New Version of Dungeons and Dragons

[Nevereverend Slaine]

Wizards posted the basic rules for the new D&D on their site: HERE

I gave it a quick read, and it really seems to refer back to 3/3.5E with a few crumbs tossed to the roleplayer crowd. There is really nothing new here, and it retains alot of the idiocy that's colored D&D for so long (*cough Armor Class, cough*). I'm really not sure why -- if I wanted to play a D&D style RPG -- I should pick the new edition over Pathfinder. It seems like a playable game, more so than 4E IMO, but still, with its steep cost of adoption, a bit too costly to recommend over a game most der Poopenhosenphiles already are playing.

What do you think? Rob? Dan?

[Rob]

Having run a 4E game for the last 5 years, I am looking forward to a different, simpler ruleset.

Pathfinder is like 3.5 on meth...

[Nevereverend Slaine]

Lol I forgot this forum autocorrects deetwenty to der poopenhosen.

Though I haven't played pathfinder, I've read most of the books and think its a very solid game for what it is. I did run 3e for quite some time, and Pathfinder incorporated a lot of house rules already commonly in use among the 3/3.5e crowd.

I read 4e when it came out, and knew immediately its not a game I could ever play. It would be a source of never ending frustration since it is built on design choices I would have never made. But, initially at least, it did not seem all that complicated. Its predecessor seemed much more complex.

5e doesn't seem any simpler, aside from offering a rules reboot to a new set of limited core books. But like anything d&d, you know it will be subject to massive rules bloat as splatbook after pointless splatbook is released. My only question is if a roleplay oriented splatbook will ever be released or will it all once again cater to the powergaming hordes.

[Rob]

Until the canon rules account for non-combat character growth, I think the answer to powergamer catering is no.

As for 5E being simpler, I think you said it better when mentioning poor design choices. 4E is a very simple system, but it is also not as intuitive as I would like. Once you learn the rules, it's easy enough to play, but the moment you play a more intuitive rules system, you inevitably forget the 4E design in favor of shit that makes more sense.

I do like Pathfinder quite a bit, and find myself trying to play Pathfinder when I'm running my 4E game.

[dan2]

I haven't kept up on any deetwenty stuff since 3ed/3.5ed. I never paid much mind to pathfinder either. I pretty much washed my hands of D&D shortly after deetwenty took over every fucking game in the early 2000's. I'm not even interested enough to read about it and where it's gone since.

I guess I'm tired of table top games trying to compete with MMO's by trying to emulate them.

[Rob]

Thankfully 5ED is moving away from that. It looks like it is moving back to basics, with a few interesting mechanics tossed in. I like the advantage/disadvantage mechanic. Streamlines a bunch of otherwise clunky combat stuff, with a simple method that should have been implemented years ago.

[Nevereverend Slaine]

I have to agree, wizards realized the mistake they made by trying make a tabletop game emulate an MMO. It just really gave 4e a wargame feel. To that extent, 5e seems like a definite improvement over 4. As for the advantage mechanic, its simple enough but ill reserve judgement until I can see how it plays out over several games. Dan, just so you know what we are talking about, getting "advantage" means you can roll 2 dtwennies and keep the high roll. most of the other additions to the game are "borrowed" from other systems. That said, some things -- like the backgrounds rules and flaws -- are a long time in coming.

[Rob]

You may not have already looked it up, but this breaks it downs pretty well.

rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14690/how-does-rolling-two-dice-and-taking-the-highest-affect-the-average-outcome

It takes the average from 10.5 up to 13.9 for advantage and down to like 7.1 for disadvantage, making the outlying crits (20 and 1) as high as 10% probablilty or as low as 0.25% for their respective modifiers.

It appears pretty significant, but a 3 point swing on the average seems reasonable.

[Nevereverend Slaine]

Its not about the numbers -- the breakdown for probability for the advantage/disadvantage mechanic is a fair one -- its about the addition of an extra die to be rolled. I know it doesn't seem like much, but I've seen first hand how confusing adding dice can be for some players. I'm well used to playing/running a game with a second task resolution die (Savage Worlds' "Wild" Die), and you would be amazed at how often it confounded certain players time and again. Any alteration to a standard core mechanic needs to be examined in light of player behavior, especially the more narrowly the scope of the rule applies. In truth, I don't think more folks would have much of a problem with 5e's take on such a mechanic, I just would like to see how it plays out among different player groups before rendering judgement.

[Rob]

I see. Well, I suppose if the numbers don't support it then neither will Wizards. That would be rather disappointing after investing a couple hundred bucks.