| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Delwa |
Posted - 03 Jul 2014 : 20:47:52
Go here to download the latest free pdf. Monsters and additional rules will be added as the Core Books Release, but if you want to start perusing the content now, here ya go!
Enjoy! |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Rils |
Posted - 30 Jul 2014 : 21:40:42
quote:
Originally posted by rodrigoalcanza
I have liked what was presented in the D&D Basic Rules. I'll wait for the Core Books to see the final version.
But I'm not sure about the amount of spell slots for spellcasters above the 10th level character. I know the rules of magic have changed, but it seemed very few spell slots for high level characters.
For what it's worth, they've said that Basic is essentially copy/paste from the PHB. There will be extra stuff int he book, but the rules, spell progressions, etc are the same. |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 30 Jul 2014 : 01:43:36
I'm not terribly impressed myself. I do like that they provided this for free...it was a good move. But the rules revealed thus far aren't that impressive. A couple of interesting things are easily homebrewed into an existing 3e/PF game. That said, it doesn't mean I won't support WotC, but that decision is based more on what they do with the Realms itself more than the rules. |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 21 Jul 2014 : 17:29:26
quote:
Originally posted by rodrigoalcanza
I have liked what was presented in the D&D Basic Rules. I'll wait for the Core Books to see the final version.
But I'm not sure about the amount of spell slots for spellcasters above the 10th level character. I know the rules of magic have changed, but it seemed very few spell slots for high level characters.
I think some of that is mitigated by Arcane Recovery and Spell Mastery. |
| rodrigoalcanza |
Posted - 21 Jul 2014 : 17:19:17
I have liked what was presented in the D&D Basic Rules. I'll wait for the Core Books to see the final version.
But I'm not sure about the amount of spell slots for spellcasters above the 10th level character. I know the rules of magic have changed, but it seemed very few spell slots for high level characters. |
| ZeshinX |
Posted - 14 Jul 2014 : 14:48:05
Replying to Diffan. :)
As far as limits on power (my "nonsesne rules" bit), we're not in total disagreement. I like the ability of Wizards recovering some spell slots, it's a great idea. With Spell Mastery and Signature Spells, I can see why they nerfed Arcane Recovery. This is where nonsense rules come from. Ultimately, it's just disappointing that it had to go back to this. No system is perfect, but I found with 3e/Pathfinder the rules felt more, well, common sense for lack of a better term. In the end I can just house-rule such nonsense away easily enough (I trust my group not to abuse these things).
As for Turning Undead....sure, a 17th level Cleric can outright destroy undead of 4 HD or lower. I'm sure they wouldn't have any other spells or abilities that could do a far better job dealing with undead at that level. ;) It's just a disappointing ability. Chanel Energy (as PF does it, and previous edition variants did it) was far more interesting and effective at all levels against all types of undead of any HD.
As for the lack of varied combat tables, I'm just conflicted. I both like and dislike it. I've never been a fan in a class-based system that tacitly admits the concept that every class has the same foundational combat ability. I found that the problem of spellcasters often missing with spells that required attack rolls was solved rather nicely with the touch attack concept (something my group had been using since 1e/2e as a house rule). However, I do rather like that the varied combat ability was changed from just incremental number improvements to combat capabilities. I find I really dig the feel of that. I also wish to see how the other warrior-type classes are handled (Ranger and Paladin). |
| Diffan |
Posted - 13 Jul 2014 : 07:43:11
quote:
Originally posted by ZeshinX
Liked
-Spellcasting: memorization/preparation being a hybrid of Wiz/Sorc. Augmenting spells using higher level slots instead of a level-based gradual increase and/or Metamagic feats. Keeps Vancian while making it a touch more dynamic (feats achieved similar things, but I found they became unwieldy quickly)
-Theater of the Mind: allowing combat to be much easier to visualize without a battle map/minis (or just drawn dots on graph paper)
I agree that the re-vamped magic system is nice and I can do things like make spells stronger just by plugging them in higher slots. It also means that my spell selection can be a bit more relaxed. As for TotM-style, we've always used a Grid or some miniatures or even colored glass beads to help pinpoint movement and size, so it's not a difficult thing to just switch back on the Feet ÷ 2 = squares.
quote:
Originally posted by ZeshinX
Didn't Like
-Nonsense rules: rules that serve no creative/flavourful purpose except to satisfy game balance. Example: Cleric's Preserve Life channel divinity capping the healing potential of half the target's total HP, Arcane Recovery's restriction on a restriction for a once/day ability (recoverable spell slots equal half Wiz level, cannot recover 6th or higher slots). If the ability requires a nonsense rule to nerf it's natural progression, it's a fundamentally broken ability and should be replaced outright.
