When I first read the PHB I found a small snag: there was a race that gave a +2 bonus to each ability score except for Wisdom. (This is half of where my hatred for Elves came from)
I really hope that when the Advanced Player's Handbook (PHA) / 5.5 comes out that they include something like that.
I hope that Wizards recognizes that some players enjoy the puzzle of character building with RAW stats, but include the Cooked Stats of Tasha's Cauldron of Everything as a permanent rule.
RAW Stats vs. Cooked Stats: RAW Stats are Rules as Written. Hill Dwarves get +2 Con and +1 Wis. This is great for new players who don't need to devote more mental energy to building a character. That is an additional barrier to entry. Reducing those barries to entry is a big part of how Mark Rosewater got M:tg to grow as he did. Cooked Stats on the other hand is at least my term for when you get to pick what they are (similar to phrase, "cooking the books" for writing down whatever you want in your ledger). You generally get a +2 and a +1 which can go wherever you want or become three +1's... just not a +3. All good.
Personally, I like the generic race benefits. I think their are times when the bonuses dont make sense and wish it were not harder to play certain classes just because your using your favorite fantasy race.
I hope that in 5.5e/6e (whatever it is) they switch the generic bonus to RAW stats and the current way to do it as a variant.
When I first read the PHB I found a small snag: there was a race that gave a +2 bonus to each ability score except for Wisdom. (This is half of where my hatred for Elves came from)
I really hope that when the Advanced Player's Handbook (PHA) / 5.5 comes out that they include something like that.
I hope that Wizards recognizes that some players enjoy the puzzle of character building with RAW stats, but include the Cooked Stats of Tasha's Cauldron of Everything as a permanent rule.
RAW Stats vs. Cooked Stats: RAW Stats are Rules as Written. Hill Dwarves get +2 Con and +1 Wis. This is great for new players who don't need to devote more mental energy to building a character. That is an additional barrier to entry. Reducing those barries to entry is a big part of how Mark Rosewater got M:tg to grow as he did. Cooked Stats on the other hand is at least my term for when you get to pick what they are (similar to phrase, "cooking the books" for writing down whatever you want in your ledger). You generally get a +2 and a +1 which can go wherever you want or become three +1's... just not a +3. All good.
Not sure what book you are reading but there are no races in the 5e players handbook that have a +2 to all stats except Wisdom. Also no clue what you are talking about when you say people just write down whatever stats they want. I don't know o any DM that allows people to do that, there are 3 stat gen methods - roll dice, stat array or point buy. Then you add on your racial bonus either as floating bonuses or fixed bonuses depending on the DM. I guess point buy or stat array could may be - kind of - sort of - be thought of as just writting down whatever you want - vaguely. But they aren't. Not even closely.
My hope for 5.5 is that ability score points based on species are done away with completely. No back-hacked floating +2/+1 to make existing species compatible with the new design philosophy. Fold those points into point buy and the standard array, and if people roll for their numbers instead then they get what the dice tell them the way they claim to want instead of slap-patching a weird roll with species floaters.
No more pigeonholing every species in the game into a tiny, narrow niche. No more "your high elf can technically be anything you want it to be!...but if you don't make it a ranger, rogue or maybe a wizard if your DM is feeling generous, Shiva will descend from the Heavens to six-armed gatling punch you in the junk like three different Senator Armstrongs at once until you stop trying to be a unique little snowflake with your own pissant ideas nobody asked for and play the character God and Gary Gygax intended you to play, you sniveling little chowder monkey." Every character gets equal access to every class, and it's qualitative differences rather than straight-up math who tends to be good at what.
Among a plethora of other, less contentious hopes, anyways. But since M3 seems to be re-igniting all the old TCoE slap fights, that's the one relevant to this thread.
My hope is that they will present the fixed ASIs for each race with an overarching option for the (+2/+1)/(+1/+1/+1) for all races so that those on both sides of the disagreement can get what they want.
Why not make more customers happy rather than only a portion of their customers? Give the people what they want, give us both options and let each table decide for themselves which to use. After all, it works for the Rolled Stats/Standard Array/Point Buy divide. Nobody complains that there’s an option for all tastes in that regard. It works for the XP/Milestone divide. It works for people who want different ways to address Encumbrance. Why not apply the same winning strategy to racial ASIs too? Ne?
