Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #2

[Clawhound]

Druid splits into:
- Spellcaster
- Animal Handler
- Shapechanging Melee Warrior

Animal Handler fits better with the Ranger. Shapechanging warrior is essentially a martial class. That leaves us with a spellcaster for the druid.

Fighter splits into:
- Guy with a special magic weapon (martial + gish)
- Hack 'n Slasher
- Shapechanging warrior
- Destined Hero

Fighter also has a number of ideas which should really go across all variants, but are effectively niche tactics:
- Bare Knuckles/Wrestling
- Mounted combat

[Kurald Galain]

It would ruin the whole plan if the design team is unable to see how the more advanced mechanics function in unexpected situations.

Not necessarily - it has worked fine for 3E, 4E, and PF. Sure, there's a lot of complaining on internet forums about how many obvious grave errors there are in those systems, but in practice they have millions of people enjoying them.

Charop is a niche, not a viable target audience.

[Tengu_temp]

That will result in a game with no need for conservation or tactics (Thats what I think the word means). Its just going to be a room after a room.

Have you played any RPG with no or very little daily resources, like Mutants and Masterminds or Weapons of the Gods? They still offer you a lot of tactical challenge, in many cases more than DND. Heck, you get the same effect by playing 3e without classes with daily powers/spells (healing is so cheap that above the first few levels you can safely assume that you never run out of it between fights). I'd say a game where everyone has a ToB class is more tactical than one where everyone is a full caster, not less.

Funnily enough, 4E wizards are Vancian (albeit with a very low limit on spells known and spells-per-day).

Coincidentally, daily powers are one of my least favorite aspects of 4e.

[NinjaStylerobot]

I disagree. If it 5e had no daily effects I would dump it right now.

There is this thrill of going through the Liches tomb, conserving what you can (Because otherwise as a GM I WILL NOT LET YOU OUT ALIVE...Unless your smart)

Im not sure how reducing resource management and giving characters infinite resources (Like a videogame) is giving them more tactical choices.

I don't understand why you dislike daily powers.

If its the 15 min adventuring day thats just because of bad GMing.

[kyoryu]

I disagree. If it 5e had no daily effects I would dump it right now.

There is this thrill of going through the Liches tomb, conserving what you can (Because otherwise as a GM I WILL NOT LET YOU OUT ALIVE...Unless your smart)

Im not sure how reducing resource management and giving characters infinite resources (Like a videogame) is giving them more tactical choices.

I don't understand why you dislike daily powers.

If its the 15 min adventuring day thats just because of bad GMing.

Daily resources make sense in a game where time itself is a resource. This is certainly true of old-school D&D, where time (or other supplies - food, etc.) were a critical resource being consumed that would determine whether or not you made it to the big bad guy/huge pile of stuff at the bottom of the dungeon.

I guess another way of saying it is that in more old-school games, "days" are resources themselves.

In a more modern style, "setup encounter," hard plot game, where things move at "the speed of plot," and things like food are considered trivial and not worth checking, daily abilities make much less sense. This is also where we start to see the 15-minute day occur. If a day isn't a valuable resource, there's no reason whatsoever not to regain valuable resources (daily abilities) at the cost of a resource with no value (days).

In the first style of game, the '15 minute day' is a somewhat counter-productive strategy as it reduces your limited resources, increasing the chance of overall failure.

The latter is not necessarily "bad GMing", but it's certainly a different style of play where daily resources make less sense.

TL;DR: The 15-minute day will end when either we get rid of daily resources, or when days become valuable resources in and of themselves.

[deuterio12]

Have you played any RPG with no or very little daily resources, like Mutants and Masterminds or Weapons of the Gods?

Then by all means go ahead and play those. Daily resources has always been one of the most basic staple of D&D (and a zillion other games out there), and if D&D 5e plans to encopass all the previous editions, you can damn bet daily resources will be one of the core characteristics.

M&M, ToB and... and whatever that "Weapons of the Gods" is are the exception, not the rule. And heck, even the crusader has some /day ability, as well as the swordsage's ultimate, not to mention some of the prcs and feats.

[Tengu_temp]

@deuterio12
Actually, I can't think of any other modern RPG other than DND that still has such prominent prominent daily powers. So if anything, it's DND that's the exception.

And yeah, there is a reason I tend to play other games and not DND. But just as other people want different stuff to be in 5e, so can I. It's supposed to be a very modular game where you can play each class in several different ways, no? I sure would like to see ways that appeal to me.

