Nah, comparing the current situation to the satanic panic is a bad comparison. More to the point, the people who engaged in the satanic panic are (some of) the same ones complaining about "woke" now. "Being aware of social problems and trying to bring justice" is kinda the new satan.
Those same anti-wokers are starting to make rumblings about the evils of D&D again…
That's makes me sad.
Anyway...in the hopes of avoiding a real political discussion (against the forum rules), uh...my biggest concern with OneD&D (which is not in the poll) is that they'll change the inspiration mechanic too much.
Valid concern in my mind -- inspiration ia potent tool. And the kind of mechanic that has big time impact since I have to try and plan for it to some extent at least.
I like both Inspiration and Hero points and that is funny to write down and read, but given I am not going to have superheroes running around, I wanted to give them a chance to still get that feeling.
As far as I’m concerned they could lop off the inspiration mechanic and toss it in the smoldering remains of the OGL dumpster fire. I hate that mechanic.
I think the current implementation of Inspiration is a bit too simple. Advantage is easier than ever to get nowadays and 1DnD looks to be no exception, so you end up with people sitting on their Inspiration because they almost never need it.
I think it would be much more interesting if you could cash it in as a sort of Cunning Action-lite - say if I could spend Inspiration in order to Bonus Action Disengage, Dodge, Hide, or even one of the new actions like Study.
I think the current implementation of Inspiration is a bit too simple. Advantage is easier than ever to get nowadays and 1DnD looks to be no exception, so you end up with people sitting on their Inspiration because they almost never need it.
I think it would be much more interesting if you could cash it in as a sort of Cunning Action-lite - say if I could spend Inspiration in order to Bonus Action Disengage, Dodge, Hide, or even one of the new actions like Study.
I like the way you are thinking there, but I might go farther and just provide a free action that would be limited to a certain extent like with the spell Haste. I might even consider allowing someone to take an extra reaction by using inspiration. This would obviously make it far more powerful than it is now, but if given out quite sparingly, I think it could be worth considering.
I think the current implementation of Inspiration is a bit too simple. Advantage is easier than ever to get nowadays and 1DnD looks to be no exception, so you end up with people sitting on their Inspiration because they almost never need it.
I think it would be much more interesting if you could cash it in as a sort of Cunning Action-lite - say if I could spend Inspiration in order to Bonus Action Disengage, Dodge, Hide, or even one of the new actions like Study.
I like that idea, myself.
Especially the concept of spending one to get a bonus action. Not a regular action, but since I use it a bit like story points, it really fits more smoothly and I hadn't thought of that use, so thank you.
I put a lot of silly stuff in my games, but I don't have "easy" encounters, lol, and I reward "heroic acts" and encourage folks to not be overly cautious.I feel like poop if a sessions ends without some kind of story to tell later.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Many heroes are capable of daring and dramatic feats, drawing upon their innate talent, determination, or a hint of the greater destiny that lies ahead of them. When a player character does something particularly heroic or in character, the DM can award them with Heroic Inspiration. Some game features, such as the Human, also specify when they award Heroic Inspiration.
When you have Heroic Inspiration, you can expend it in one of the following ways:
Heroic Advantage: The player character can expend their Heroic Inspiration to gain Advantage on a d20 Test. You decide whether to do so immediately after rolling the d20.
Heroic Surge: On your turn, you can expend your Heroic Inspiration to gain an extra Action. The Action you gain in this way cannot be used to make an attack or cast a spell.
You can never have more than one instance of Heroic Inspiration. If something gives you Heroic Inspiration and you already have it, you can give it to a player character in your group who lacks it.
Many heroes are capable of daring and dramatic feats, drawing upon their innate talent, determination, or a hint of the greater destiny that lies ahead of them. When a player character does something particularly heroic or in character, the DM can award them with Heroic Inspiration. Some game features, such as the Human, also specify when they award Heroic Inspiration.
When you have Heroic Inspiration, you can expend it in one of the following ways:
Heroic Advantage: The player character can expend their Heroic Inspiration to gain Advantage on a d20 Test. You decide whether to do so immediately after rolling the d20.
Heroic Surge: On your turn, you can expend your Heroic Inspiration to gain an extra Action. The Action you gain in this way cannot be used to make an attack or cast a spell.