I would like to see better/more rules for Exploration and Social Interaction. D&D has always, and should always, be partially about cool combat, killing things and taking their stuff, but if we want to encourage the other pillars of D&D, then we need rules to help facilitate that, at least as much as we have rules for combat. Something like Skill Contests from 4e (why wasn't this brought forward to 5e) and more info on how to run social interactions.
In a 5.5e MM I would LOVE to have an easy way to scale monsters or NPCs for combat.
I agree that we should keep the species/race ability modifiers as one option, if it's no longer going to be the default, or if not in the PHB then I'd like to see it in the DMG explained as a way to customize your world, or have a proper fully formed Forgotten Realms book that stipulates the racial bonuses.
I don't want to see alignment go away. D&D is supposed to be about fantasy worlds where real gods that are really Evil and Good exist, and can do powerful things based on their alignment.
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing) You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
A little more customisation, in the form of more (but less powered) feat access. Do away with the powerhouse feats and break them down into individual components for a mix and match system.
I'd appreciate more attention to the implementation of magic items. 5e is not balanced around the party having them, and there's really no guidelines on how adding them into your game affects things (let alone what they might cost). For new DMs, there is little but to feel out how they affect game play and adjust accordingly. I'm not familiar enough with previous editions to know how it used to be handled, but I guess more DM guidance in general would be nice.
I suppose this dovetails into fixing CR, but we all know that's an issue...
I'd like to see some notes taken from the star wars 5e system.
Starting feats based on your background you can pick from, with some feats being slapped with level 4 prerequisites to stop a level 1 from having anything too busted.
More options for martials, such as their version of rogue being able to sacrifice two of their sneak attack dice for different effects, all fighters getting maneuvers and just having a crap ton more maneuvers to pick from, fighting styles made more interesting and adding fighting masteries as a second layer for fighters, etc.
- Take proficiencies, languages, and ability score adjustments, and put them in backgrounds only (example background: tribal raider is usually the background for goblins in the forgotten realms, gives proficiency in a weapon and a language from like, goblin, uthgardt, or orcish, and then either STR or DEX +2)
- Balance feats so you can take them every few levels, and then make it so you take them every few levels
- Remove ASIs
- Rebalance magic items so you can craft them without breaking the game, then make a crafting system
- fix the bad wording, i.e. melee weapon attack vs attack with a melee weapon
- make all spells behave similarly, i.e. if you save every turn, it's always at the end of turn
I hope that in 5.5e/6e (whatever it is) they switch the generic bonus to RAW stats and the current way to do it as a variant.
That's pretty much where we are now with the new MMM races and legacy versions.
I think it's important to temper expectations here. When people hear 5.5, a lot of them are thinking of the books teased for 2024. I'm pretty sure we are already in that phase of D&D. They are not going to put out radical changes from what we're seeing now. I pretty much expect a reprint of the PHB with the design changes we've seen implemented since Tasha's. Maybe some of the ideas we've seen in Strixhaven or the Dragonlance UA, but those feel to me more like spitballing ideas rather than committed design decisions. Maybe a few of the upcoming books will be used to refine these mechanics.
So I wouldn't expect big changes until 6.0. And I wouldn't expect 6.0 for many years.
I echo a lot of the sentiment here, especially things like placing more emphasis on feats, presentation regarding ruling language, and sorting out some of the more bothersome traits of classes (Sorcerers being limited to a handful of Metamagics, Fighters lacking maneuvers, and I'll keep some rants about Barbarian identity to myself).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Zero is the most important number in D&D: Session Zero sets the boundaries and the tone; Rule Zero dictates the Dungeon Master (DM) is the final arbiter; and Zero D&D is better than Bad D&D.
"Let us speak plainly now, and in earnest, for words mean little without the weight of conviction."
I hope that in 5.5e/6e (whatever it is) they switch the generic bonus to RAW stats and the current way to do it as a variant.
That's pretty much where we are now with the new MMM races and legacy versions.
I think it's important to temper expectations here. When people hear 5.5, a lot of them are thinking of the books teased for 2024. I'm pretty sure we are already in that phase of D&D. They are not going to put out radical changes from what we're seeing now. I pretty much expect a reprint of the PHB with the design changes we've seen implemented since Tasha's. Maybe some of the ideas we've seen in Strixhaven or the Dragonlance UA, but those feel to me more like spitballing ideas rather than committed design decisions. Maybe a few of the upcoming books will be used to refine these mechanics.