I don't understand why you dislike daily powers.

I have several reasons:
1. They're a pain to keep track of. If you're a high level DND caster, you need a whole sheet just for your prepared spells!
2. They put limitations on the number of daily encounters you can have - both upper and lower. Too many encounters, and the party will run out of steam. Too few encounters, and they will steamroll them. I want to have as many encounters a day as I want, without having to make them weaker or harder to compensate for their number.
3. Without daily powers, it's easier to balance encounters and make them as strong or weak as you want - because the unpredictable aspect of "how many daily powers they still have left?" goes away.
4. I'm just not interested in the whole conservation aspect of the game. I don't find it tactically challenging, it's just being an accountant. Tactics for me are about how to beat the enemy in front of you with the resources at your disposal, not about saving those resources.

If its the 15 min adventuring day thats just because of bad GMing.

Yeah, if my party wanted to do that, I'd tell them "you're not tired yet. Keep adventuring". So it's not an issue.

[randomhero00]

Hopefully DnD 5e will be as differerent as 4e was to 3e.

[NinjaStylerobot]

words

Spoiler

Show

I have several reasons:
1. They're a pain to keep track of. If you're a high level DND caster, you need a whole sheet just for your prepared spells!
2. They put limitations on the number of daily encounters you can have - both upper and lower. Too many encounters, and the party will run out of steam. Too few encounters, and they will steamroll them. I want to have as many encounters a day as I want, without having to make them weaker or harder to compensate for their number.
3. Without daily powers, it's easier to balance encounters and make them as strong or weak as you want - because the unpredictable aspect of "how many daily powers they still have left?" goes away.
4. I'm just not interested in the whole conservation aspect of the game. I don't find it tactically challenging, it's just being an accountant. Tactics for me are about how to beat the enemy in front of you with the resources at your disposal, not about saving those resources.

Without countering with my own wall of text, these things is what I like in DD and what I don't want gone.

Its what makes it interesting for me as a GM and as a player.

These things are PART of DD history (A pretty big part). If you don't like em, play a game without them.

Yeah, if my party wanted to do that, I'd tell them "you're not tired yet. Keep adventuring". So it's not an issue.

I go "If you do this there is a 50% chance you get attacked by wolves at night. No XP"

or

"You loose because you didn't stop the Lich from draining all his powers back"

[Oracle_Hunter]

Yeah, if my party wanted to do that, I'd tell them "you're not tired yet. Keep adventuring". So it's not an issue.

Does that work for you

If some DM said that to me then I'd say "ok, we wait around until we are tired, and then rest." If the PCs don't want to go do something, it's not exactly kosher for the DM to demand that they do it -- we're in "very specific level of tired" territory otherwise.

[RedWarlock]

Daily powers aren't the only way to have strategic options, it could be a matter of choice of encounter power. Like if you only get one 'strong' power per encounter, so you better make the more strategic decision. Not all fights are wars of attrition.

[Tengu_temp]

Without countering with my own wall of text, these things is what I like in DD and what I don't want gone.

Its what makes it interesting for me as a GM and as a player.

These things are PART of DD history (A pretty big part). If you don't like em, play a game without them.

And that's what is one of the best things I see about 5e: that it's a very modular game where every class can be played in several different variants. So in addition to the already announced Vancian wizards and clerics, I'd also like to see variants that don't use daily spells but something else instead.

Does that work for you

If some DM said that to me then I'd say "ok, we wait around until we are tired, and then rest." If the PCs don't want to go do something, it's not exactly kosher for the DM to demand that they do it -- we're in "very specific level of tired" territory otherwise.

Well, I'm pretty sure that the intention was that casters regain their spells only once per day, because WotC didn't predict the possibility of people resting the moment they run out of spells... But if they are stubborn about it, fine. But they have to bear in mind that the world doesn't just freeze for 8 hours when they go to sleep - the nearby enemies might, and probably will, find out about their presence, with various consequences ranging from escaping to calling reinforcements to outward causing their quest to fail. Bonus points if the PCs are on a mission with a time limit - do they really think that the cultists will wait 8 hours to sacrifice the captured princess, without moving from the sacrificial chamber the entire time?

[Alejandro]

As someone who was there and played it, I want to chime in as much as the NDA will let me:

- It was a very early alpha and this was stressed to us heavily. Virtually nothing you see or hear of it is guaranteed, other than the base idea of D&D (hit points, spells, you get the idea.)

- One table of testers may have had a totally different experience from other testers, based on what they chose to do ingame.

