What are some things you wish were in 5E that youd liked from other TTRPGs? ill go first.
Shields (item not spell) are just really boring and just a basic +2 set and forget type of item i really like what pathfinder 2e did with them by making them have more purpose in combat and giving you things to do with them like blocking more damage from hitting you at the cost of the shields HP. It allows you to feel like you are using a shield in combat rather and not just doing nothing with it
There is more than a few things I could say that Pathfinder 2E has that I could say I wish D&D had but If I had to point to any one thing specifically it would be Focus Spells which is just a superior way to handle half-casters.
From VtM (not certain on version), I like the way you can get extra points by optionally taking some extra weaknesses (flaws) but can also spend points for additional boons (Merits) at character creation. Gives a bit more to designing a character than just some Ability Scores, Class and Species.
One thing I'm working on adding to D&D from Daggerheart is environmental stat blocks. It's such a simple idea that I think works really well and could integrate into D&D pretty seamlessly on par with traps.
I also love exploding dice rolls from systems like Kids on Bikes, I think that's something D&D could use more. The best fit for it imo would be sorcerer spells.
I still wish that they had not chickened out in 5e Design and kept the 4e healing surge system instead of replacing it with more swingy, less effective hit dice. Healing surges and how they interacted with healing mechanics, as well as being a resource that monsters, traps, or hazards could attack, or characters could spend to fuel other effects, were very nice.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The mongoose blew out its candle and was asleep in bed before the room went dark." —Llanowar fable
I'm really liking Daggerheart's three choices at death mechanic. The option of death saves or going out in a blaze of glory with one guaranteed critical hit as you die gives players more of a feel of control over their death and especially for players with loads of back up characters they want to try 5e's death saves often feel like they lack any sense of purpose
I'm really liking Daggerheart's three choices at death mechanic. The option of death saves or going out in a blaze of glory with one guaranteed critical hit as you die gives players more of a feel of control over their death and especially for players with loads of back up characters they want to try 5e's death saves often feel like they lack any sense of purpose
Yeah, this is another aspect I really like as it gives players meaningful choices when their character goes down. I've been toying with how to possibly steal this for D&D, although I'm not sure how readily available resurrection magic is in Daggerheart, which I feel is something that would factor into the balance of this rule.
I'm really liking Daggerheart's three choices at death mechanic. The option of death saves or going out in a blaze of glory with one guaranteed critical hit as you die gives players more of a feel of control over their death and especially for players with loads of back up characters they want to try 5e's death saves often feel like they lack any sense of purpose
I'm integrating those starting on my session on Monday. It's Strahd and very lethal, so I daresay it won't be long before it gets used...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I'm really liking Daggerheart's three choices at death mechanic. The option of death saves or going out in a blaze of glory with one guaranteed critical hit as you die gives players more of a feel of control over their death and especially for players with loads of back up characters they want to try 5e's death saves often feel like they lack any sense of purpose
I'm integrating those starting on my session on Monday. It's Strahd and very lethal, so I daresay it won't be long before it gets used...
Yeah, I was about to say, in a campaign like CoS or Tomb of Annihilation -- where you literally cannot revive or resurrect anyone -- it's an awesome way to give characters a final spotlight rather than just having them bleed out with a third failed death save
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I feel like there needs to be a way to stack advantages. The yes/no system doesn't encourage planning very well because you can't stack the benefits, generally speaking. I'm having to mess around with DCs to account for player efforts and agency, which isn't ideal. I get that this is easier with dice pools and that would fundamentally affect the game...but given how much the engine pushes combat and tactics...this is a spot that's really needing attention.
Similarly, a way to represent varying effort. Not sure how to do that without messing with the fundamentals though.
More choice beyond CharGen. I'd like my character to evolve according to his choices without having to resort to multiclassing and similar things. At the moment, once you get past 3rd level, the only choices are things like spells and every now and again you choose a feat.
Armour having more dimensionality than just affecting your AC v weight/stealth. It would be nice if each option were a choice.
The Landmark system from TOR is really good. In the setting books, you get locations that are described with maps and so forth, as well as suggestions on how to implement them. Your story develops such that you want to take the players to Mount Gram to rescue their friend? Everything you need is there and set up. Just plonk your NPC friend down in the prison, and it's ready to go. It's really helped me develop my abilities and confidence to homebrew my own adventures by bridging the gap between having your hand held by prewritten adventures and being told "just go and make it up as you go along!" It'd be harder to do with D&D's steeper character progression...but it would be very good for new DMs.