So I wouldn't expect big changes until 6.0. And I wouldn't expect 6.0 for many years.
I love how this turned into a 5.5 prediction thread. And Scatterbrained, I am 100% with you. I honestly expect a PHA (Advanced Player's Handbook) to replace the PHB with a more consistent tone, pulling out a lot of weak stuff like Way of the Four Elements Monk, and with some better focus in general. Mostly reprint, but all solid stuff.
I hope that in 5.5e/6e (whatever it is) they switch the generic bonus to RAW stats and the current way to do it as a variant.
That's pretty much where we are now with the new MMM races and legacy versions.
I think it's important to temper expectations here. When people hear 5.5, a lot of them are thinking of the books teased for 2024. I'm pretty sure we are already in that phase of D&D. They are not going to put out radical changes from what we're seeing now. I pretty much expect a reprint of the PHB with the design changes we've seen implemented since Tasha's. Maybe some of the ideas we've seen in Strixhaven or the Dragonlance UA, but those feel to me more like spitballing ideas rather than committed design decisions. Maybe a few of the upcoming books will be used to refine these mechanics.
So I wouldn't expect big changes until 6.0. And I wouldn't expect 6.0 for many years.
I love how this turned into a 5.5 prediction thread. And Scatterbrained, I am 100% with you. I honestly expect a PHA (Advanced Player's Handbook) to replace the PHB with a more consistent tone, pulling out a lot of weak stuff like Way of the Four Elements Monk, and with some better focus in general. Mostly reprint, but all solid stuff.
That is the same type of thing they did with 3 when it switched to 3.5. It wasn't huge changes to the rule set, it was cleaning up issues and holes. That is why it is easy to look at what they are currently doing and speculate that what we will see in 2024 will be a 5.5 no matter what they name it.
"This is great for new players who don't need to devote more mental energy to building a character. That is an additional barrier to entry."
This is true on a general scale Erokow32, it is quicker to build a character using the pre-assigned bonuses and that can get players into the game faster but that said it's the worst way to build your character.
I like the "cooked" version of assigning my +2 and +1 wherever I want because it makes more story sense to me. Why should my Hill dwarf get a +1 to Wisdom just because of his race? Dwarves aren't automatically more into knowledge than an elf or human or any other species.
I don't feel it's that hard to tell someone you can put a +2 and a +1 wherever you want so I don't think it would scare off as many as some believe; it gets "confusing" when you say to a first time player there's optional rules and say you could do three +1s instead (I wouldn't say no to a +3 somewhere as a rule either because if you're going to bust up the 2 into ones why not combine the 2 and 1 into a 3, it's only fair - maxers are going to max if that's what you're worried about so you can't stop that). Just tell them the game gives you two starting bonuses since you're a main character so you're going to be stronger than the NPCs in the world. After their first campaign then you bring in variant rules. :)
"I like the concept of backgrounds providing a starting Feat like we have seen recently and would like that carried over to the PHB."
This is an interesting idea, but I'm not sure how it would work in reality. I feel you could get some really OP builds if you do it right; again maxers are going to max I know, but how do you determine a suitable Feat for each background? Some are easy like Solider and Inspiring Leader go together pretty easily but what would be the set Feat for an Urchin or Folk Hero?
You definitely couldn't have the stat bonuses here for this system as you'd have ridiculous numbers at the start for some PCs (which could be fine for some groups). I would think it would almost have to be something simple like advantage/disadvantage on certain situations. Maybe an extra proficiency as some backgrounds now feel light on selection for them compared to others.
"When people hear 5.5, a lot of them are thinking of the books teased for 2024."
I agree Scatterbraind they are not the same.
Honestly there's so much supplement stuff flooding the game right now I don't think there needs to be a 5.5, just go straight to 6e and learn from all of this and only do Tasha like books when there's a true need for them. I say this because I don't think Tasha's was really needed because every table I saw was already editing bonuses and classes to work better - Tasha's was just Wizards basically saying "we agree and here it is on official Wizards paper". Xanthar's actually adds to elements with the THIS IS YOUR LIFE feature in the book and subclasses and such so I'm for those books coming out as long as they have a worthy amount to them, don't launch a book with like 3 new items and sell it for $50 Wizards, and it's not constantly feeling like update after update after update; bring back the "Unearthed Arcana" path to test new ideas and if it works then polish it up and when you have 10 of them for the new game worlds you have planned then do a book along with some rules updates you've complied and maybe some tables for new magic items and sell that for $50 to make it worth it as an expansion.