You can never have more than one instance of Heroic Inspiration. If something gives you Heroic Inspiration and you already have it, you can give it to a player character in your group who lacks it.
Tying Inspiration to a feature trait for humans is probably the thing I like the least about 1D&D, specifically because it's extra baggage if the GM removes/reduces/enhances Inspiration. With 5E, WotC was at least smart enough to limit the trait using a optional rule to the variant version. Don't strongly bond game features that are not inherently related, it's just bad game design.
Many heroes are capable of daring and dramatic feats, drawing upon their innate talent, determination, or a hint of the greater destiny that lies ahead of them. When a player character does something particularly heroic or in character, the DM can award them with Heroic Inspiration. Some game features, such as the Human, also specify when they award Heroic Inspiration.
When you have Heroic Inspiration, you can expend it in one of the following ways:
Heroic Advantage: The player character can expend their Heroic Inspiration to gain Advantage on a d20 Test. You decide whether to do so immediately after rolling the d20.
Heroic Surge: On your turn, you can expend your Heroic Inspiration to gain an extra Action. The Action you gain in this way cannot be used to make an attack or cast a spell.
You can never have more than one instance of Heroic Inspiration. If something gives you Heroic Inspiration and you already have it, you can give it to a player character in your group who lacks it.
Tying Inspiration to a feature trait for humans is probably the thing I like the least about 1D&D, specifically because it's extra baggage if the GM removes/reduces/enhances Inspiration. With 5E, WotC was at least smart enough to limit the trait using a optional rule to the variant version. Don't strongly bond game features that are not inherently related, it's just bad game design.
I like humans getting inspiration, it's a great way to make them feel special without making them feel inhuman.
Many heroes are capable of daring and dramatic feats, drawing upon their innate talent, determination, or a hint of the greater destiny that lies ahead of them. When a player character does something particularly heroic or in character, the DM can award them with Heroic Inspiration. Some game features, such as the Human, also specify when they award Heroic Inspiration.
When you have Heroic Inspiration, you can expend it in one of the following ways:
Heroic Advantage: The player character can expend their Heroic Inspiration to gain Advantage on a d20 Test. You decide whether to do so immediately after rolling the d20.
Heroic Surge: On your turn, you can expend your Heroic Inspiration to gain an extra Action. The Action you gain in this way cannot be used to make an attack or cast a spell.
You can never have more than one instance of Heroic Inspiration. If something gives you Heroic Inspiration and you already have it, you can give it to a player character in your group who lacks it.
Tying Inspiration to a feature trait for humans is probably the thing I like the least about 1D&D, specifically because it's extra baggage if the GM removes/reduces/enhances Inspiration. With 5E, WotC was at least smart enough to limit the trait using a optional rule to the variant version. Don't strongly bond game features that are not inherently related, it's just bad game design.
Having features interact with each other is bad game design? Yes, WotC relegated the trait that used an optional rule to the option variant version in 5e. That was a good choice. However, in 1D&D, inspiration is not an optional rule.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
I have five human types. Only one gets the inspiration thing.
the other four get something else.
And all of the people types have something roughly equivalent.
but as a real human in the real world, I can say that I am both special and inhuman, and I don’t even get a choice in it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Many heroes are capable of daring and dramatic feats, drawing upon their innate talent, determination, or a hint of the greater destiny that lies ahead of them. When a player character does something particularly heroic or in character, the DM can award them with Heroic Inspiration. Some game features, such as the Human, also specify when they award Heroic Inspiration.
When you have Heroic Inspiration, you can expend it in one of the following ways:
Heroic Advantage: The player character can expend their Heroic Inspiration to gain Advantage on a d20 Test. You decide whether to do so immediately after rolling the d20.
Heroic Surge: On your turn, you can expend your Heroic Inspiration to gain an extra Action. The Action you gain in this way cannot be used to make an attack or cast a spell.
You can never have more than one instance of Heroic Inspiration. If something gives you Heroic Inspiration and you already have it, you can give it to a player character in your group who lacks it.
Tying Inspiration to a feature trait for humans is probably the thing I like the least about 1D&D, specifically because it's extra baggage if the GM removes/reduces/enhances Inspiration. With 5E, WotC was at least smart enough to limit the trait using a optional rule to the variant version. Don't strongly bond game features that are not inherently related, it's just bad game design.