Just some thoughts on what I'd like them to introduce.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I'm really liking Daggerheart's three choices at death mechanic. The option of death saves or going out in a blaze of glory with one guaranteed critical hit as you die gives players more of a feel of control over their death and especially for players with loads of back up characters they want to try 5e's death saves often feel like they lack any sense of purpose
Yeah, this is another aspect I really like as it gives players meaningful choices when their character goes down. I've been toying with how to possibly steal this for D&D, although I'm not sure how readily available resurrection magic is in Daggerheart, which I feel is something that would factor into the balance of this rule.
I'm considering introducing it as just a two choice mechanic, either death saves or Blaze of Glory that means you can't be resurrected. Hopefully that won't upset balance too much and I'm sure I can come up with some in-universe rational
I'm really liking Daggerheart's three choices at death mechanic. The option of death saves or going out in a blaze of glory with one guaranteed critical hit as you die gives players more of a feel of control over their death and especially for players with loads of back up characters they want to try 5e's death saves often feel like they lack any sense of purpose
Yeah, this is another aspect I really like as it gives players meaningful choices when their character goes down. I've been toying with how to possibly steal this for D&D, although I'm not sure how readily available resurrection magic is in Daggerheart, which I feel is something that would factor into the balance of this rule.
I'm considering introducing it as just a two choice mechanic, either death saves or Blaze of Glory that means you can't be resurrected. Hopefully that won't upset balance too much and I'm sure I can come up with some in-universe rational
Blaze of glory with no rez I think would narratively make sense—you draw on the power of the other side as you begin to cross over or something. Or even just you're making a decision that you're not coming back.
There is more than a few things I could say that Pathfinder 2E has that I could say I wish D&D had but If I had to point to any one thing specifically it would be Focus Spells which is just a superior way to handle half-casters.
From VtM (not certain on version), I like the way you can get extra points by optionally taking some extra weaknesses (flaws) but can also spend points for additional boons (Merits) at character creation. Gives a bit more to designing a character than just some Ability Scores, Class and Species.
The thing about a Flaws system is that it’s a fine needle to thread trying to make them significant enough to be impactful and offset the perks offered for taking them without being debilitating. Note all the debates on how things like a blind character could be effectively implemented. Plus if you try to make flaws impacting character behavior then it starts stepping on player agency and creates something extra the DM has to track. Neither of which seems to gel well with 5e’s design philosophies.
There is more than a few things I could say that Pathfinder 2E has that I could say I wish D&D had but If I had to point to any one thing specifically it would be Focus Spells which is just a superior way to handle half-casters.
From VtM (not certain on version), I like the way you can get extra points by optionally taking some extra weaknesses (flaws) but can also spend points for additional boons (Merits) at character creation. Gives a bit more to designing a character than just some Ability Scores, Class and Species.
The thing about a Flaws system is that it’s a fine needle to thread trying to make them significant enough to be impactful and offset the perks offered for taking them without being debilitating. Note all the debates on how things like a blind character could be effectively implemented. Plus if you try to make flaws impacting character behavior then it starts stepping on player agency and creates something extra the DM has to track. Neither of which seems to gel well with 5e’s design philosophies.
That might be true but just like in VtM, It would be optional and if a player isn't willing to actually apply the penalties then they just forgo it or DM doesn't have to allow it.
I think it was 13th age that had an ability score system I thought was cool. Start with 13’s. Roll 6d6 and each one gets a letter assigned to it. Then for each score, you add one and subtract one. So 13+A-B, then the next is +B-C, last one is +F-A. It seemed like an interesting way to get at the randomness I love about rolling for stats, with much less risk of either a super OP or unplayable-ly low stat spread.
There is more than a few things I could say that Pathfinder 2E has that I could say I wish D&D had but If I had to point to any one thing specifically it would be Focus Spells which is just a superior way to handle half-casters.
From VtM (not certain on version), I like the way you can get extra points by optionally taking some extra weaknesses (flaws) but can also spend points for additional boons (Merits) at character creation. Gives a bit more to designing a character than just some Ability Scores, Class and Species.