Polishing up release content is definitely something I would like to see moving forward as again it feels like we've had 100 supplement books announced recently and only 1 that really impacted the game (Xanathar). I'm not saying Tasha's and Acquisitions were useless because you have new races and subclasses but they didn't need to be their own books I feel as there wasn't enough content to warrant them really; yeah they had lore but I don't really care about it because there's no settings that hardcore play to it. Maybe with Wizards buying DNDBeyond they can tickle out theses drips of new concepts online and save the physical releases of them when again there's enough to warrant a new sourcebook over.
They keep selling the same core source material over and over because they have nothing else.
That's my big thing for the next phase and this current one that remains - can we PLEASE get some more adventure books already?!
I've been playing for almost 3 years now and every time I go into my local shop it's the same 5 adventures over and over again. *sigh* The only ones putting out new adventure books are Critical Role and you can't leave them to do it all Wizards. I personally don't care about a new cover of Tasha's - it's the same material in it as before! Is it a pretty cover? Yes, but still the same content inside; it's like DNDBeyond constantly pushing the DM trilogy - it's just new art not content really.
It feels like it took forever to get Witchlight and again I've just been here for 3 years!
We have a good rule set and character options going right now I'd say and when you consider they will be new races and subclasses, maybe they make some UA classes official for more classes (can't do too many as you have the standards in fighter person, healer person, range person, and strictly magic options people so there's not a lot to add main class wise), in the next PHB to justify selling a new book like that to players it's going to be awhile before a new PHB is really worth doing so can we please focus on adventures instead of just officially what players are already doing? Give me worlds to explore these features in before you go adding more and they really play the same as what I just did! And please make more 10-20 books because what is the point of showing me in the PHB what I can do at high levels if I never get to go there?!
If they're going to focus on levels 1-10 all of the time then dial the PHB class options down to those levels and scale the features as appropriate to always playing those same levels over and over.
I'd also like to see more two part adventures so you could go from 1-20 with the same characters if they survive. I know that's a big task building wise for story and mechanics of the scope of events that could happens so I wouldn't expect it to be the new thing but a 1-20 adventure series every 5 years or at least once a phase if you want to call them that wouldn't be insane to ask I feel; it would give fans something to look forward to each phase like superhero fans look forward to crossover epic event films now. At the very least again I just ask for every 5 1-10 story adventure books you do please do at least 1 10-20 level adventure book; and again focus on the adventure books because it's been forever since we had a batch of new ones and we don't need anymore rules, lore, and miscellaneous content books...they're flooding your market and people aren't buying them because they just repeat content right now.
"pulling out a lot of weak stuff like Way Of The Four Elements monk"
Too many people want to be the avatar Erokow32 so if anything this would be edited not removed in my opinion.
Wizards is currently aware of a new player issue they call Redlining, which has to do with all of the new information you need to absorb when playing a new game, and how while each bit is tiny tiny, it can add up and kill the game. That's part of what I was saying.
If your first experience playing was someone saying, "Hey, come over and we'll play some D&D." And you head over, make a character, and go through ALL OF THE CHARACTER CREATION, you've experience redlining. I'm sure you asked, "What's the difference between Wisdom and Intelligence?" And were worried you were making the right choice, or getting cheated out of the optimum option because they gave you an answer that didn't entirely add up like "Book smarts vs. Street smarts".
Pre-Made characters exist for this, and they're the ultimate nail in my puzzle coffin, but WotC is aware that the fewer choices a player needs to make to get to playing the game, the more likely they are to spend more money on it. That's part of why most backgrounds don't give you proficiency options unless it saves a ton of ink (like Guild Artisan).
As for adventures, I'm with you. I really want more. I'm a collector of 5e and the "Player Side" of my bookshelf is getting disproportionately full. Currently people like us are facing two problems: 1) Adventures are generally skipped by anyone other than a collector or a DM, and even then most DM's skip them. They're just a lot less profitable. 2) Adventures are best pushed in Adventurer's League which hasn't happened much since Covid hit... so a struggling product is lacking its biggest audience. Heck AL is why they printed TCE, which ticked off most players because they weren't the target audience.
