D&D 5th Edition: the fifth edition of the discussion thread

[Draz74]

Not to be snarky, but are there, really? I don't think I've ever met one.

Sure.

In my experience (which is admittedly a shaky sample size, which probably shouldn't be used to draw conclusions about the demographic as a whole), they tend to be the same segment of players who don't particularly enjoy combat. They're there to roleplay, rather than to play a tactical wargames (whereas most of us on this forum prefer a mix of both).

... which does raise the question as to whether the "super simple" class for these people should be the Fighter archetype, as opposed to, say, the Rogue. But like I said, limited sample size, probably shouldn't draw conclusions.

(Would people like that be better off playing some other RPG system rather than D&D? Probably. But D&D is easier to get a playgroup together for, since it's more well-known.)

In my opinion it's FAR easier to take a complex system and make it simple via a module, than it is to make a complex system a module.

Really? This general statement immediately baffles me. It runs entirely contrary to my experience.

I mean if you have the complex option as core, writing a module to make it simple is as easy as saying "Take the average value of your combat superiority dice and apply it as a flat bonus to all damage rolls". Now you have an ultra simple fighter. It's weaker, but no options is ALWAYS weaker than options.

Not always. I mean, for a 3.5e example, try comparing a Truenamer to a Hulking Hurler ... at Level 8. One strong option is better than a big pile of nigh-useless options. But this is all a sidetrack ... my point is, it is possible (although very difficult) to balance power vs. versatility, in spite of what many optimizers have been led to believe by their 3.5e experience.

But sure. This is doable.

On the other hand, starting with a simple fighter, a module would need to include the combat superiority mechanic, and tons of options for that mechanic.

True ... but what's wrong with that? I mean, it seems like more work when you're just looking at the task of writing the module, but it's really not any more work overall. Because your previous idea involved writing "tons of options" in the original non-module ruleset.

Having an optional module taking up far more room that the main class is backwards imo.

So you're saying 3.5e Core would have been better off including Incarnum from the get-go, rather than making it an optional rules module (aka splatbook) that could be added and integrated in by groups who were interested?