The thing about a Flaws system is that it’s a fine needle to thread trying to make them significant enough to be impactful and offset the perks offered for taking them without being debilitating. Note all the debates on how things like a blind character could be effectively implemented. Plus if you try to make flaws impacting character behavior then it starts stepping on player agency and creates something extra the DM has to track. Neither of which seems to gel well with 5e’s design philosophies.
That might be true but just like in VtM, It would be optional and if a player isn't willing to actually apply the penalties then they just forgo it or DM doesn't have to allow it.
I’m not saying it’s unworkable, although I think you’re downplaying the upkeep it creates for the DM. Which is my point- 5e strives to avoid applying mechanically significant upkeep to things like alignment requirements or other aspects of character behavior. There’s room to add it in, but it’s not a hard aspect.
There is more than a few things I could say that Pathfinder 2E has that I could say I wish D&D had but If I had to point to any one thing specifically it would be Focus Spells which is just a superior way to handle half-casters.
From VtM (not certain on version), I like the way you can get extra points by optionally taking some extra weaknesses (flaws) but can also spend points for additional boons (Merits) at character creation. Gives a bit more to designing a character than just some Ability Scores, Class and Species.
The thing about a Flaws system is that it’s a fine needle to thread trying to make them significant enough to be impactful and offset the perks offered for taking them without being debilitating. Note all the debates on how things like a blind character could be effectively implemented. Plus if you try to make flaws impacting character behavior then it starts stepping on player agency and creates something extra the DM has to track. Neither of which seems to gel well with 5e’s design philosophies.
That might be true but just like in VtM, It would be optional and if a player isn't willing to actually apply the penalties then they just forgo it or DM doesn't have to allow it.
I’m not saying it’s unworkable, although I think you’re downplaying the upkeep it creates for the DM. Which is my point- 5e strives to avoid applying mechanically significant upkeep to things like alignment requirements or other aspects of character behavior. There’s room to add it in, but it’s not a hard aspect.
I understand, I just think for the players, usually the most interesting thing to them is their own character and how that character interacts, as such those characters having flaws and merits which mechanically have actual impact is nice but you might be right that it's more to track. That said I think since it is a base part of the character it isn't all that difficult, it's no more difficult than tracking any feat or class feature, in my opinion.
There is more than a few things I could say that Pathfinder 2E has that I could say I wish D&D had but If I had to point to any one thing specifically it would be Focus Spells which is just a superior way to handle half-casters.
From VtM (not certain on version), I like the way you can get extra points by optionally taking some extra weaknesses (flaws) but can also spend points for additional boons (Merits) at character creation. Gives a bit more to designing a character than just some Ability Scores, Class and Species.
The thing about a Flaws system is that it’s a fine needle to thread trying to make them significant enough to be impactful and offset the perks offered for taking them without being debilitating. Note all the debates on how things like a blind character could be effectively implemented. Plus if you try to make flaws impacting character behavior then it starts stepping on player agency and creates something extra the DM has to track. Neither of which seems to gel well with 5e’s design philosophies.
That might be true but just like in VtM, It would be optional and if a player isn't willing to actually apply the penalties then they just forgo it or DM doesn't have to allow it.
I’m not saying it’s unworkable, although I think you’re downplaying the upkeep it creates for the DM. Which is my point- 5e strives to avoid applying mechanically significant upkeep to things like alignment requirements or other aspects of character behavior. There’s room to add it in, but it’s not a hard aspect.
I understand, I just think for the players, usually the most interesting thing to them is their own character and how that character interacts, as such those characters having flaws and merits which mechanically have actual impact is nice but you might be right that it's more to track. That said I think since it is a base part of the character it isn't all that difficult, it's no more difficult than tracking any feat or class feature, in my opinion.
If it was just down to the player to track it’s one thing, but since it’s a penalty that might conditionally crop up the DM does need to remain cognizant of it as well, as opposed to feats and such where the players will actively scan their sheets for them in response to an obstacle. It’s not inherently unworkable for a TTRPG of course, but I don’t think it’s a dynamic they wanted as a core part of 5e, particularly after they cut out the soft “I know a guy” type background features from ‘24.
Now, regarding something they could implement, I don’t have a specific mechanic to point to, but a limited way to spend something extra as a last resort move for a skill check would be a good way to help mitigate a bad roll making a climactic moment fall through.