Like I said, I'm a collector. I've bought the AL adventures off the DM's Guild and have them in binders to go with my hardcover adventures. It's neat being able to see both sides of each season, even if Rime of the Frostmaiden has gone on FOR EVER!
Players want to be the Avatar, but anyone who plays it wants it homebrewed almost instantly. I'd love to see them give it the TCE treatment too.
Floating Racial ASIs are just minmaxing. If we are offended by the concept of biological differences between species, then best to just to do away with Racial ASIs completely. Though I do object to the idea that not having an optimal build is somehow playing wrong. God forbid that any of you roll for stats. Not starting that game with a 16 in your main stat is not ruining a character. If a +2 or +1 to your rolls is a make or break characteristic for your characters, then you need to learn to play better. Come up with better plans rather than relying on the big numbers to drive your success. Brute force of numbers shouldn't be your strategy for success.
In fact, if the numbers are that important to you, you don't even need other players. Just start rolling dice.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
When I first read the PHB I found a small snag: there was a race that gave a +2 bonus to each ability score except for Wisdom. (This is half of where my hatred for Elves came from)
I really hope that when the Advanced Player's Handbook (PHA) / 5.5 comes out that they include something like that.
I hope that Wizards recognizes that some players enjoy the puzzle of character building with RAW stats, but include the Cooked Stats of Tasha's Cauldron of Everything as a permanent rule.
RAW Stats vs. Cooked Stats: RAW Stats are Rules as Written. Hill Dwarves get +2 Con and +1 Wis. This is great for new players who don't need to devote more mental energy to building a character. That is an additional barrier to entry. Reducing those barries to entry is a big part of how Mark Rosewater got M:tg to grow as he did. Cooked Stats on the other hand is at least my term for when you get to pick what they are (similar to phrase, "cooking the books" for writing down whatever you want in your ledger). You generally get a +2 and a +1 which can go wherever you want or become three +1's... just not a +3. All good.
Personally, I like the generic race benefits. I think their are times when the bonuses dont make sense and wish it were not harder to play certain classes just because your using your favorite fantasy race.
I hope that in 5.5e/6e (whatever it is) they switch the generic bonus to RAW stats and the current way to do it as a variant.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.Not sure what book you are reading but there are no races in the 5e players handbook that have a +2 to all stats except Wisdom. Also no clue what you are talking about when you say people just write down whatever stats they want. I don't know o any DM that allows people to do that, there are 3 stat gen methods - roll dice, stat array or point buy. Then you add on your racial bonus either as floating bonuses or fixed bonuses depending on the DM. I guess point buy or stat array could may be - kind of - sort of - be thought of as just writting down whatever you want - vaguely. But they aren't. Not even closely.
What they mean is that there are races in the PHB that give a+2 bonus to various Ability scores, but not one of them gives the +2 bonus to Wis.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I think what he meant to say is that there is a race, not a SINGLE race, but one for each stat, that gives +2 except wisdom.
My hope for 5.5 is that ability score points based on species are done away with completely. No back-hacked floating +2/+1 to make existing species compatible with the new design philosophy. Fold those points into point buy and the standard array, and if people roll for their numbers instead then they get what the dice tell them the way they claim to want instead of slap-patching a weird roll with species floaters.
No more pigeonholing every species in the game into a tiny, narrow niche. No more "your high elf can technically be anything you want it to be!...but if you don't make it a ranger, rogue or maybe a wizard if your DM is feeling generous, Shiva will descend from the Heavens to six-armed gatling punch you in the junk like three different Senator Armstrongs at once until you stop trying to be a unique little snowflake with your own pissant ideas nobody asked for and play the character God and Gary Gygax intended you to play, you sniveling little chowder monkey." Every character gets equal access to every class, and it's qualitative differences rather than straight-up math who tends to be good at what.
Among a plethora of other, less contentious hopes, anyways. But since M3 seems to be re-igniting all the old TCoE slap fights, that's the one relevant to this thread.
Please do not contact or message me.
My hope is that they will present the fixed ASIs for each race with an overarching option for the (+2/+1)/(+1/+1/+1) for all races so that those on both sides of the disagreement can get what they want.