Meh, there should be limits to power otherwise it's nearly pointless to play other classes except Clerics and Wizards. The fact that wizards get an ability to recover spells is pretty awesome and probably shouldn't go beyond 5th level. And if Clerics could heal more with Preserve Life (an ability regained with a Short Rest) then it would make casting healing spells pretty pointless past 2nd level. It's the same reason why Fighters get more attacks as they progress while other classes get less. If a Fighter could make 6 attacks in 6 seconds at 1st level, wouldn't that really mess with the balance of a class-based game?
quote:
Originally posted by ZeshinX
-Return of "Run away! Run away!" version of Undead Turning as the default Turning. This ensures it is a completely useless ability against higher level undead (vampires, liches, etc).
I'm not really sure why? While I'm not a fan of "run away!!" style either, Clerics can outright destroy them if they're at or above a certain level. Further, lower level monsters will be a more constant threat to higher level parties due to Bounded Accuracy.
quote:
Originally posted by ZeshinX
I'm also a little conflicted about the lack of varied combat tables (Base Attack Bonus, THAC0, etc). I suspect we'll see a lot of Clerics and Wizards out Fighter-ing the Fighter yet again this edition.
This was done in part for Multiclassing and because Proficiency bonus being tied to other aspects like Tools and Skills. Further, the difference between them is now number of attacks. Having played a 14th level Fighter in the 10/14/13 Playtest packet (which highly resembles the Basic Fighter) I can say that 3 attacks per turn or 6 with action surge 1/battle and a heavy weapon decimates monsters. I felt I didn't need the cleric's aiding magic or a wizard's potent buffs because I was just cleaving through monsters all by myself. Also, you can make attacks while moving so it's not like I have to dispense with ALL my attacks against one monster, I can move and attack who I want with 3 or 6 attacks too.
|
| ZeshinX |
Posted - 10 Jul 2014 : 16:30:25
I'm also getting a sense that we'll be seeing class books (splat books) like we saw in 2e. Hard to say until I see the PHB, but I get the feeling that each class will be able to support its own splat book in 5e (so seeing returns of The Complete Fighter's Handbook, Complete Rogue's Handbook, and so on). |
| ZeshinX |
Posted - 10 Jul 2014 : 15:20:57
I found the Basic rules made me interested in seeing the full PHB. Up until now I had abandoned the D&D brand for Pathfinder, but 5e has me at least "kicking the tires".
I found a lot I like and a lot I didn't like (knowing full well a more "complete" view of 5e will be forthcoming in the PHB).
Liked
-Spellcasting: memorization/preparation being a hybrid of Wiz/Sorc. Augmenting spells using higher level slots instead of a level-based gradual increase and/or Metamagic feats. Keeps Vancian while making it a touch more dynamic (feats achieved similar things, but I found they became unwieldy quickly)
-Theater of the Mind: allowing combat to be much easier to visualize without a battle map/minis (or just drawn dots on graph paper)
Didn't Like
-Nonsense rules: rules that serve no creative/flavourful purpose except to satisfy game balance. Example: Cleric's Preserve Life chanel divinity capping the healing potential of half the target's total HP, Arcane Recovery's restriction on a restriction for a once/day ability (recoverable spell slots equal half Wiz level, cannot recover 6th or higher slots). If the ability requires a nonsense rule to nerf it's natural progression, it's a fundamentally broken ability and should be replaced outright.
-Return of "Run away! Run away!" version of Undead Turning as the default Turning. This ensures it is a completely useless ability against higher level undead (vampires, liches, etc).
I'm also a little conflicted about the lack of varied combat tables (Base Attack Bonus, THAC0, etc). I suspect we'll see a lot of Clerics and Wizards out Fighter-ing the Fighter yet again this edition.
All that being said, I'm still quite interested in 5e. Well done WotC, you got me thinking of spending money on your product again. Helluva good start. :D |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 10 Jul 2014 : 12:47:54
The new rules are mentioned in the latest Full Frontal Nerdity.  |
| idilippy |
Posted - 04 Jul 2014 : 18:11:12
Plus, with their main competitor releasing every piece of their rules for free (Paizo with Pathfinder), if WotC hadn't released the little they are releasing I can't imagine the rules being received all that well. If their expectation is to climb back to the top of the RPG heap bringing in new blood with free rules is a must. |
| Delwa |
Posted - 04 Jul 2014 : 18:04:56
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Delwa
quote:
Originally posted by Plaguescarred
like how 5E turned out! Also it was nice of WoTC to release Basic D&D PDF for free...
