How does combat compare to older editions?
I have browsed the character sheets that were released, I have had a quick look at the basic PDF, but it "seems" a lot less basic that I am used to.
Basic to me:
Roll initiative,
Roll to hit,
Roll damage,
Do HPs etc, move on.
This has powers and stuff, and the dreaded word "feat" is mentioned.
How basic is it in relation to other releases?
It's pretty close. Feats are completely optional, and what feats are more compartmentalized than the dreaded feat chains of 3-4e. Whether it crosses the complexity rubicon is up to you.
In my games it ends up more like
Roll initiative.
Spellcasters equivocate.
DM yells at spellcasters.
Move around.
Roll to hit.
Roll Damage.
- check against class abilities: sneak attack, paladin's smite, etc.
Deduct HP.
Spellcasters swear they cast the wrong spell.
That's pretty much it. Not as simple as OD&D, pretty close to 2e levels of crunch.
Cool. That answers that then!
I would throw in weapon speeds, maybe weapon versus armour type to spice things up a bit prior to anything WoTC D&D related (2E here).
Sounds ok. I mean, there are so many positive reviews coming out. Must try it.
Quote from: BarefootGaijin;767421Cool. That answers that then!
I would throw in weapon speeds, maybe weapon versus armour type to spice things up a bit prior to anything WoTC D&D related (2E here).
Sounds ok. I mean, there are so many positive reviews coming out. Must try it.
Just grab the Basic PDF and take a gander - it's easy enough to scan through it quickly.
Quote from: BarefootGaijin;767421Sounds ok. I mean, there are so many positive reviews coming out. Must try it.
While I'm more optimistic than you were, I'm staying cautious. I'm waiting to see what the fine-tooth-comb crowd discovers. Some of their complaints so far are whiny bullshit, but you never know...
Quote from: Shipyard Locked;767431While I'm more optimistic than you were, I'm staying cautious. I'm waiting to see what the fine-tooth-comb crowd discovers. Some of their complaints so far are whiny bullshit, but you never know...
Name a single game in the history of gaming going back to HG Wells that didn't have a billion and one nits to pick. Look for holes and you'll find them.
Most spell attacks work the same as weapon attacks (roll d20+your ability modifier+prof bonus). So in that case most combat goes:
1. roll initiative
2. roll to attack
3. roll damage
4. do bookkeeping (hp, etc).
So pretty much the same as B/X. The only difference is that you don't look at an armor class table. So it's actually one less step.
Quote from: Sacrosanct;767459Most spell attacks work the same as weapon attacks (roll d20+your ability modifier+prof bonus). So in that case most combat goes:
1. roll initiative
2. roll to attack
3. roll damage
4. do bookkeeping (hp, etc).
So pretty much the same as B/X. The only difference is that you don't look at an armor class table. So it's actually one less step.
I got that sense from looking at rolling to hit. I wanted to port THAC0 over, but there is no need because the AC is the target to beat. This seems nice. Maybe it is the same as BAB, but whenever I have encountered that with 3.PF I was hideously lost with modifiers and rolling blind. I did not have a clue. 5E (or maybe 4E before it) seems to have tightened that up.
Quote from: JonWake;767458Name a single game in the history of gaming going back to HG Wells that didn't have a billion and one nits to pick. Look for holes and you'll find them.
Oh of course, I'm well aware of that nitpicking nonsense, it's the stuff that fandom crybaby drama is built on unfortunately (and the reason I try to stay away from other fans of anything other than tabletop now). I'm looking for serious issues that would kill it, stuff on par with 7th Sea's subtle but lethal core flaws.
Quote from: BarefootGaijin;767461I got that sense from looking at rolling to hit. I wanted to port THAC0 over, but there is no need because the AC is the target to beat. This seems nice. Maybe it is the same as BAB, but whenever I have encountered that with 3.PF I was hideously lost with modifiers and rolling blind. I did not have a clue. 5E (or maybe 4E before it) seems to have tightened that up.
numbers bloat was something that really turned me off of 3e/PF. +35 or +40 total modifiers? Screw that noise. Bounded accuracy fixes that in a heart beat. For one, you don't have a different BAB for each attack you make in a round for higher level fighter types. Even at high levels, it looks something like this:
20th level fighter:
+6 prof bonus. +5 ability bonus (assuming he max'd str at 20). Probably a +2 weapon bonus (5e weapons don't have high + weapons like previous editions). So that's a +13 to hit. For every attack. Damage is probably 1dx+7 (ability+wpn). And that's at 20th level.
I would assume +3 max for magic items. But the point is the to hit and AC is at least soft capped it's all about the damage which makes the fighter relavent again and the wizard all about strategy not tactics again like 2e.
I reread the PDF tonight and laugh at the current Charop arguments because they still haven't understood how backloaded each class is. Please single dip into fighter and watch a pure wizard fuck you three times to Sunday with no effort. Just use Misty Step and Fireball/Lightning Bolt at will as an Evoker. With supreme control no less.