Why not make more customers happy rather than only a portion of their customers? Give the people what they want, give us both options and let each table decide for themselves which to use. After all, it works for the Rolled Stats/Standard Array/Point Buy divide. Nobody complains that there’s an option for all tastes in that regard. It works for the XP/Milestone divide. It works for people who want different ways to address Encumbrance. Why not apply the same winning strategy to racial ASIs too? Ne?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I would like to see better/more rules for Exploration and Social Interaction. D&D has always, and should always, be partially about cool combat, killing things and taking their stuff, but if we want to encourage the other pillars of D&D, then we need rules to help facilitate that, at least as much as we have rules for combat. Something like Skill Contests from 4e (why wasn't this brought forward to 5e) and more info on how to run social interactions.
In a 5.5e MM I would LOVE to have an easy way to scale monsters or NPCs for combat.
I agree that we should keep the species/race ability modifiers as one option, if it's no longer going to be the default, or if not in the PHB then I'd like to see it in the DMG explained as a way to customize your world, or have a proper fully formed Forgotten Realms book that stipulates the racial bonuses.
I don't want to see alignment go away. D&D is supposed to be about fantasy worlds where real gods that are really Evil and Good exist, and can do powerful things based on their alignment.
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing)
You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
A little more customisation, in the form of more (but less powered) feat access. Do away with the powerhouse feats and break them down into individual components for a mix and match system.
I like the concept of backgrounds providing a starting Feat like we have seen recently and would like that carried over to the PHB.
I would like to see Feats and ASI's separated from one another with Feats tied to class progression and ASI's tied to character progression.
And I like the idea of Feat "chains" or "trees" as long as they don't get as out of hand as 3/3.5 and PF1e did.
Edit: I would like to second the idea of more robust rules for the Exploration and Social encounter pillars of the game.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I'd appreciate more attention to the implementation of magic items. 5e is not balanced around the party having them, and there's really no guidelines on how adding them into your game affects things (let alone what they might cost). For new DMs, there is little but to feel out how they affect game play and adjust accordingly. I'm not familiar enough with previous editions to know how it used to be handled, but I guess more DM guidance in general would be nice.
I suppose this dovetails into fixing CR, but we all know that's an issue...
I'd like to see some notes taken from the star wars 5e system.
Starting feats based on your background you can pick from, with some feats being slapped with level 4 prerequisites to stop a level 1 from having anything too busted.
More options for martials, such as their version of rogue being able to sacrifice two of their sneak attack dice for different effects, all fighters getting maneuvers and just having a crap ton more maneuvers to pick from, fighting styles made more interesting and adding fighting masteries as a second layer for fighters, etc.
- Take proficiencies, languages, and ability score adjustments, and put them in backgrounds only (example background: tribal raider is usually the background for goblins in the forgotten realms, gives proficiency in a weapon and a language from like, goblin, uthgardt, or orcish, and then either STR or DEX +2)
- Balance feats so you can take them every few levels, and then make it so you take them every few levels
- Remove ASIs
- Rebalance magic items so you can craft them without breaking the game, then make a crafting system
- fix the bad wording, i.e. melee weapon attack vs attack with a melee weapon
- make all spells behave similarly, i.e. if you save every turn, it's always at the end of turn
- remove sea elves
That's pretty much where we are now with the new MMM races and legacy versions.
I think it's important to temper expectations here. When people hear 5.5, a lot of them are thinking of the books teased for 2024. I'm pretty sure we are already in that phase of D&D. They are not going to put out radical changes from what we're seeing now. I pretty much expect a reprint of the PHB with the design changes we've seen implemented since Tasha's. Maybe some of the ideas we've seen in Strixhaven or the Dragonlance UA, but those feel to me more like spitballing ideas rather than committed design decisions. Maybe a few of the upcoming books will be used to refine these mechanics.
So I wouldn't expect big changes until 6.0. And I wouldn't expect 6.0 for many years.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
I echo a lot of the sentiment here, especially things like placing more emphasis on feats, presentation regarding ruling language, and sorting out some of the more bothersome traits of classes (Sorcerers being limited to a handful of Metamagics, Fighters lacking maneuvers, and I'll keep some rants about Barbarian identity to myself).
Zero is the most important number in D&D: Session Zero sets the boundaries and the tone; Rule Zero dictates the Dungeon Master (DM) is the final arbiter; and Zero D&D is better than Bad D&D.