[deuterio12]

@deuterio12
Actually, I can't think of any other modern RPG other than DND that still has such prominent prominent daily powers. So if anything, it's DND that's the exception.

O'rrly?

-Pathfinder (current top TT RPG point)
-Black Crusade
-Rogue Trader
-Dark Heresy
-Skyrim (all the rage across the net)

I have several reasons:
1. They're a pain to keep track of. If you're a high level DND caster, you need a whole sheet just for your prepared spells!
2. They put limitations on the number of daily encounters you can have - both upper and lower. Too many encounters, and the party will run out of steam. Too few encounters, and they will steamroll them. I want to have as many encounters a day as I want, without having to make them weaker or harder to compensate for their number.
3. Without daily powers, it's easier to balance encounters and make them as strong or weak as you want - because the unpredictable aspect of "how many daily powers they still have left?" goes away.
4. I'm just not interested in the whole conservation aspect of the game. I don't find it tactically challenging, it's just being an accountant. Tactics for me are about how to beat the enemy in front of you with the resources at your disposal, not about saving those resources.

1. True enough, but that's an extreme example.
2. That's absurd from a storytelling view. It makes no sense whatsoever that the adventurers have as much trouble with a single bandit than endless waves of goblins. Actualy if the players hear there's coming a hundred goblins, they should either start running or preparations, not go all "what do we care? it's not like we can run out of anything".
3.It also makes the game duller because the players never need to worry about what's next.
4.Completely false. Whitout limited resources, the player "tactics" are reduced to throwing their best nukes at the start at every battle. Which, honestly, it's what happens with M&M and ToB. Just unleash your uber combination on the enemy, no other thinking needed.

[Tengu_temp]

O'rrly?

-Pathfinder (current top TT RPG point)
-Black Crusade
-Rogue Trader
-Dark Heresy
-Skyrim (all the rage across the net)

- DND under a different name.
- Three different WH40K RPGs - counts as one game for me.
- A video game. Also, it has mana regenerating in real time.

So yeah. Tabletop RPGs with prominent daily resources are still the exception, not the rule. It's just that one of them happens to also be the biggest RPG on the market.

2. That's absurd from a storytelling view. It makes no sense whatsoever that the adventurers have as much trouble with a single bandit than endless waves of goblins. Actualy if the players hear there's coming a hundred goblins, they should either start running or preparations, not go all "what do we care? it's not like we can run out of anything".

Yeah, that would be pretty absurd, but fortunately that's not the point I was making.

3.It also makes the game duller because the players never need to worry about what's next.
4.Completely false. Whitout limited resources, the player "tactics" are reduced to throwing their best nukes at the start at every battle. Which, honestly, it's what happens with M&M and ToB. Just unleash your uber combination on the enemy, no other thinking needed.

If that's what happened to you, then you haven't played with a DM who can challenge the players within a single encounter, not just by whittling them down by slowly stripping them of daily resources during several encounters. When I intend a M&M fight to be tough, the players have to do more than just jump in and nuke blindly.

[Timberboar]

Not to be pedantic, but making good use of limited resources is probably better referred to as "logistics" instead of "tactics."

And to be on topic: I think 5E will need to find a balance between too much and too little.

Too much can lead to accounting sessions cunningly disguised as gaming sessions.

Too little hampers tension by reducing the sense of urgency usually heightened by coming to the very edge of your limits.

[Oracle_Hunter]

Well, I'm pretty sure that the intention was that casters regain their spells only once per day, because WotC didn't predict the possibility of people resting the moment they run out of spells... But if they are stubborn about it, fine. But they have to bear in mind that the world doesn't just freeze for 8 hours when they go to sleep - the nearby enemies might, and probably will, find out about their presence, with various consequences ranging from escaping to calling reinforcements to outward causing their quest to fail. Bonus points if the PCs are on a mission with a time limit - do they really think that the cultists will wait 8 hours to sacrifice the captured princess, without moving from the sacrificial chamber the entire time?

That's very different from "no, you're not sleepy. Keep adventuring."

The real problem is that it can be very tiring to have every mission be on such a strict time limit that missing a day causes the mission to fail.

Spoiler

Show

Delays happen in games for legitimate reasons all the time -- the PCs miss a clue and spend hours chasing their own tail, the PCs decide to solve a problem inefficiently, or they even just have a bad encounter and actually need to rest or they'll die in the next one. If the PCs fail every time they take longer than the DM decided initially, they'll get frustrated.