Having features interact with each other is bad game design? Yes, WotC relegated the trait that used an optional rule to the option variant version in 5e. That was a good choice. However, in 1D&D, inspiration is not an optional rule.
That's clearly not what I stated, but I bolded a key part. Obviously in some instances features have to interact with each other. Playing a human character & using the RAW Inspiration mechanic is not one of them.
Many heroes are capable of daring and dramatic feats, drawing upon their innate talent, determination, or a hint of the greater destiny that lies ahead of them. When a player character does something particularly heroic or in character, the DM can award them with Heroic Inspiration. Some game features, such as the Human, also specify when they award Heroic Inspiration.
When you have Heroic Inspiration, you can expend it in one of the following ways:
Heroic Advantage: The player character can expend their Heroic Inspiration to gain Advantage on a d20 Test. You decide whether to do so immediately after rolling the d20.
Heroic Surge: On your turn, you can expend your Heroic Inspiration to gain an extra Action. The Action you gain in this way cannot be used to make an attack or cast a spell.
You can never have more than one instance of Heroic Inspiration. If something gives you Heroic Inspiration and you already have it, you can give it to a player character in your group who lacks it.
Tying Inspiration to a feature trait for humans is probably the thing I like the least about 1D&D, specifically because it's extra baggage if the GM removes/reduces/enhances Inspiration. With 5E, WotC was at least smart enough to limit the trait using a optional rule to the variant version. Don't strongly bond game features that are not inherently related, it's just bad game design.
Having features interact with each other is bad game design? Yes, WotC relegated the trait that used an optional rule to the option variant version in 5e. That was a good choice. However, in 1D&D, inspiration is not an optional rule.
That's clearly not what I stated, but I bolded a key part. Obviously in some instances features have to interact with each other. Playing a human character & using the RAW Inspiration mechanic is not one of them.
Halflings are a species thatare not inherently related to the idea of a d20, and yet their main feature relies on having a DM that uses d20s. Is there no justice in this world!?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Many heroes are capable of daring and dramatic feats, drawing upon their innate talent, determination, or a hint of the greater destiny that lies ahead of them. When a player character does something particularly heroic or in character, the DM can award them with Heroic Inspiration. Some game features, such as the Human, also specify when they award Heroic Inspiration.
When you have Heroic Inspiration, you can expend it in one of the following ways:
Heroic Advantage: The player character can expend their Heroic Inspiration to gain Advantage on a d20 Test. You decide whether to do so immediately after rolling the d20.
Heroic Surge: On your turn, you can expend your Heroic Inspiration to gain an extra Action. The Action you gain in this way cannot be used to make an attack or cast a spell.
You can never have more than one instance of Heroic Inspiration. If something gives you Heroic Inspiration and you already have it, you can give it to a player character in your group who lacks it.
Tying Inspiration to a feature trait for humans is probably the thing I like the least about 1D&D, specifically because it's extra baggage if the GM removes/reduces/enhances Inspiration. With 5E, WotC was at least smart enough to limit the trait using a optional rule to the variant version. Don't strongly bond game features that are not inherently related, it's just bad game design.
Having features interact with each other is bad game design? Yes, WotC relegated the trait that used an optional rule to the option variant version in 5e. That was a good choice. However, in 1D&D, inspiration is not an optional rule.
That's clearly not what I stated, but I bolded a key part. Obviously in some instances features have to interact with each other. Playing a human character & using the RAW Inspiration mechanic is not one of them.
Halflings are a species thatare not inherently related to the idea of a d20, and yet their main feature relies on having a DM that uses d20s. Is there no justice in this world!?
Using d20s is a far more integral part of D&D than Inspiration because it's the resolution method for a large percentage of the actions taken in game. How many sessions have you had where no one made a attack roll, saving throw, or ability check? Maybe if you spent the entire evening hanging out in the tavern & roleplaying, but that's rule system agnostic anyway. If you did change the resolution method from d20 to something else, Lucky can tie into whatever that method is because the key part of Lucky actually doesn't require d20s, it requires rerolls. Inspiration on the other hand, can be cleanly removed by simply not using it, and there are no other consequences. Except in 1D&D, as humans would have a chunk of mechanics missing.
