140

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

It looks like they want to pare down the spell list to the important stuff. I kinda agree: there were TONS of spells that were useful, but you'd never want most of them every day.

It's still not all that important as a feature yet.


#141

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

I took it as more of a survey of what is iconic D&D and they will look into making sure those stay in the game.


#142

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20120730

Interesting.


#143

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

Brand new packet for all to enjoy!

Everything is changed and different and sort of the same and different and sort of the same and ...


#144

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

It's good they added some stuff to make Fighters and Rogues a bit more interesting.


#145

Jay

Jay

Rogues don't suck a dick anymore?


#146

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

Jay said:
Rogues don't suck a dick anymore?
Click to expand...
Sorta. Pre-gen is completely different. Better stats and a more useful speciality (You don't lose advantage against a creature if you start that turn hidden). It really feels like they want Rogues to engage in melee. Pre-gen doesn't start with a ranged weapon. The addition of schemes changes how a Rogue plays.

The Thug scheme gives you more ways to sneak attack and makes it more effective, but your less stealthy because of it. The starting one lets you do sneak attack damage if two or more allies are within reach of the target. Your also unable to be surprised while you can act.

The Thief scheme gives you better stealth and mobility. You get the normal hiding stuff, plus night vision and a way to escape after using your sneak attack.

So it's definitely better, but I wouldn't know how much without playing. I think reintroducing attacks of opportunity had a lot to do with how the game is going to play now.


#147

Jay

Jay

Thanks for the info.

Though I always preferred the ranged rogue, shooting at stuff in the dark then going back into the darkness.


#148

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

That's only the scheme they have NOW. There really isn't anything preventing them or another person from making a ranged scheme. Though I'm actually glad they finally put a ranged build in for Fighters.


#149

HCGLNS

HCGLNS

I like the character generation process, be interesting to put it into a table form and see how it all plays out. The whole Lore skills are kinda silly.

The rogue as a whole went from being overpowered to incredibly overpowered


#150

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

HCGLNS said:
I like the character generation process, be interesting to put it into a table form and see how it all plays out. The whole Lore skills are kinda silly.

The rogue as a whole went from being overpowered to incredibly overpowered
Click to expand...
I think they should move Skill Mastery into it's own Scheme and break up it's two parts. Make the Take 10 bit it's level 5 ability. That would basically fix it. At least most the Take 10 bit to a Scheme instead of making it default.

Clerics got hit pretty hard, but not too hard. Kinda want to make a Law domain.


#151

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

New update! Sorcerer and Warlock classes! Sorcerer is completely different in how it runs! Warlock is the same!


Top