Quote from: Dirk Remmecke;650595Old school players could still note their initial roll on the character sheet (to have that familiar 3-18 range in front of them) but all that really matters is the modifier.

Except for tables that use "roll under" attribute rolls, which a lot of TSR-style D&D players use (and not just old school ones).  Also, I fear this would push attribute inflation because too many players would not want any zeros (let alone any negative numbers) on their character sheets under attributes. I would go with it if the total of your attribute modifiers had to be zero.

However, this would bork their current +1 to an attribute if you don't take a feat system as I know a lot of non-powergamers who would strongly object to a +1 modifier per level.

Quote from: CRKrueger;648871Point.

I'd assume though that most of the crowd who can't take a dead level would be doing Feats anyway.

When you're rolling for hit points each level (or gaining a set amount), then there's no such thing as a dead level anyway.

Quote from: One Horse Town;650616When you're rolling for hit points each level (or gaining a set amount), then there's no such thing as a dead level anyway.

Beat me to it.

Quote from: RandallS;650615Except for tables that use "roll under" attribute rolls, which a lot of TSR-style D&D players use (and not just old school ones).  Also, I fear this would push attribute inflation because too many players would not want any zeros (let alone any negative numbers) on their character sheets under attributes. I would go with it if the total of your attribute modifiers had to be zero.

However, this would bork their current +1 to an attribute if you don't take a feat system as I know a lot of non-powergamers who would strongly object to a +1 modifier per level.

Looks more like a class power or a +1 every 3 levels.

Feats WILL stop be engaging with Next. It is a barrier to uptake. However, I am a 2E player therefore I don't count for much!

Am I right in thinking that they are proposing to have something called character class, something called skills, something called feats, and now something called backgrounds, the last three of which all do more or less the same thing (i.e. give you special abilities that help you either optimise or define your character, depending on what floats your boat) but in subtly different ways? This seems overly complex to me, even if feats, skills and backgrounds are optional.

Quote from: Glazer;650639Am I right in thinking that they are proposing to have something called character class, something called skills, something called feats, and now something called backgrounds, the last three of which all do more or less the same thing (i.e. give you special abilities that help you either optimise or define your character, depending on what floats your boat) but in subtly different ways? This seems overly complex to me, even if feats, skills and backgrounds are optional.

Skills come in backgrounds, which are basically a themed collection of skills, plus a standalone trait.

Feats can be bundled into specialties (such as Archer), which indicate which feats to take as you gain levels.

So at character generation, you select a race, a background (which includes your skills), a class, and a specialty (which includes feats). After that, you just take the prescribed feats for your class and specialty as you progress.

If you want to dial it back, just create a straight Fighter and take the ability bonuses at level-up instead of feats. If you want more customization, ignore specialties and choose feats a la carte as you level up.

Seems reasonably straightforward and flexible.

Quote from: Haffrung;650648Skills come in backgrounds, which are basically a themed collection of skills, plus a standalone trait.

Feats can be bundled into specialties (such as Archer), which indicate which feats to take as you gain levels.

So at character generation, you select a race, a background (which includes your skills), a class, and a specialty (which includes feats). After that, you just take the prescribed feats for your class and specialty as you progress.

If you want to dial it back, just create a straight Fighter and take the ability bonuses at level-up instead of feats. If you want more customization, ignore specialties and choose feats a la carte as you level up.

Seems reasonably straightforward and flexible.

Pretty much.  And honestly, specialty feat packages are a pretty good way of handling class bloat.  In AD&D, there were dozens of classes, especially if you factored in the ones from Dragon Magazine.  Specialties in Next pretty much just say, "Instead of separate fighter, dualist, archer, bounty hunter, samurai, etc classes, just go with fighter and choose the appropriate specialty."

And the 3e char op crowd can easily ignore the packages if they want, and choose feats like they would in 3e.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;650652And the 3e char op crowd can easily ignore the packages if they want, and choose feats like they would in 3e.

A la carte menus of shit you can stick on your character will always result in massive power disparity with packages and evolve into super builds.

It is simply the nature of the beast. The sheer volume of these tidbits that get released make predicting all the ways in which they interact with the core impossible to keep straight.