There is more than a few things I could say that Pathfinder 2E has that I could say I wish D&D had but If I had to point to any one thing specifically it would be Focus Spells which is just a superior way to handle half-casters.
From VtM (not certain on version), I like the way you can get extra points by optionally taking some extra weaknesses (flaws) but can also spend points for additional boons (Merits) at character creation. Gives a bit more to designing a character than just some Ability Scores, Class and Species.
The thing about a Flaws system is that it’s a fine needle to thread trying to make them significant enough to be impactful and offset the perks offered for taking them without being debilitating. Note all the debates on how things like a blind character could be effectively implemented. Plus if you try to make flaws impacting character behavior then it starts stepping on player agency and creates something extra the DM has to track. Neither of which seems to gel well with 5e’s design philosophies.
Thinking back to systems I've played with similar character creation options, a lot of the flaws are things like having a nemesis/sworn enemy that would just tend to be part of a backstory anyway, or a phobia that would be fairly easy to implement mechanically
Whether it's a good idea to add that to 5e is a different question, but I don't think it would be difficult to do. Origin Feats already provide a framework for balancing out the benefits, too
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The thing about a Flaws system is that it’s a fine needle to thread trying to make them significant enough to be impactful and offset the perks offered for taking them without being debilitating. Note all the debates on how things like a blind character could be effectively implemented. Plus if you try to make flaws impacting character behavior then it starts stepping on player agency and creates something extra the DM has to track. Neither of which seems to gel well with 5e’s design philosophies.
Typically older school flaw systems solve this by having a limited budget for flaws (you can take X flaws or points in flaws, and most people do), though this adds a whole new area of character optimization as people look for the flaws that limit them the least for the points they grant. Also, this really does work best with a point system, not a class system.
A number of newer school flaw systems have switched over to dynamic accounting for flaws -- you get a bonus when the flaw causes you a problem. 2014 Inspiration looked like it was trying to do something like this. However, this runs into a different set of issues:
A flaw that gives a penalty to action X will generally cause you to just choose to do Y instead, meaning the flaw never directly gives you a problem, it's just limiting your choices. This is still a real penalty, as it may cause you to pick a more difficult course of action, but it's generally not easily accounted for by the flaw system.
Those awards tend to be handed out by the GM, which runs into the same problem as 2014 Inspiration: if a GM has 5 players with 5 flaws each, they're just going to forget about most of them.
I've yet to see a flaw system in games that didn't have one of those problems.
Note that a fair number of flaws can be handled as DM suggestions instead: if you assume the DM is going to give you challenges no matter what you do, you can suggest what kind of challenges fit your character.
What are some things you wish were in 5E that youd liked from other TTRPGs? ill go first.
Shields (item not spell) are just really boring and just a basic +2 set and forget type of item i really like what pathfinder 2e did with them by making them have more purpose in combat and giving you things to do with them like blocking more damage from hitting you at the cost of the shields HP. It allows you to feel like you are using a shield in combat rather and not just doing nothing with it
There is more than a few things I could say that Pathfinder 2E has that I could say I wish D&D had but If I had to point to any one thing specifically it would be Focus Spells which is just a superior way to handle half-casters.
From VtM (not certain on version), I like the way you can get extra points by optionally taking some extra weaknesses (flaws) but can also spend points for additional boons (Merits) at character creation. Gives a bit more to designing a character than just some Ability Scores, Class and Species.
One thing I'm working on adding to D&D from Daggerheart is environmental stat blocks. It's such a simple idea that I think works really well and could integrate into D&D pretty seamlessly on par with traps.
I also love exploding dice rolls from systems like Kids on Bikes, I think that's something D&D could use more. The best fit for it imo would be sorcerer spells.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
I still wish that they had not chickened out in 5e Design and kept the 4e healing surge system instead of replacing it with more swingy, less effective hit dice. Healing surges and how they interacted with healing mechanics, as well as being a resource that monsters, traps, or hazards could attack, or characters could spend to fuel other effects, were very nice.
I would like more "interation" mechanics, like we had in Powered by Apocalipse games (Avatar, Masks, etc..) and Pendragon games.
I'll be testing out the Doom Pool and Momentum Pool Star Trek Adventures mechanics at some point in D&D.
Finally, isn't exactly a mechanic, but i would like that some adventures could the form of the "Mission Briefs" from Star Trek Adventures.