Likewise, the DM "punishing" Players for acting reasonably (i.e. being at full power before risking their lives) is going to breed Player resentment and raise cries of railroading. "How is it that wolves only attack us when we call for a rest, and not when you do?" An even-handed DM is simply going to waste more time on Random Encounters which do nothing to advance the plot (by definition) and require an already-fatigued party to rest even longer.

The short of it is that Players can waste time for legitimate reasons so it is risky setting up many adventures (let alone campaigns!) that fall apart if the PCs are 8 hours off schedule. Additionally, Players don't like having their characters arbitrarily punished for making reasonable choices simply because the DM doesn't like them -- and only scheduling Night Ambushes in response to 15 minute workdays is transparently such a case. Worst of all, these sort of punishments only exacerbate the problem since the party will be even lower on resources after dealing with the attack than before, so they will rest even longer.

[Tengu_temp]

Well, good I don't have to deal with this issue by playing games where the 15-minute adventure day is pointless, right?

Speaking of which, I hope 5e deals with this issue. Also...

"When you think of classic D&D what elements spring to mind?" -- "Alignment, Races, Classes, Monsters".
Mike Mearls.

Come on. Just get rid of it already.

[kyoryu]

The real problem is that it can be very tiring to have every mission be on such a strict time limit that missing a day causes the mission to fail.
[spoiler]Delays happen in games for legitimate reasons all the time -- the PCs miss a clue and spend hours chasing their own tail, the PCs decide to solve a problem inefficiently, or they even just have a bad encounter and actually need to rest or they'll die in the next one. If the PCs fail every time they take longer than the DM decided initially, they'll get frustrated.

Yeah, which is why that would be poor game design. A better way of doing it would be to assume a moderate efficiency for players. If you've got 15 encounters planned, and players can do 4 a day at high efficiency, give them 5 days rather than four. Now they can screw around (or up) a little, but the time pressure is still sufficient that they just can't do a full day of rest after every encounter.

Likewise, the DM "punishing" Players for acting reasonably (i.e. being at full power before risking their lives) is going to breed Player resentment and raise cries of railroading. "How is it that wolves only attack us when we call for a rest, and not when you do?" An even-handed DM is simply going to waste more time on Random Encounters which do nothing to advance the plot (by definition) and require an already-fatigued party to rest even longer.

Again, we get to "plot," which is why, as I've mentioned before, daily resources don't work well in plot-based games. Random encounters shouldn't be "meaningless," they're a cost for travel through certain areas. If you've already got a predetermined outcome in mind, then yeah, managing resources is kind of irrelevant.

The short of it is that Players can waste time for legitimate reasons so it is risky setting up many adventures (let alone campaigns!) that fall apart if the PCs are 8 hours off schedule. Additionally, Players don't like having their characters arbitrarily punished for making reasonable choices simply because the DM doesn't like them -- and only scheduling Night Ambushes in response to 15 minute workdays is transparently such a case. Worst of all, these sort of punishments only exacerbate the problem since the party will be even lower on resources after dealing with the attack than before, so they will rest even longer.

... unless there's an overall time goal which allows time for sufficient rest/flexibility, but not so much time to allow for 15 minute days. An 8-hour time frame is too close for a month's worth of adventuring - but a 5-7 day window is probably reasonable.

And at any rate, it should be okay for players to fail. That just means the game takes one of two paths.

[Dsurion]

@deuterio12
Actually, I can't think of any other modern RPG other than DND that still has such prominent prominent daily powers. So if anything, it's DND that's the exception.

And yeah, there is a reason I tend to play other games and not DND. But just as other people want different stuff to be in 5e, so can I. It's supposed to be a very modular game where you can play each class in several different ways, no? I sure would like to see ways that appeal to me.



I have several reasons:
1. They're a pain to keep track of. If you're a high level DND caster, you need a whole sheet just for your prepared spells!
2. They put limitations on the number of daily encounters you can have - both upper and lower. Too many encounters, and the party will run out of steam. Too few encounters, and they will steamroll them. I want to have as many encounters a day as I want, without having to make them weaker or harder to compensate for their number.
3. Without daily powers, it's easier to balance encounters and make them as strong or weak as you want - because the unpredictable aspect of "how many daily powers they still have left?" goes away.
4. I'm just not interested in the whole conservation aspect of the game. I don't find it tactically challenging, it's just being an accountant. Tactics for me are about how to beat the enemy in front of you with the resources at your disposal, not about saving those resources.



