Hello adventurers! I am here to open a somewhat peculiar discussion, but that can open a window of creativity of the team.. In my opinion, issue 5 may have its flaws, but I believe it has achieved the initial goal of the system, which was to bring new players to the D&D.
Perhaps for an addition and also correction of some classes, it could be done an "Advanced Players Handbook 5E".
What do you mean? To bring complexity to combat beyond the modifications to some spells that are already being made.
Example? Movement within the threatened area can cause opportunity attack. As the game is very easy for the beginning player, bringing this complexity of movement can make the player think before making a hasty action to maybe catch a flank (similar to 3.5). Another modification would be to bring something like Ability Advantage and Flank Advantage (+2 in attack from levels 1 to 9, +3 in attack from levels 10+). Since it is the current mechanics of the flank, I feel that it can disable some abilities of some classes, like Barbarian’s Reckless Attack.
Of course, as I also commented, correction in some classes, as in Ranger that in my opinion is a class that displeased many players who liked to play with it in other editions.
So what? Comment on what you would make of changes in the upcoming books, to also encourage players to buy more books?
In principle I have no issues with the idea, I just don't think it is needed as part of a revision of the core rules/OneD&D core rules, but rather It could just be a source book after the release.
I get where you're coming from, but the reality is that we haven't actually received a title for the new PHB. A lot of users here and elsewhere have speculated on how it should be described but ultimately only WOTC knows for sure.
The reality is, I hope that they make the changeover as subtle as possible. Just "50th anniversary edition." It makes dinner changes but recognizes that the game has changed in meaningful ways over 50 years.
The PHB is already Advanced, because we already have a toned down version of it called Basic. And we will get updated versions of both next year.
If you're looking to add more complexity to combat, that's where optional rules come into play, such as the DMG's Tumble, Disarm, Overrun, Climb Onto, Shove Aside, as well as optional rules around Grittier Rests, Lingering Injuries etc.
I agree that Flanking should grant a small attack increase (+1 or +2) rather than advantage. That seems to be a common houserule.
Exactly. However, I believe that even with the more advanced rules, the game is still very simple and with that feeling of being very flexible, still. It doesn’t necessarily have to be equal to 3.5, but I believe that a bit of complexity, maybe a greater chance of the characters dying (instead of simply going to 0 HP, gets negative HP, maybe) can give to players who have already acquired knowledge in this edition, a little more excitement. Because we know that at higher levels it is very difficult for characters to die instantly because of the amount of life they have. Maybe the + 3 on the flank can get very strong, but I believe that if there is this difference in the way the advantage works, it can be a way to let the combat with more chance of some class skills being used.
I'm fine with more optional rules to help tailor the game's difficulty or complexity even further. But that doesn't have to be in the PHB; some of it will be in the new DMG and the rest can come later. What you're describing are nice-to-haves rather than essentials.
I agree with psyren, I’m all for optional rules, but they belong in the DMG. The PHB is for the core game. Also, there’s a number of 3rd party publishers who’ve released what amount to a more complex version of 5e. I wouldn’t be surprised if WotC left it to those companies, as it seems the desire for more complexity seems to be a bit niche. I don’t know it would get the kind of sales needed to make it worth Wizard’s while. I could be wrong, I’m just basing that on the fact that those existing more complex systems don’t get the kinds of sales numbers.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hello adventurers! I am here to open a somewhat peculiar discussion, but that can open a window of creativity of the team.. In my opinion, issue 5 may have its flaws, but I believe it has achieved the initial goal of the system, which was to bring new players to the D&D.
Perhaps for an addition and also correction of some classes, it could be done an "Advanced Players Handbook 5E".
What do you mean? To bring complexity to combat beyond the modifications to some spells that are already being made.
Example? Movement within the threatened area can cause opportunity attack. As the game is very easy for the beginning player, bringing this complexity of movement can make the player think before making a hasty action to maybe catch a flank (similar to 3.5).
Another modification would be to bring something like Ability Advantage and Flank Advantage (+2 in attack from levels 1 to 9, +3 in attack from levels 10+). Since it is the current mechanics of the flank, I feel that it can disable some abilities of some classes, like Barbarian’s Reckless Attack.
Of course, as I also commented, correction in some classes, as in Ranger that in my opinion is a class that displeased many players who liked to play with it in other editions.
So what? Comment on what you would make of changes in the upcoming books, to also encourage players to buy more books?
Good games and good rolls, guys!
In principle I have no issues with the idea, I just don't think it is needed as part of a revision of the core rules/OneD&D core rules, but rather It could just be a source book after the release.
I get where you're coming from, but the reality is that we haven't actually received a title for the new PHB. A lot of users here and elsewhere have speculated on how it should be described but ultimately only WOTC knows for sure.
The reality is, I hope that they make the changeover as subtle as possible. Just "50th anniversary edition." It makes dinner changes but recognizes that the game has changed in meaningful ways over 50 years.
The PHB is already Advanced, because we already have a toned down version of it called Basic. And we will get updated versions of both next year.
If you're looking to add more complexity to combat, that's where optional rules come into play, such as the DMG's Tumble, Disarm, Overrun, Climb Onto, Shove Aside, as well as optional rules around Grittier Rests, Lingering Injuries etc.
I agree that Flanking should grant a small attack increase (+1 or +2) rather than advantage. That seems to be a common houserule.
Exactly. However, I believe that even with the more advanced rules, the game is still very simple and with that feeling of being very flexible, still. It doesn’t necessarily have to be equal to 3.5, but I believe that a bit of complexity, maybe a greater chance of the characters dying (instead of simply going to 0 HP, gets negative HP, maybe) can give to players who have already acquired knowledge in this edition, a little more excitement. Because we know that at higher levels it is very difficult for characters to die instantly because of the amount of life they have. Maybe the + 3 on the flank can get very strong, but I believe that if there is this difference in the way the advantage works, it can be a way to let the combat with more chance of some class skills being used.
I'm fine with more optional rules to help tailor the game's difficulty or complexity even further. But that doesn't have to be in the PHB; some of it will be in the new DMG and the rest can come later. What you're describing are nice-to-haves rather than essentials.
I agree with psyren, I’m all for optional rules, but they belong in the DMG. The PHB is for the core game.
Also, there’s a number of 3rd party publishers who’ve released what amount to a more complex version of 5e. I wouldn’t be surprised if WotC left it to those companies, as it seems the desire for more complexity seems to be a bit niche. I don’t know it would get the kind of sales needed to make it worth Wizard’s while. I could be wrong, I’m just basing that on the fact that those existing more complex systems don’t get the kinds of sales numbers.