Aye, making Basic free was a very good decision on their part. I've been following this edition fairly closely throughout the playtest, and there was a significant decrease in negative comments toward the ruleset after they announced that Basic would be a free download.
It also increases the potential player base, and decreases the appeal of pirating the books when they are released in print. A smart decision, all around.
Very much agreed. They did a very good job within the pdf of seeding tantalizing teasers to inspire you to buy the PHB. A sidebar or two dangle the, "this option is in the Player's Handbook" carrot quite nicely. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 04 Jul 2014 : 17:56:50
quote:
Originally posted by Delwa
quote:
Originally posted by Plaguescarred
like how 5E turned out! Also it was nice of WoTC to release Basic D&D PDF for free...
Aye, making Basic free was a very good decision on their part. I've been following this edition fairly closely throughout the playtest, and there was a significant decrease in negative comments toward the ruleset after they announced that Basic would be a free download.
It also increases the potential player base, and decreases the appeal of pirating the books when they are released in print. A smart decision, all around. |
| Delwa |
Posted - 04 Jul 2014 : 17:25:01
quote:
Originally posted by Plaguescarred
like how 5E turned out! Also it was nice of WoTC to release Basic D&D PDF for free...
Aye, making Basic free was a very good decision on their part. I've been following this edition fairly closely throughout the playtest, and there was a significant decrease in negative comments toward the ruleset after they announced that Basic would be a free download. |
| Plaguescarred |
Posted - 04 Jul 2014 : 17:20:14
like how 5E turned out! Also it was nice of WoTC to release Basic D&D PDF for free... |
| Diffan |
Posted - 04 Jul 2014 : 15:53:03
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
Sounds complicated, but if its a good idea then i'm stealing it
Its not complicated. To use 3e terms, imagine if your BAB only went to +6 over 20 levels and the system math made platemail (non-magical one at that) a significant AC improvement that could last all the way to 20th. Yet your not in the strata sphere of AC land an even lower level monsters can hit you on higher roll (unlike 3e or 4e where a goblin can only hit with a natural 20). |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 04 Jul 2014 : 15:30:48
Sounds complicated, but if its a good idea then i'm stealing it |
| Delwa |
Posted - 04 Jul 2014 : 15:20:12
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
I might take a gander at these to see if there is anything worth adapting/stealing for my 3.5/pathfinder rules.
Interesting that they have chosen to increase the damage potential of spells. Given the number creep problems with 3.5 and 4th edition i would have expected them to go with the "less is more" idea.
I personally chose to reduce the damage potential of spells by linking the number of damage dice directly to the spell's level (a fireball does 3d6 damage because it is a 3rd level spell) and then have the possibility of an extra 1d6 damage dice being added when a critical hit is scored or if a specialist mage is casting it or when using a wand/holy symbol made of a certain material.
Lower numbers make bonuses more valuable in my book. I wonder whether the hit points of characters and monsters is much higher as well to enable them to survive a fireball blast.
It's partially due to the Bonded Accuracy system. Your to hit bonuses and AC stay relatively low, but the ways you do damage get more varied and pack a bigger punch. This makes low level monsters more relevant for longer, and means a suit of mundane plate stays a significant benefit.
I'm admittedly not a rules analyst, so I don't think I can offer more information than that. |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 04 Jul 2014 : 09:55:37
I might take a gander at these to see if there is anything worth adapting/stealing for my 3.5/pathfinder rules.
Interesting that they have chosen to increase the damage potential of spells. Given the number creep problems with 3.5 and 4th edition i would have expected them to go with the "less is more" idea.
I personally chose to reduce the damage potential of spells by linking the number of damage dice directly to the spell's level (a fireball does 3d6 damage because it is a 3rd level spell) and then have the possibility of an extra 1d6 damage dice being added when a critical hit is scored or if a specialist mage is casting it or when using a wand/holy symbol made of a certain material.
Lower numbers make bonuses more valuable in my book. I wonder whether the hit points of characters and monsters is much higher as well to enable them to survive a fireball blast. |
| Dalor Darden |
Posted - 04 Jul 2014 : 07:22:43
Otto’s Irresistible Dance
Still a lie...it can be resisted.  |
| Delwa |
Posted - 04 Jul 2014 : 05:19:36
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Delwa
It's like 3E. You see in the dark, but it's black and white. I have No clue what 4E did.
My bad, I meant 3E.
And I will sigh at the way that continues to break continuity. 