Many heroes are capable of daring and dramatic feats, drawing upon their innate talent, determination, or a hint of the greater destiny that lies ahead of them. When a player character does something particularly heroic or in character, the DM can award them with Heroic Inspiration. Some game features, such as the Human, also specify when they award Heroic Inspiration.
When you have Heroic Inspiration, you can expend it in one of the following ways:
Heroic Advantage: The player character can expend their Heroic Inspiration to gain Advantage on a d20 Test. You decide whether to do so immediately after rolling the d20.
Heroic Surge: On your turn, you can expend your Heroic Inspiration to gain an extra Action. The Action you gain in this way cannot be used to make an attack or cast a spell.
You can never have more than one instance of Heroic Inspiration. If something gives you Heroic Inspiration and you already have it, you can give it to a player character in your group who lacks it.
Tying Inspiration to a feature trait for humans is probably the thing I like the least about 1D&D, specifically because it's extra baggage if the GM removes/reduces/enhances Inspiration. With 5E, WotC was at least smart enough to limit the trait using a optional rule to the variant version. Don't strongly bond game features that are not inherently related, it's just bad game design.
Having features interact with each other is bad game design? Yes, WotC relegated the trait that used an optional rule to the option variant version in 5e. That was a good choice. However, in 1D&D, inspiration is not an optional rule.
That's clearly not what I stated, but I bolded a key part. Obviously in some instances features have to interact with each other. Playing a human character & using the RAW Inspiration mechanic is not one of them.
Halflings are a species thatare not inherently related to the idea of a d20, and yet their main feature relies on having a DM that uses d20s. Is there no justice in this world!?
Using d20s is a far more integral part of D&D than Inspiration because it's the resolution method for a large percentage of the actions taken in game. How many sessions have you had where no one made a attack roll, saving throw, or ability check? Maybe if you spent the entire evening hanging out in the tavern & roleplaying, but that's rule system agnostic anyway. If you did change the resolution method from d20 to something else, Lucky can tie into whatever that method is because the key part of Lucky actually doesn't require d20s, it requires rerolls. Inspiration on the other hand, can be cleanly removed by simply not using it, and there are no other consequences. Except in 1D&D, as humans would have a chunk of mechanics missing.
I don't see the problem with this. There are holes that must be patched if you decide to completely and utterly remove a facet of the game. Woe is you.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
My major concern will be that they'll make things over-genericised. There's been a move for that, and it makes things much less interesting.
An example of what's reawakened my concern is the UA Druid WS - rather than being a diverse and wide selection with various options available, they've boiled it all down to three generic choices and told "flavour them how you like". While I was less bothered by it, they did similar with mixed species - they tell you that if you want to be a half-x, half-y, then pick either x or y and then just call it a half-x, half-y. No real mechanical representation that you're actually a mix of two.
Going back to the Druid, I'd have been happier of they'd offered the three generic statblocks as an alternative to the various beasts as a "if you just want to keep things simple, you can use these to only need to deal with three statblocks".
The advantage of D&D over video games is that you can do all sorts of things and have them be mechanically meaningful in the game. I could play Skyrim, become a were-wolf and pretend it's a giant badger. 5e offered the opportunity to actually become a Giant Badger and have that be mechanically meaningfully different to being a Werewolf, which a computer game can't really handle too well. By resolving things down to generic options, it's losing what makes it advantageous over a computer game...while having the various disadvantages that come with being a tabletop game.
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.
My major concern will be that they'll make things over-genericised. There's been a move for that, and it makes things much less interesting.
An example of what's reawakened my concern is the UA Druid WS - rather than being a diverse and wide selection with various options available, they've boiled it all down to three generic choices and told "flavour them how you like". While I was less bothered by it, they did similar with mixed species - they tell you that if you want to be a half-x, half-y, then pick either x or y and then just call it a half-x, half-y. No real mechanical representation that you're actually a mix of two.
Going back to the Druid, I'd have been happier of they'd offered the three generic statblocks as an alternative to the various beasts as a "if you just want to keep things simple, you can use these to only need to deal with three statblocks".
The advantage of D&D over video games is that you can do all sorts of things and have them be mechanically meaningful in the game. I could play Skyrim, become a were-wolf and pretend it's a giant badger. 5e offered the opportunity to actually become a Giant Badger and have that be mechanically meaningfully different to being a Werewolf, which a computer game can't really handle too well. By resolving things down to generic options, it's losing what makes it advantageous over a computer game...while having the various disadvantages that come with being a tabletop game.