To really get the the good stuff in any particular class you need to commit to 5-6 levels. You want a good GISH? Then levels 8-12 split either way within those 4 levels (5 variations) is your sweet spot.
Now run the math against a single class character. You'll see it's basically even when you factor in number of stat bumps/feat chances each path will actually get. It's about as balanced as an actual Dnd RPG can be if your DM isn't Rain Man.
Quote from: Shipyard Locked;767462Oh of course, I'm well aware of that nitpicking nonsense, it's the stuff that fandom crybaby drama is built on unfortunately (and the reason I try to stay away from other fans of anything other than tabletop now). I'm looking for serious issues that would kill it, stuff on par with 7th Sea's subtle but lethal core flaws.
That sort of thing hasn't come up with the the basic set. There are some odd choices: overnight healing is pants on head crazy, but it's intentional.
It's pretty modular, though. I've plugged in a critical hit table and slower healing, and it's made some classes better, changed the pace of fights, and probably a few trickle down effects that haven't come up yet, but it hasn't broken anything the way, say Call of Cthulhu breaks if you screw around with skill lists too much.
Quote from: Sacrosanct;767464numbers bloat was something that really turned me off of 3e/PF. +35 or +40 total modifiers? Screw that noise. Bounded accuracy fixes that in a heart beat. For one, you don't have a different BAB for each attack you make in a round for higher level fighter types. Even at high levels, it looks something like this:
20th level fighter:
+6 prof bonus. +5 ability bonus (assuming he max'd str at 20). Probably a +2 weapon bonus (5e weapons don't have high + weapons like previous editions). So that's a +13 to hit. For every attack. Damage is probably 1dx+7 (ability+wpn). And that's at 20th level.
This alone would sell me on 5e.
I loathe the 3x style multiple attacks and number bloat.
The basic rules do indeed look very flexible and hackable. Everything isn't so tightly woven together like 3E & 4E does.
It looks like you can tweak healing, at-will magic, etc. without breaking the core, which is critical to game designed to be modular.
Quote from: Bill;767661This alone would sell me on 5e.
I loathe the 3x style multiple attacks and number bloat.
I was going to do a comparison between a level 20 3.x fighter and a level 20 5e fighter, but when I looked at all the crap involved in creating a level 20 3.e fighter, I said "fuck this". Way too much work. :D
Quote from: Shipyard Locked;767462Oh of course, I'm well aware of that nitpicking nonsense, it's the stuff that fandom crybaby drama is built on unfortunately (and the reason I try to stay away from other fans of anything other than tabletop now). I'm looking for serious issues that would kill it, stuff on par with 7th Sea's subtle but lethal core flaws.
Or the way that you could reportedly break 3.5 in two easy steps?
1. Write down Class: Druid
2. Pick Natural Spell as a feat
It can take a while for this stuff to get sorted out and discovered, and it usually requires a mix of careful analysis and actual play reports to shake out the real problems; remember, the initial fears at the 3E and 3.5 launches were that the monk and the mystic theurge were overpowered. :)
Quote from: Sacrosanct;767666I was going to do a comparison between a level 20 3.x fighter and a level 20 5e fighter, but when I looked at all the crap involved in creating a level 20 3.e fighter, I said "fuck this". Way too much work. :D
Heh. I have said that quite a few times when I was running 3x campaigns.
Too much freakin' work.
On some level I do appreciate all the widgets, but ultimately, I just want to play the game, not play the mechanics.
Quote from: Bill;767805Heh. I have said that quite a few times when I was running 3x campaigns.
Too much freakin' work.
On some level I do appreciate all the widgets, but ultimately, I just want to play the game, not play the mechanics.
Yep. At first I was like, "OK, +20/+15/+10/+5, then add +5 for ability bonus, that's not too bad. +5 for another magic weapon? THat's not too hard either. Wait, what? I've got to add and total all the bonuses as well for these half dozen feat chains? Fuck it. I ain't gonna look that up."
And really, I don't need to, because even without all those feats (3 different levels of weapon spec, dual wielding, and power attack/cleave/great cleave), you're still looking at +30 attack modifiers. blech.
But without looking up each one, I suppose this gives a comparison:
3e factors that are added to attack roll:
BAB
Ability MOD
magic weapon
feat 1
feat 2
feat 2
feat 3
feat 4
feat 5
feat 6
feat 7
feat 8
feat 9
feat 10
5e factors
Prof bonus
Ability Mod
Weapon Mod
and that's it. There are no feats in 5e that add a bonus to hit. Nor do I think there will be, by design. They all give other benefits.
Yes, I am a fan of bounded accuracy :D
Quote from: Sacrosanct;767817Yep. At first I was like, "OK, +20/+15/+10/+5, then add +5 for ability bonus, that's not too bad. +5 for another magic weapon? THat's not too hard either. Wait, what? I've got to add and total all the bonuses as well for these half dozen feat chains? Fuck it. I ain't gonna look that up."
And really, I don't need to, because even without all those feats (3 different levels of weapon spec, dual wielding, and power attack/cleave/great cleave), you're still looking at +30 attack modifiers. blech.