"Let us speak plainly now, and in earnest, for words mean little without the weight of conviction."
- The Assemblage of Houses, World of Warcraft
I love how this turned into a 5.5 prediction thread. And Scatterbrained, I am 100% with you. I honestly expect a PHA (Advanced Player's Handbook) to replace the PHB with a more consistent tone, pulling out a lot of weak stuff like Way of the Four Elements Monk, and with some better focus in general. Mostly reprint, but all solid stuff.
That is the same type of thing they did with 3 when it switched to 3.5. It wasn't huge changes to the rule set, it was cleaning up issues and holes. That is why it is easy to look at what they are currently doing and speculate that what we will see in 2024 will be a 5.5 no matter what they name it.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
"This is great for new players who don't need to devote more mental energy to building a character. That is an additional barrier to entry."
This is true on a general scale Erokow32, it is quicker to build a character using the pre-assigned bonuses and that can get players into the game faster but that said it's the worst way to build your character.
I like the "cooked" version of assigning my +2 and +1 wherever I want because it makes more story sense to me. Why should my Hill dwarf get a +1 to Wisdom just because of his race? Dwarves aren't automatically more into knowledge than an elf or human or any other species.
I don't feel it's that hard to tell someone you can put a +2 and a +1 wherever you want so I don't think it would scare off as many as some believe; it gets "confusing" when you say to a first time player there's optional rules and say you could do three +1s instead (I wouldn't say no to a +3 somewhere as a rule either because if you're going to bust up the 2 into ones why not combine the 2 and 1 into a 3, it's only fair - maxers are going to max if that's what you're worried about so you can't stop that). Just tell them the game gives you two starting bonuses since you're a main character so you're going to be stronger than the NPCs in the world. After their first campaign then you bring in variant rules. :)
"I like the concept of backgrounds providing a starting Feat like we have seen recently and would like that carried over to the PHB."
This is an interesting idea, but I'm not sure how it would work in reality. I feel you could get some really OP builds if you do it right; again maxers are going to max I know, but how do you determine a suitable Feat for each background? Some are easy like Solider and Inspiring Leader go together pretty easily but what would be the set Feat for an Urchin or Folk Hero?
You definitely couldn't have the stat bonuses here for this system as you'd have ridiculous numbers at the start for some PCs (which could be fine for some groups). I would think it would almost have to be something simple like advantage/disadvantage on certain situations. Maybe an extra proficiency as some backgrounds now feel light on selection for them compared to others.
"When people hear 5.5, a lot of them are thinking of the books teased for 2024."
I agree Scatterbraind they are not the same.
Honestly there's so much supplement stuff flooding the game right now I don't think there needs to be a 5.5, just go straight to 6e and learn from all of this and only do Tasha like books when there's a true need for them. I say this because I don't think Tasha's was really needed because every table I saw was already editing bonuses and classes to work better - Tasha's was just Wizards basically saying "we agree and here it is on official Wizards paper". Xanthar's actually adds to elements with the THIS IS YOUR LIFE feature in the book and subclasses and such so I'm for those books coming out as long as they have a worthy amount to them, don't launch a book with like 3 new items and sell it for $50 Wizards, and it's not constantly feeling like update after update after update; bring back the "Unearthed Arcana" path to test new ideas and if it works then polish it up and when you have 10 of them for the new game worlds you have planned then do a book along with some rules updates you've complied and maybe some tables for new magic items and sell that for $50 to make it worth it as an expansion.
Polishing up release content is definitely something I would like to see moving forward as again it feels like we've had 100 supplement books announced recently and only 1 that really impacted the game (Xanathar). I'm not saying Tasha's and Acquisitions were useless because you have new races and subclasses but they didn't need to be their own books I feel as there wasn't enough content to warrant them really; yeah they had lore but I don't really care about it because there's no settings that hardcore play to it. Maybe with Wizards buying DNDBeyond they can tickle out theses drips of new concepts online and save the physical releases of them when again there's enough to warrant a new sourcebook over.
They keep selling the same core source material over and over because they have nothing else.
That's my big thing for the next phase and this current one that remains - can we PLEASE get some more adventure books already?!