I'm surprised that WotC didn't copy 3 generally useful creatures (like wolf, shark, owl just as examples) to use as a simple option, and then state "Once you're comfortable with playing a druid, talk to your GM about shifting into other beast forms." and more or less reprint the existing Wildshape rules. I get the aversion to needing to know about every beast in every book that's legal at your table, but that doesn't mean there shouldn't be a path to more options for the players that want to use it. Low barrier to entry, more complexity available when desired.
My major concern will be that they'll make things over-genericised. There's been a move for that, and it makes things much less interesting.
An example of what's reawakened my concern is the UA Druid WS - rather than being a diverse and wide selection with various options available, they've boiled it all down to three generic choices and told "flavour them how you like". While I was less bothered by it, they did similar with mixed species - they tell you that if you want to be a half-x, half-y, then pick either x or y and then just call it a half-x, half-y. No real mechanical representation that you're actually a mix of two.
Going back to the Druid, I'd have been happier of they'd offered the three generic statblocks as an alternative to the various beasts as a "if you just want to keep things simple, you can use these to only need to deal with three statblocks".
The advantage of D&D over video games is that you can do all sorts of things and have them be mechanically meaningful in the game. I could play Skyrim, become a were-wolf and pretend it's a giant badger. 5e offered the opportunity to actually become a Giant Badger and have that be mechanically meaningfully different to being a Werewolf, which a computer game can't really handle too well. By resolving things down to generic options, it's losing what makes it advantageous over a computer game...while having the various disadvantages that come with being a tabletop game.
I'm surprised that WotC didn't copy 3 generally useful creatures (like wolf, shark, owl just as examples) to use as a simple option, and then state "Once you're comfortable with playing a druid, talk to your GM about shifting into other beast forms." and more or less reprint the existing Wildshape rules. I get the aversion to needing to know about every beast in every book that's legal at your table, but that doesn't mean there shouldn't be a path to more options for the players that want to use it. Low barrier to entry, more complexity available when desired.
Agreed. I did have hopes that's the route they'd take when they announced the premade prepared spell lists - an easy, pretty good option that beginners can default to and be confident that it's going to be reasonable, but still the option to build your own according to your own desires - perhaps roleplaying your character, tailoring to your style of play, or whatever. You get the ease of entry, while allowing advanced players the opportunity to do more. The UA WS has reawakened my concern that they're just going to head towards making it an interior version of a computer game.
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.
The issue with R5e Wild Shape - the one everybody's forgetting while they self-destruct over the first iteration of the One druid - is that it's not fair to the druid player. Every other class in R5e with one minor subclass exception is contained within the Player's Handbook, their rules are right there and easy to reference. But a druid? A druid has to go out and buy a Monster Manual and also probably a DMG to get a full listing of beast shapes they can change into, or wheedle and convince their DM to share access to books most DMs are loathe to let players touch. If the druid can do neither of these things? They get no Wild Shape.
Why should a druid player have to spend an extra hundred dollars just to gain access to one class feature?
The issue with R5e Wild Shape - the one everybody's forgetting while they self-destruct over the first iteration of the One druid - is that it's not fair to the druid player. Every other class in R5e with one minor subclass exception is contained within the Player's Handbook, their rules are right there and easy to reference. But a druid? A druid has to go out and buy a Monster Manual and also probably a DMG to get a full listing of beast shapes they can change into, or wheedle and convince their DM to share access to books most DMs are loathe to let players touch. If the druid can do neither of these things? They get no Wild Shape.
Why should a druid player have to spend an extra hundred dollars just to gain access to one class feature?
Easy fix: only beast forms in the Basic Rules are allowed. That would solve a number of balance problems, tbh (not all; CR 1 is still too powerful for level 2).
The issue with R5e Wild Shape - the one everybody's forgetting while they self-destruct over the first iteration of the One druid - is that it's not fair to the druid player. Every other class in R5e with one minor subclass exception is contained within the Player's Handbook, their rules are right there and easy to reference. But a druid? A druid has to go out and buy a Monster Manual and also probably a DMG to get a full listing of beast shapes they can change into, or wheedle and convince their DM to share access to books most DMs are loathe to let players touch. If the druid can do neither of these things? They get no Wild Shape.
