How to Homebrew for Next?

[pinohkio]

I understand that the thing hasn't even come out yet, but my friends and I are kind of underwhelmed with the range of class options in Next, and we want to try our hands at homebrewing (or at least porting) some builds from 3.5 as apparently there are several similarities? Forgive my ignorance if they're vastly different as I have never actually played 3.5, having jumped on the Dungeons and Dragons wagon late into 4e's life cycle, but from what I can gather it's not impossible to do this kind of thing.

Basically I'm wondering how we can homebrew without breaking the game from the DMs perspective. Feel free to discuss how you would go about porting pre-existing classes and abilities, I'm sure they'll come in handy for somebody.

(This might belong in the Homebrew forum, if it does could a mod please move it for me? Sorry, I'm new here :smallsmile:)

[Seerow]

There is really no point at all in homebrewing for a system that doesn't even have a core released yet. If you're not satisfied with the options available in the Next playtest packets, go back to playing another game for a few months until Next comes out.

[Thrudd]

Yeah, I'd wait until the game actually comes out. There's no telling what options will be available, nor what the rules will actually be. The Next packets are not complete games, there's no point trying to port anything over.

[Lokiare]

Yeah, I know as soon as it comes out I'm going to have to house rule an entire module of 4E stuff that will change the game by about 66%. Even I am waiting for it to come out though.

[Warskull]

Yeah, I know as soon as it comes out I'm going to have to house rule an entire module of 4E stuff that will change the game by about 66%. Even I am waiting for it to come out though.

If you are changing 2/3rds of the game, wouldn't it make more sense to start with 4th edition and then just replace certain rules with 5th edition rules?

[Lokiare]

If you are changing 2/3rds of the game, wouldn't it make more sense to start with 4th edition and then just replace certain rules with 5th edition rules?

Yes, it would. However I want to play a supported game. I'm also making a point about its compatibility with the 'balanced tactical options' crowd.

[Zweisteine]

Yeah, I know as soon as it comes out I'm going to have to house rule an entire module of 4E stuff that will change the game by about 66%. Even I am waiting for it to come out though.
Before you go about houseruling everything, I recommend trying it as is. Make sure you personally understand the system (As opposed to just following the internet's analyses) before you start changing it to more suit your tastes. And be sure to have an open mind.

[Lokiare]

Before you go about houseruling everything, I recommend trying it as is. Make sure you personally understand the system (As opposed to just following the internet's analyses) before you start changing it to more suit your tastes. And be sure to have an open mind.

I always have an open mind and I will definitely try it out as-is. I do have enough experience both as a game designer and a player/DM to understand by looking at the mechanics how it will work though. 5E simply doesn't give very many choice points. That's the simple truth of the matter.

[Envyus]

I always have an open mind and I will definitely try it out as-is. I do have enough experience both as a game designer and a player/DM to understand by looking at the mechanics how it will work though. 5E simply doesn't give very many choice points. That's the simple truth of the matter.

No it's the Lokiare predetermined opinion of the matter. As you don't know what the full game will be nor do you know of any of the books coming out that will give more choices.

[Lokiare]

No it's the Lokiare predetermined opinion of the matter. As you don't know what the full game will be nor do you know of any of the books coming out that will give more choices.

Well if we assume the developers aren't outright lying when they say that there won't be huge differences between the last play test and the final game, then its going to look very similar to what we have in the play test. Its not an opinion. Its a fact. Go through and count how many times you get to choose between different things at each level and then go through and count how many options you have to choose from during any given round. You'll find that 5E has the least amount from all the editions, unless you pick a specific build of 1-2 classes, then you beat out a few early editions with non-casters. Its not even close to the options of 3E and 4E. Its not even close to the options of 2E in many cases.

[Envyus]

Well if we assume the developers aren't outright lying when they say that there won't be huge differences between the last play test and the final game, then its going to look very similar to what we have in the play test. Its not an opinion. Its a fact. Go through and count how many times you get to choose between different things at each level and then go through and count how many options you have to choose from during any given round. You'll find that 5E has the least amount from all the editions, unless you pick a specific build of 1-2 classes, then you beat out a few early editions with non-casters. Its not even close to the options of 3E and 4E. Its not even close to the options of 2E in many cases.

You still don't know how much it will change so I want you stop talking about this. They still said there would be changes the math and everything mainly. So I would like you to shut up about how it has less options until the game is out. If does when the game is out then you can say this.

[archaeo]

Go through and count how many times you get to choose between different things at each level and then go through and count how many options you have to choose from during any given round. You'll find that 5E has the least amount from all the editions, unless you pick a specific build of 1-2 classes, then you beat out a few early editions with non-casters. Its not even close to the options of 3E and 4E. Its not even close to the options of 2E in many cases.

Without even really commenting on the merits of what you're saying, just counting up the number of choices you can make is a pretty coarse and silly way to make any claim about a game. The actually useful thing to look at is the number of meaningful choices you can make. Certainly, in 3e and 4e, there are numerous places where, despite there being a wide set of options to choose from, there are only a few really sensible feats or spells or what have you. Even if D&D Next has fewer of these options (in the PHB, at least, since no matter their promises about reducing splat content, the variety of everything will increase as the edition ages), if they are all mechanically distinct and valuable, you'll end up with the same number of options as a more bloated system.