I'm really liking Daggerheart's three choices at death mechanic. The option of death saves or going out in a blaze of glory with one guaranteed critical hit as you die gives players more of a feel of control over their death and especially for players with loads of back up characters they want to try 5e's death saves often feel like they lack any sense of purpose
Yeah, this is another aspect I really like as it gives players meaningful choices when their character goes down. I've been toying with how to possibly steal this for D&D, although I'm not sure how readily available resurrection magic is in Daggerheart, which I feel is something that would factor into the balance of this rule.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
I'm integrating those starting on my session on Monday. It's Strahd and very lethal, so I daresay it won't be long before it gets used...
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Yeah, I was about to say, in a campaign like CoS or Tomb of Annihilation -- where you literally cannot revive or resurrect anyone -- it's an awesome way to give characters a final spotlight rather than just having them bleed out with a third failed death save
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Just some thoughts on what I'd like them to introduce.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I'm considering introducing it as just a two choice mechanic, either death saves or Blaze of Glory that means you can't be resurrected. Hopefully that won't upset balance too much and I'm sure I can come up with some in-universe rational
Blaze of glory with no rez I think would narratively make sense—you draw on the power of the other side as you begin to cross over or something. Or even just you're making a decision that you're not coming back.
Balance wise I think that also works well.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
The thing about a Flaws system is that it’s a fine needle to thread trying to make them significant enough to be impactful and offset the perks offered for taking them without being debilitating. Note all the debates on how things like a blind character could be effectively implemented. Plus if you try to make flaws impacting character behavior then it starts stepping on player agency and creates something extra the DM has to track. Neither of which seems to gel well with 5e’s design philosophies.
That might be true but just like in VtM, It would be optional and if a player isn't willing to actually apply the penalties then they just forgo it or DM doesn't have to allow it.
I think it was 13th age that had an ability score system I thought was cool. Start with 13’s. Roll 6d6 and each one gets a letter assigned to it. Then for each score, you add one and subtract one. So 13+A-B, then the next is +B-C, last one is +F-A. It seemed like an interesting way to get at the randomness I love about rolling for stats, with much less risk of either a super OP or unplayable-ly low stat spread.
I’m not saying it’s unworkable, although I think you’re downplaying the upkeep it creates for the DM. Which is my point- 5e strives to avoid applying mechanically significant upkeep to things like alignment requirements or other aspects of character behavior. There’s room to add it in, but it’s not a hard aspect.
I understand, I just think for the players, usually the most interesting thing to them is their own character and how that character interacts, as such those characters having flaws and merits which mechanically have actual impact is nice but you might be right that it's more to track. That said I think since it is a base part of the character it isn't all that difficult, it's no more difficult than tracking any feat or class feature, in my opinion.
If it was just down to the player to track it’s one thing, but since it’s a penalty that might conditionally crop up the DM does need to remain cognizant of it as well, as opposed to feats and such where the players will actively scan their sheets for them in response to an obstacle. It’s not inherently unworkable for a TTRPG of course, but I don’t think it’s a dynamic they wanted as a core part of 5e, particularly after they cut out the soft “I know a guy” type background features from ‘24.
Now, regarding something they could implement, I don’t have a specific mechanic to point to, but a limited way to spend something extra as a last resort move for a skill check would be a good way to help mitigate a bad roll making a climactic moment fall through.
Thinking back to systems I've played with similar character creation options, a lot of the flaws are things like having a nemesis/sworn enemy that would just tend to be part of a backstory anyway, or a phobia that would be fairly easy to implement mechanically
Whether it's a good idea to add that to 5e is a different question, but I don't think it would be difficult to do. Origin Feats already provide a framework for balancing out the benefits, too
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Typically older school flaw systems solve this by having a limited budget for flaws (you can take X flaws or points in flaws, and most people do), though this adds a whole new area of character optimization as people look for the flaws that limit them the least for the points they grant. Also, this really does work best with a point system, not a class system.
A number of newer school flaw systems have switched over to dynamic accounting for flaws -- you get a bonus when the flaw causes you a problem. 2014 Inspiration looked like it was trying to do something like this. However, this runs into a different set of issues:
I've yet to see a flaw system in games that didn't have one of those problems.
Note that a fair number of flaws can be handled as DM suggestions instead: if you assume the DM is going to give you challenges no matter what you do, you can suggest what kind of challenges fit your character.