Why should a druid player have to spend an extra hundred dollars just to gain access to one class feature?
Easy fix: only beast forms in the Basic Rules are allowed. That would solve a number of balance problems, tbh (not all; CR 1 is still too powerful for level 2).
You don't even need to go that far, to be honest. Just provide a couple of statblocks as options from those who don't have a MM or whatever. Or even, like, the DM could share that information. Adventures expect that kind of thing not infrequently. It's really not hard to get around these obstacles without making things that make the game interesting illegal.
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.
The issue with R5e Wild Shape - the one everybody's forgetting while they self-destruct over the first iteration of the One druid - is that it's not fair to the druid player. Every other class in R5e with one minor subclass exception is contained within the Player's Handbook, their rules are right there and easy to reference. But a druid? A druid has to go out and buy a Monster Manual and also probably a DMG to get a full listing of beast shapes they can change into, or wheedle and convince their DM to share access to books most DMs are loathe to let players touch. If the druid can do neither of these things? They get no Wild Shape.
Why should a druid player have to spend an extra hundred dollars just to gain access to one class feature?
I don't know what DM's you've played with, but I never had one gatekeep access to books when needed. Also, you're incorrect. The basic elementals and beasts are accessible here under Basic Rules, so you can see their statblocks even without owning or having shared access to a Monster Manual. Yes, it's not outright printed in the physical PHB, but it takes a minimum effort for someone to find them.
As far as I’m concerned they could lop off the inspiration mechanic and toss it in the smoldering remains of the OGL dumpster fire. I hate that mechanic.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I think the current implementation of Inspiration is a bit too simple. Advantage is easier than ever to get nowadays and 1DnD looks to be no exception, so you end up with people sitting on their Inspiration because they almost never need it.
I think it would be much more interesting if you could cash it in as a sort of Cunning Action-lite - say if I could spend Inspiration in order to Bonus Action Disengage, Dodge, Hide, or even one of the new actions like Study.
I like the way you are thinking there, but I might go farther and just provide a free action that would be limited to a certain extent like with the spell Haste. I might even consider allowing someone to take an extra reaction by using inspiration. This would obviously make it far more powerful than it is now, but if given out quite sparingly, I think it could be worth considering.
I like that idea, myself.
Especially the concept of spending one to get a bonus action. Not a regular action, but since I use it a bit like story points, it really fits more smoothly and I hadn't thought of that use, so thank you.
I put a lot of silly stuff in my games, but I don't have "easy" encounters, lol, and I reward "heroic acts" and encourage folks to not be overly cautious.I feel like poop if a sessions ends without some kind of story to tell later.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
How about something like this?
Heroic Inspiration
Many heroes are capable of daring and dramatic feats, drawing upon their innate talent, determination, or a hint of the greater destiny that lies ahead of them. When a player character does something particularly heroic or in character, the DM can award them with Heroic Inspiration. Some game features, such as the Human, also specify when they award Heroic Inspiration.
When you have Heroic Inspiration, you can expend it in one of the following ways:
Heroic Advantage: The player character can expend their Heroic Inspiration to gain Advantage on a d20 Test. You decide whether to do so immediately after rolling the d20.
Heroic Surge: On your turn, you can expend your Heroic Inspiration to gain an extra Action. The Action you gain in this way cannot be used to make an attack or cast a spell.
You can never have more than one instance of Heroic Inspiration. If something gives you Heroic Inspiration and you already have it, you can give it to a player character in your group who lacks it.
Tying Inspiration to a feature trait for humans is probably the thing I like the least about 1D&D, specifically because it's extra baggage if the GM removes/reduces/enhances Inspiration. With 5E, WotC was at least smart enough to limit the trait using a optional rule to the variant version. Don't strongly bond game features that are not inherently related, it's just bad game design.
I like humans getting inspiration, it's a great way to make them feel special without making them feel inhuman.
Having features interact with each other is bad game design? Yes, WotC relegated the trait that used an optional rule to the option variant version in 5e. That was a good choice. However, in 1D&D, inspiration is not an optional rule.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
I have five human types. Only one gets the inspiration thing.
the other four get something else.
And all of the people types have something roughly equivalent.
but as a real human in the real world, I can say that I am both special and inhuman, and I don’t even get a choice in it.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
That's clearly not what I stated, but I bolded a key part. Obviously in some instances features have to interact with each other. Playing a human character & using the RAW Inspiration mechanic is not one of them.