Yeah, if my party wanted to do that, I'd tell them "you're not tired yet. Keep adventuring". So it's not an issue.

This post. I agree with everything said in it.

[jaybird]

-Pathfinder (current top TT RPG point)
-Black Crusade
-Rogue Trader
-Dark Heresy
-Skyrim (all the rage across the net)

Wait, what? Since when does Dark Heresy have daily powers? The only thing I can think of are Fate Points, and those aren't so much "daily" as they are "when GM says so".

[Crow]

I just hope that there is some form of attrition throughout the adventuring day. Maybe daily powers aren't the answer. Either way, anybody who thinks someone should feel just as ready for action facing their 1000th orc of the day as they did facing their first is playing a game that I have no interest in.

[Tengu_temp]

Do note that in DND 3e, if you're not a caster or another class with X/day abilities, then you only lose HP between encounters. And out of combat healing is so cheap and easy that after a few levels it doesn't really matter as attrition anymore.

[Crow]

Do note that in DND 3e, if you're not a caster or another class with X/day abilities, then you only lose HP between encounters. And out of combat healing is so cheap and easy that after a few levels it doesn't really matter as attrition anymore.

3e isn't quite my cup of tea aside from it being so ubiquitous as to always be able to find material/games for it. I prefer the 1e/2e style of D&D, but that puts me squarely in the minority.

[Oracle_Hunter]

I just hope that there is some form of attrition throughout the adventuring day. Maybe daily powers aren't the answer. Either way, anybody who thinks someone should feel just as ready for action facing their 1000th orc of the day as they did facing their first is playing a game that I have no interest in.

I think Healing Surges were a step in the right direction but -- most of the time -- they don't matter. Like Daily Powers, you need a long adventuring day to make losing them meaningful, or a variety of effects that drain them.

Some sort of metric tied to survival is nice because it makes the Players care about it more. AP in 4e became a "spend it when you have it" commodity because an unspent AP loses value after 2 Encounters and the situations where it would be clutch are comparatively rare. If you had to use Surges for AP, for example, every one you spent might be worth 1/4 of your total HP at some later date.

[NinjaStylerobot]

Ive just never had any problems with limited resources. I guess this is kinda cheep but realism goes first in my games, followed by rule of cool.

If the characters have no realistic way of stopping the monster Im not going to create that encounter. At the same time, if they can pull off something cool Im not going to penalize them for that.

For example- a lich will regain his powers in 3 months time. The characters just need to stop him before it happens. Yes I am going to change the things in between a bit so it fits better but generally they would need to hurry.

PS: Because I don't use XP-every day has a 50% chance of having a random encounter (I give away more loot too).

[ClothedInVelvet]

I must say, I'm getting excited for this new version. I know it's a way off, but I'm ready. My excitement level just passed my excitement level for DDR4 RAM. And that's pretty high on the list.

[Zombimode]

@deuterio12
Actually, I can't think of any other modern RPG other than DND that still has such prominent prominent daily powers. So if anything, it's DND that's the exception.

Mechwarrior 4th edition
Shadowrun 4th edition
The Dark Eye 4th edition

Do note that in DND 3e, if you're not a caster or another class with X/day abilities, then you only lose HP between encounters. And out of combat healing is so cheap and easy that after a few levels it doesn't really matter as attrition anymore.

Only if you play with unconditional WBL and magic mart. You dont HAVE to do this, you know.
(But judeging from this forum many people do, so you may have a point).

Edit: ah, scratch that, I forgot about the reserve feat. I forgot it because I banned it for my current campaign.

[Earthwalker]

Shadowrun 4th edition

What daily power is in Shadowrun 4th ? Has things changed so much from 3rd.

I have to put myself in the anti daily camp. I don't object to having the ability to go nova, I just prefer a different system. If you get

At-wills
per encounter and
per chapter (for want of a better word)

If the GM get to decide when a chapter is finished, then the 15 min working day stops. The chapter closes when the dungeon is clear. Or object X is met.

[Clawhound]

I'm concerned about the idea of varying complexities of classes. It seems to me that they can't possibly playtest the complex options properly, and we'll end up with the same problems as 3.5.

I can see them doing static classes with few choices (like monk in 3rd), classes with power choices from a finite list (like 4th), and mix-n-match (for the expert players).Players will always hand-roll their own classes, so you may as well put it in as an option. In most games, the first two options will predominate, and that should make design easier. Mix-n-match will give them headaches, but that is guaranteed. They will need to put a disclaimer onto that system.