Its like WOTC is a mad scientist that thinks he can control his creation this time because of all the lessons learned from the past. Its all a delusion that will send Next right into the 3E bin unless they wise up.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;650697A la carte menus of shit you can stick on your character will always result in massive power disparity with packages and evolve into super builds.

It is simply the nature of the beast. The sheer volume of these tidbits that get released make predicting all the ways in which they interact with the core impossible to keep straight.

Its like WOTC is a mad scientist that thinks he can control his creation this time because of all the lessons learned from the past. Its all a delusion that will send Next right into the 3E bin unless they wise up.

Sorry, I don't see the problem.  I don't like A la Carte, so I won't play Next that way.  That doesn't mean other groups don't have that option if they want.  It's not like Jimmy's version of Next to emulate 3e over there is a table I'm forced to join.  Let Jimmy play how he wants.  There are things about Next that could be improved, but this isn't one of them, IMO, because I can play how I want and Jimmy the Char OP Fiend can play how he wants.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;650700Sorry, I don't see the problem.  I don't like A la Carte, so I won't play Next that way.  That doesn't mean other groups don't have that option if they want.  It's not like Jimmy's version of Next to emulate 3e over there is a table I'm forced to join.  Let Jimmy play how he wants.  There are things about Next that could be improved, but this isn't one of them, IMO, because I can play how I want and Jimmy the Char OP Fiend can play how he wants.

You can do that now. If next can't do that at the same table then its really a pointless release. We already have every flavor of D&D anyone could want for separate gaming groups.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;650717You can do that now. If next can't do that at the same table then its really a pointless release. We already have every flavor of D&D anyone could want for separate gaming groups.

Maybe I'm not following.  In every edition of D&D, most tables have house rules that are different from other tables.  Maybe not so much in 4e because that seems to be the RAW crowd, but for most other editions it seems true.  Next doesn't seem to be any different, IMO.

The only difference I can see is that if I have a person at my table who doesn't like char op and just wants to play a packaged theme similar to a class in 1e, and another person at my table who prefers to create their own feat theme (everything at every game table in every edition still requires DM approval, no?), they both can do that.

At the same table.

In 3e, that's hard to do because the game pretty much forces every player to pick and choose feats and multi-class options.  In AD&D, that's hard to do because things are packaged into classes and you can't really pick and choose what class abilities you want.  Next is allowing both styles of play, at the same table.

So the edition progression of chargen is...

0e/BX = Pick Race or Class
1e = Pick Race + Class
2e = Pick Race + Class (+ Kit)
3e= Pick Race + Class + Feats + Prestige Class
4e = Pick Race + Class + Feats + Paragon Class + Epic Class
5e = Pick Race + Class + Background + Specialty
OR Pick Race + Class + Custom Background + Custom Specialty

I don't need 5e's chargen complexity, but I see its value as a half-measure trying to please everyone. The build guys can either crunch the value of combos or just min/max via the custom approach and then bitch and moan at the table when other players just choose options they like.

Quote from: Spinachcat;650845So the edition progression of chargen is...

0e/BX = Pick Race or Class
1e = Pick Race + Class
2e = Pick Race + Class (+ Kit)
3e= Pick Race + Class + Feats + Prestige Class
4e = Pick Race + Class + Feats + Paragon Class + Epic Class
5e = Pick Race + Class + Background + Specialty
OR Pick Race + Class + Custom Background + Custom Specialty

I don't need 5e's chargen complexity, but I see its value as a half-measure trying to please everyone. The build guys can either crunch the value of combos or just min/max via the custom approach and then bitch and moan at the table when other players just choose options they like.

Ha! But I see your point it does seem like a decent middle ground.

Quote from: Spinachcat;650845So the edition progression of chargen is...

0e/BX = Pick Race or Class
1e = Pick Race + Class
2e = Pick Race + Class (+ Kit)
3e= Pick Race + Class + Feats + Prestige Class
4e = Pick Race + Class + Feats + Paragon Class + Epic Class
5e = Pick Race + Class + Background + Specialty
OR Pick Race + Class + Custom Background + Custom Specialty

I don't need 5e's chargen complexity, but I see its value as a half-measure trying to please everyone. The build guys can either crunch the value of combos or just min/max via the custom approach and then bitch and moan at the table when other players just choose options they like.

OR:

5e: pick race + class and that's it.  Use basic ability checks instead of skills, and ignore feats for an attribute bonus instead.