Halflings are a species that are not inherently related to the idea of a d20, and yet their main feature relies on having a DM that uses d20s. Is there no justice in this world!?
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Using d20s is a far more integral part of D&D than Inspiration because it's the resolution method for a large percentage of the actions taken in game. How many sessions have you had where no one made a attack roll, saving throw, or ability check? Maybe if you spent the entire evening hanging out in the tavern & roleplaying, but that's rule system agnostic anyway. If you did change the resolution method from d20 to something else, Lucky can tie into whatever that method is because the key part of Lucky actually doesn't require d20s, it requires rerolls. Inspiration on the other hand, can be cleanly removed by simply not using it, and there are no other consequences. Except in 1D&D, as humans would have a chunk of mechanics missing.
I don't see the problem with this. There are holes that must be patched if you decide to completely and utterly remove a facet of the game. Woe is you.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
My major concern will be that they'll make things over-genericised. There's been a move for that, and it makes things much less interesting.
An example of what's reawakened my concern is the UA Druid WS - rather than being a diverse and wide selection with various options available, they've boiled it all down to three generic choices and told "flavour them how you like". While I was less bothered by it, they did similar with mixed species - they tell you that if you want to be a half-x, half-y, then pick either x or y and then just call it a half-x, half-y. No real mechanical representation that you're actually a mix of two.
Going back to the Druid, I'd have been happier of they'd offered the three generic statblocks as an alternative to the various beasts as a "if you just want to keep things simple, you can use these to only need to deal with three statblocks".
The advantage of D&D over video games is that you can do all sorts of things and have them be mechanically meaningful in the game. I could play Skyrim, become a were-wolf and pretend it's a giant badger. 5e offered the opportunity to actually become a Giant Badger and have that be mechanically meaningfully different to being a Werewolf, which a computer game can't really handle too well. By resolving things down to generic options, it's losing what makes it advantageous over a computer game...while having the various disadvantages that come with being a tabletop game.
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 surprised that WotC didn't copy 3 generally useful creatures (like wolf, shark, owl just as examples) to use as a simple option, and then state "Once you're comfortable with playing a druid, talk to your GM about shifting into other beast forms." and more or less reprint the existing Wildshape rules. I get the aversion to needing to know about every beast in every book that's legal at your table, but that doesn't mean there shouldn't be a path to more options for the players that want to use it. Low barrier to entry, more complexity available when desired.
Agreed. I did have hopes that's the route they'd take when they announced the premade prepared spell lists - an easy, pretty good option that beginners can default to and be confident that it's going to be reasonable, but still the option to build your own according to your own desires - perhaps roleplaying your character, tailoring to your style of play, or whatever. You get the ease of entry, while allowing advanced players the opportunity to do more. The UA WS has reawakened my concern that they're just going to head towards making it an interior version of a computer game.
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.
The issue with R5e Wild Shape - the one everybody's forgetting while they self-destruct over the first iteration of the One druid - is that it's not fair to the druid player. Every other class in R5e with one minor subclass exception is contained within the Player's Handbook, their rules are right there and easy to reference. But a druid? A druid has to go out and buy a Monster Manual and also probably a DMG to get a full listing of beast shapes they can change into, or wheedle and convince their DM to share access to books most DMs are loathe to let players touch. If the druid can do neither of these things? They get no Wild Shape.
Why should a druid player have to spend an extra hundred dollars just to gain access to one class feature?
Please do not contact or message me.
Easy fix: only beast forms in the Basic Rules are allowed. That would solve a number of balance problems, tbh (not all; CR 1 is still too powerful for level 2).
You don't even need to go that far, to be honest. Just provide a couple of statblocks as options from those who don't have a MM or whatever. Or even, like, the DM could share that information. Adventures expect that kind of thing not infrequently. It's really not hard to get around these obstacles without making things that make the game interesting illegal.
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 don't know what DM's you've played with, but I never had one gatekeep access to books when needed. Also, you're incorrect. The basic elementals and beasts are accessible here under Basic Rules, so you can see their statblocks even without owning or having shared access to a Monster Manual. Yes, it's not outright printed in the physical PHB, but it takes a minimum effort for someone to find them.