I've been playing for almost 3 years now and every time I go into my local shop it's the same 5 adventures over and over again. *sigh* The only ones putting out new adventure books are Critical Role and you can't leave them to do it all Wizards. I personally don't care about a new cover of Tasha's - it's the same material in it as before! Is it a pretty cover? Yes, but still the same content inside; it's like DNDBeyond constantly pushing the DM trilogy - it's just new art not content really.
It feels like it took forever to get Witchlight and again I've just been here for 3 years!
We have a good rule set and character options going right now I'd say and when you consider they will be new races and subclasses, maybe they make some UA classes official for more classes (can't do too many as you have the standards in fighter person, healer person, range person, and strictly magic options people so there's not a lot to add main class wise), in the next PHB to justify selling a new book like that to players it's going to be awhile before a new PHB is really worth doing so can we please focus on adventures instead of just officially what players are already doing? Give me worlds to explore these features in before you go adding more and they really play the same as what I just did! And please make more 10-20 books because what is the point of showing me in the PHB what I can do at high levels if I never get to go there?!
If they're going to focus on levels 1-10 all of the time then dial the PHB class options down to those levels and scale the features as appropriate to always playing those same levels over and over.
I'd also like to see more two part adventures so you could go from 1-20 with the same characters if they survive. I know that's a big task building wise for story and mechanics of the scope of events that could happens so I wouldn't expect it to be the new thing but a 1-20 adventure series every 5 years or at least once a phase if you want to call them that wouldn't be insane to ask I feel; it would give fans something to look forward to each phase like superhero fans look forward to crossover epic event films now. At the very least again I just ask for every 5 1-10 story adventure books you do please do at least 1 10-20 level adventure book; and again focus on the adventure books because it's been forever since we had a batch of new ones and we don't need anymore rules, lore, and miscellaneous content books...they're flooding your market and people aren't buying them because they just repeat content right now.
"pulling out a lot of weak stuff like Way Of The Four Elements monk"
Too many people want to be the avatar Erokow32 so if anything this would be edited not removed in my opinion.
Wizards is currently aware of a new player issue they call Redlining, which has to do with all of the new information you need to absorb when playing a new game, and how while each bit is tiny tiny, it can add up and kill the game. That's part of what I was saying.
If your first experience playing was someone saying, "Hey, come over and we'll play some D&D." And you head over, make a character, and go through ALL OF THE CHARACTER CREATION, you've experience redlining. I'm sure you asked, "What's the difference between Wisdom and Intelligence?" And were worried you were making the right choice, or getting cheated out of the optimum option because they gave you an answer that didn't entirely add up like "Book smarts vs. Street smarts".
Pre-Made characters exist for this, and they're the ultimate nail in my puzzle coffin, but WotC is aware that the fewer choices a player needs to make to get to playing the game, the more likely they are to spend more money on it. That's part of why most backgrounds don't give you proficiency options unless it saves a ton of ink (like Guild Artisan).
As for adventures, I'm with you. I really want more. I'm a collector of 5e and the "Player Side" of my bookshelf is getting disproportionately full. Currently people like us are facing two problems: 1) Adventures are generally skipped by anyone other than a collector or a DM, and even then most DM's skip them. They're just a lot less profitable. 2) Adventures are best pushed in Adventurer's League which hasn't happened much since Covid hit... so a struggling product is lacking its biggest audience. Heck AL is why they printed TCE, which ticked off most players because they weren't the target audience.
Like I said, I'm a collector. I've bought the AL adventures off the DM's Guild and have them in binders to go with my hardcover adventures. It's neat being able to see both sides of each season, even if Rime of the Frostmaiden has gone on FOR EVER!
Players want to be the Avatar, but anyone who plays it wants it homebrewed almost instantly. I'd love to see them give it the TCE treatment too.
Floating Racial ASIs are just minmaxing. If we are offended by the concept of biological differences between species, then best to just to do away with Racial ASIs completely. Though I do object to the idea that not having an optimal build is somehow playing wrong. God forbid that any of you roll for stats. Not starting that game with a 16 in your main stat is not ruining a character. If a +2 or +1 to your rolls is a make or break characteristic for your characters, then you need to learn to play better. Come up with better plans rather than relying on the big numbers to drive your success. Brute force of numbers shouldn't be your strategy for success.
In fact, if the numbers are that important to you, you don't even need other players. Just start rolling dice.