And even if you do end up with fewer real choices to make in a given round of combat or whatever, that just isn't necessarily a bad thing for many players. No matter how incompetent you think WotC is, they couldn't have missed basic issues like "how long do players like combat to last." I've read lots of people praising the speed of Next's combat. Ideally, they'll have a tactical mod that slows down combat for people who like that kind of thing, but if not, then there'll be other games until the halcyon day where they make it happen.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

I recently worked the Warden from 4e back into 3.5, not completely done yet but I think it wouldn't be to much different to change the class from 4e to 5e.

Well maybe I'll just take the 3e version and change it to 5e since some of the work is already done...

[Lokiare]

You still don't know how much it will change so I want you stop talking about this. They still said there would be changes the math and everything mainly. So I would like you to shut up about how it has less options until the game is out. If does when the game is out then you can say this.

First off. I can say anything I want whenever I want. Secondly, until I see some proof that what you think is true is actually true, I will continue to make evaluations on the available evidence and claim that the game is going to very much like the last packet with some modified math and a few new classes.

The developers have not indicated that there are going to be more option points in the game. Don't get me wrong when 5E comes out, I don't expect there to be ten choices at each choice point. I'd be happy with 2-3 at each choice point, knowing that later expansions will add options. My main problem is you choose a race, class, and background at level 1, then you don't get another choice until you hit level 3 (unless you are a spell caster and then you get one choice at each level + more choices at different intervals), then you don't get another choice until you hit your feat levels. Across 20 levels you literally only get 5-7 choice points unless you are a caster. It wouldn't be a problem if they had non-caster classes that had lots of choice points when leveling and others that had few or none. That would be a game for everyone. Unfortunately WotC appears to be making 5E for only one play style.


Without even really commenting on the merits of what you're saying, just counting up the number of choices you can make is a pretty coarse and silly way to make any claim about a game. The actually useful thing to look at is the number of meaningful choices you can make. Certainly, in 3e and 4e, there are numerous places where, despite there being a wide set of options to choose from, there are only a few really sensible feats or spells or what have you. Even if D&D Next has fewer of these options (in the PHB, at least, since no matter their promises about reducing splat content, the variety of everything will increase as the edition ages), if they are all mechanically distinct and valuable, you'll end up with the same number of options as a more bloated system.

And even if you do end up with fewer real choices to make in a given round of combat or whatever, that just isn't necessarily a bad thing for many players. No matter how incompetent you think WotC is, they couldn't have missed basic issues like "how long do players like combat to last." I've read lots of people praising the speed of Next's combat. Ideally, they'll have a tactical mod that slows down combat for people who like that kind of thing, but if not, then there'll be other games until the halcyon day where they make it happen.

Yes, and no. What you say can be applied to games with lots of choices and choice points, however 5E is so choice point barren that it simply doesn't matter. It has around 5-7 choice points as you level up to level 20. This is abysmal for the players that like lots of choices and customizability.

[rlc]

Even if D&D Next has fewer of these options (in the PHB, at least, since no matter their promises reducing splat content, the variety of everything will increase as the edition ages), if they are all mechanically distinct and valuable, you'll end up with the same number of options as a more system.

This is what people always seem to forget about game sequels in the age of expansions (which actually might have been started by D&D, now that I think about it). You can't really compare something new with something that has been expanded and supported for years and years. It's like saying you're better than a baby because you're stronger. Just wait until that baby grows up a little bit, then decide which is better.

[Millennium]

If you are changing 2/3rds of the game, wouldn't it make more sense to start with 4th edition and then just replace certain rules with 5th edition rules?
Switching systems in the middle of a campaign is usually not a good idea, unless your campaign is specifically structured to use multiple systems. It's not like just adding a house rule: there are so many changes going on at once that you have little ability to gauge the way change A interacts with change B. Even when going between two systems as similar as 3.0 and 3.5, rules changes are still liable to make some things stop working that worked before, and vice versa, and often confusion reigns for quite some time. There's also a risk of overlooking some changes, littering your 5e campaign with 4e-isms or 3e-isms that nobody outside the group understands. When going between systems more different than that (as Next promises to be from either 4e or 3e), it gets even crazier.

Because of this, it's usually best to keep breaks clean. Finish your existing campaign under the system it started with, and then run a new campaign with the new system. If you're just finishing up a campaign, then either take a few weeks off until the new system comes out, or commit to an existing system for your next campaign and use the time to brush up on the 5e rules so that when it's time for the campaign after that, you're ready.

I'm actually facing something like this myself. My group just finished a long-running campaign, and my turn to DM has come up. I mentioned to the group that we could experiment with 5e if we were willing to wait for a couple of months. But we all agreed that switching in the middle was unlikely to work out, and they preferred to start the game sooner rather than experiment, so I'll be running 3e for a good while yet. But I plan to spend some time getting familiar with 5e, so that I can use it for the next campaign (or decide that it isn't for me, if things work out that way).