I heard that. I honestly don't have a dog in that debate, (although if you nailed me to a wall and made me pick, Infravision just sounds cooler) but it is easily house ruled in from what I see. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 04 Jul 2014 : 05:15:14
quote:
Originally posted by Delwa
It's like 3E. You see in the dark, but it's black and white. I have No clue what 4E did.
My bad, I meant 3E.
And I will sigh at the way that continues to break continuity. |
| Delwa |
Posted - 04 Jul 2014 : 03:21:44
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
quote:
Originally posted by Delwa
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
It clearly is basic , a long read as well. Elves (all of them now have dark vision), can not buy even a wagon wheel now. Looking at clearly have some sense of what is hoped to be achieved. I also got reminded of something TSR did many years ago.
You've peaked my curiosity. What did TSR do?
Well TSR did many of things, however my thought was specific to a character could buy a wagon wheel, however could not buy a wagon (as that was edited off the list).
Some things that were covered in detail have been removed over the years, in someways a cgood thing as too much detail could slow the game, paying 2000 gp to be trained to achieve a level when a character earned enough Ex. pts. to be two levels or more higher (just not having enough to pay teacher in wealth was a bug).
Understood. I could see my group doing a whole lot with a Wagon Wheel... Shudder
I just finished reading the Basic Document. It didn't change drastically from the Final Public Playtest packet, and I'm ok with the changes that were made. My PC's are level 3 using the Playtest Rules, and given our rate of advancement, we'll be level 4 by the time the PHB releases, so I mostly focused on that range.
Anyway, sleep is getting to me. I think I'm rambling. I'll post more if needed when I'm able to think. |
| Kentinal |
Posted - 04 Jul 2014 : 03:11:40
quote:
Originally posted by Delwa
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
It clearly is basic , a long read as well. Elves (all of them now have dark vision), can not buy even a wagon wheel now. Looking at clearly have some sense of what is hoped to be achieved. I also got reminded of something TSR did many years ago.
You've peaked my curiosity. What did TSR do?
Well TSR did many of things, however my thought was specific to a character could buy a wagon wheel, however could not buy a wagon (as that was edited off the list).
Some things that were covered in detail have been removed over the years, in someways a cgood thing as too much detail could slow the game, paying 2000 gp to be trained to achieve a level when a character earned enough Ex. pts. to be two levels or more higher (just not having enough to pay teacher in wealth was a bug). |
| Delwa |
Posted - 04 Jul 2014 : 02:41:48
The Rogue's Expertise ability got a severe spanking, too. I'm not complaining, though. It was kinda broken. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 04 Jul 2014 : 02:39:34
quote:
Originally posted by Delwa
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Thanks! I have them a preview, very similar to the playtest
No problem! It is very similar. Major changes I noticed is a lot of base races got +2 vs +1 to a stat, and Elves have Darkvision. I haven't gotten to classes yet.
Couple of other things like spells getting some serious buffs. Fireball, at 3rd level, dealing 8d6 damage and Meteor Swarm dealing 20d6 Fire/20d6 Bludgeoning damage (save for half). They nerfed Spare the Dying, it's now stabilize create touched as a Orison instead of give the target 1 HP (though perhaps it's too much for your action AND touch).
Proficiency bonus starts at +2 at 1st level and increases by +1 every 4 levels (tapping out at +6 from 17th - 20th level).
Rogue's Sneak Attack now goes to 10d6 instead of 7d6 |
| Delwa |
Posted - 04 Jul 2014 : 00:06:31
It's like 3E. You see in the dark, but it's black and white. I have No clue what 4E did. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 04 Jul 2014 : 00:04:42
Is darkvision the heat vision of earlier editions, or is it the odd replacement of 4E? |
| Delwa |
Posted - 04 Jul 2014 : 00:01:28
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
It clearly is basic , a long read as well. Elves (all of them now have dark vision), can not buy even a wagon wheel now. Looking at clearly have some sense of what is hoped to be achieved. I also got reminded of something TSR did many years ago.
You've peaked my curiosity. What did TSR do? |
| Kentinal |
Posted - 03 Jul 2014 : 23:59:30
It clearly is basic , a long read as well. Elves (all of them now have dark vision), can not buy even a wagon wheel now. Looking at clearly have some sense of what is hoped to be achieved. I also got reminded of something TSR did many years ago. |
| Delwa |
Posted - 03 Jul 2014 : 22:28:52
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Thanks! I have them a preview, very similar to the playtest
No problem! It is very similar. Major changes I noticed is a lot of base races got +2 vs +1 to a stat, and Elves have Darkvision. I haven't gotten to classes yet. |
