Wild Shape revised (D&DNext)

Mostlyjoe · October 18, 2013, 02:48:45 PM

It's not a bad way to handle. Next is sounding pretty reasonable thses days.

Sacrosanct · October 18, 2013, 02:54:54 PM

I would like it if they did something like 2e's Complete book of druids (IIRC), in that the shapeschanging wasn't an all or nothing change. You could take on aspects of the shape, like growing claws or somesuch.

I'd like to see a return to that.

Archangel Fascist · October 18, 2013, 07:46:28 PM

Quote from: Sacrosanct;700974I would like it if they did something like 2e's Complete book of druids (IIRC), in that the shapeschanging wasn't an all or nothing change. You could take on aspects of the shape, like growing claws or somesuch.

I'd like to see a return to that.

They need to make wild shape just another spell that druids can cast.

Marleycat · October 18, 2013, 10:27:39 PM

Quote from: Sacrosanct;700974I would like it if they did something like 2e's Complete book of druids (IIRC), in that the shapeschanging wasn't an all or nothing change. You could take on aspects of the shape, like growing claws or somesuch.

I'd like to see a return to that.

That should be a spell like 3e. Done and simple given it's useful in all 3 pillars without specializing in shapechanging proper. I suppose it could be a feat but I would be very careful with that path or possibility.

OTOH, I dislike summoning as something a druid does given it's a specific style of wizardry imo

Omega · October 18, 2013, 11:14:44 PM

The Next system essentially splits the Druid into two sub-classes. spell focused and Shifter focused.

Marleycat · October 18, 2013, 11:29:40 PM

Quote from: Omega;701108The Next system essentially splits the Druid into two sub-classes. spell focused and Shifter focused.

Correct. And it's the best option in my opinion. 5e is looking pretty solid to me.

Omega · October 19, 2013, 12:07:59 AM

I just finished off the last playtest questionaire and noted some goofs and points that could be improved. But overall its not bad.

Mistwell · October 19, 2013, 01:50:57 AM

Quote from: Omega;701117I just finished off the last playtest questionaire and noted some goofs and points that could be improved. But overall its not bad.

What are some goofs and areas for improvement IYO? I am filling out the survey in a couple days and can include those as well.

Omega · October 19, 2013, 02:27:57 AM

Mostly for the druid. Its missing entries for otter and badger at least. Also the Weasel is missing part of its data. The Deer could possibly be beefed up on its damage from a d4 to a d6.

The mage is missing its entry for cantrips.

The critical system doesnt feel right. It works, but seems just one step too much math when the old system was fine for the most part.

The Death/Uncontiousness part was unsatisfying as mentioned elsewhere.

And just overall a little better organization of rules. Some are scattered around the sections. Resting and spell recovery are two that came to mind.

Haffrung · October 20, 2013, 02:28:47 PM

Quote from: Omega;701155And just overall a little better organization of rules. Some are scattered around the sections. Resting and spell recovery are two that came to mind.

They are playtest rules. It's safe to assume they'll be re-formatted from the ground up before publication.

Omega · October 20, 2013, 09:23:15 PM

Yes. But you want the players to not be lost before they even get to play.

And part of playtesting is pointing out where rules need better organization, clarification, syntax oddities, etc.

RPGPundit · October 25, 2013, 04:24:03 PM

Quote from: TristramEvans;700852Caesarian propoganda

No, it was almost certainly true. Some of the DETAILS may have been roman propaganda, but there's strong evidence these days that the Druids did indeed engage in human sacrifice.

Shapeshifting? Not so much.

RPGPundit

Omega · October 25, 2013, 05:52:58 PM

Quote from: RPGPundit;702905No, it was almost certainly true. Some of the DETAILS may have been roman propaganda, but there's strong evidence these days that the Druids did indeed engage in human sacrifice.

Shapeshifting? Not so much.

RPGPundit

They were LARPERs who got into immersion a little too much...

Arduin · October 25, 2013, 06:03:05 PM

Quote from: Omega;702924They were LARPERs who got into immersion a little too much...

:rotfl:

James Gillen · October 26, 2013, 01:39:10 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit;702905No, it was almost certainly true. Some of the DETAILS may have been roman propaganda, but there's strong evidence these days that the Druids did indeed engage in human sacrifice.

Shapeshifting? Not so much.

RPGPundit

The ability to call lightning is also questionable.

JG