But without looking up each one, I suppose this gives a comparison:
3e factors that are added to attack roll:
BAB
Ability MOD
magic weapon
feat 1
feat 2
feat 2
feat 3
feat 4
feat 5
feat 6
feat 7
feat 8
feat 9
feat 10
5e factors
Prof bonus
Ability Mod
Weapon Mod
and that's it. There are no feats in 5e that add a bonus to hit. Nor do I think there will be, by design. They all give other benefits.
Yes, I am a fan of bounded accuracy :D
I am a fan of bounded accuracy as well. I would call it 'Bounded numbers so your game system does not form Voltron'
I'm curious what systems the DMG will bring to the table we can snap on. I really like the idea of optional combat mechanics I can allow/not allow at my table.
Like I'm cool with movement rules, but not so happy about advanced facing/AoO crap.
Shorter down time/level ups are great (I go pulpy games), but item creation is nerfed to hell.
The idea of D&D as a tool kit (if not out right generic) sounds...deliciously useful. It's very much the OSR idea with pick what you like and don't like as a GM.
Wonder if I can have a GM variant sheet in my pitches to players.
The numbers on the character sheet are lower and come from fewer sources, but what I noticed running it was that we had never to RECALCULATE THE NUMBERS. The classic RPG past-time of adding and subtracting various situational modifiers each turn and each attack is gone, and it is sooo nice especially with new gamers who are just trying to find the weapon entry on their sheet.
This is due to the Advantage/Disadvantage rule (roll 2d20, take higher or lower respectively). Also spells like Bless add a 1d4 to each roll rather than recalculate the to hit roll. It's really nice at the table.
Quote from: Durn;768936The numbers on the character sheet are lower and come from fewer sources, but what I noticed running it was that we had never to RECALCULATE THE NUMBERS. The classic RPG past-time of adding and subtracting various situational modifiers each turn and each attack is gone, and it is sooo nice especially with new gamers who are just trying to find the weapon entry on their sheet.
This is due to the Advantage/Disadvantage rule (roll 2d20, take higher or lower respectively). Also spells like Bless add a 1d4 to each roll rather than recalculate the to hit roll. It's really nice at the table.
It was obvious from the playtest that Advantage /disadvantage was an awesome rule . I stole it immediately and have bene using in in my homebrew for nearly a year. As I use 2d10 v trarget as a base mechanic I actually usestacked ad/disad upto +/-3 . When a guy hits or better yet gets a crit on a roll with 3 disads its a moment to behold :)
When the game was in the early stages of design, there was a lot of insecurity about advantage/disadvantage: whether to just use advantage, to use both, how much to use them, how much should be done with more conventional "+2/+4/-1/-2 etc." type bonuses and penalties.
I took one look at that rule and said "This. This is your Killer App." I think it will be the most important thing that people will see about 5e to distinguish it in a good way from any other edition.
Quote from: RPGPundit;771352When the game was in the early stages of design, there was a lot of insecurity about advantage/disadvantage: whether to just use advantage, to use both, how much to use them, how much should be done with more conventional "+2/+4/-1/-2 etc." type bonuses and penalties.
I took one look at that rule and said "This. This is your Killer App." I think it will be the most important thing that people will see about 5e to distinguish it in a good way from any other edition.
I think you're right.
2E is tied up with THAC0 (even though it first appeared elsewhere, BECMI or 1E UA, not sure).
3E has d20 and roll high.
4E has the tight map combat integration et al.
5E? Adv/Disadv and bounded accuracy.
Quote from: RPGPundit;771352I took one look at that rule and said "This. This is your Killer App." I think it will be the most important thing that people will see about 5e to distinguish it in a good way from any other edition.
Hell, I'm looking at Fate and contemplating grafting Inspiration and Ads/Disads to it.
That... is a big thing.
Quote from: RPGPundit;771352When the game was in the early stages of design, there was a lot of insecurity about advantage/disadvantage: whether to just use advantage, to use both, how much to use them, how much should be done with more conventional "+2/+4/-1/-2 etc." type bonuses and penalties.
I took one look at that rule and said "This. This is your Killer App." I think it will be the most important thing that people will see about 5e to distinguish it in a good way from any other edition.
You do know you're an asshat? And would hate my version of Dnd? But you're dead on about advantage/disadvantage. It's a game changer full stop. It lets me play Dnd without going to Savage Worlds, Castles and Crusades, some OSR derivatives or just go Onyx Path and say" fuck it".
I say the above because I'm playing it RAW and it's FUN.:)
Yet I get banned at TBP for 3 days because I quoted a wall of bullshit and said it was relavent to my one line response and their reason is....I had a thread ban and a 1 day ban combined with a 7 day ban which caused me to find this place 2 years ago? Get real. All they want is a 4e echo chamber and theorycraft haven... just ask Polaris.
I don't know what the fuck's in the water at TBP lately, but the last, oh, month has been a string of BAN ALL THE PEOPLES.
Critical mass, maybe.
103 pages bitching about "boring" fighters. Shoes fit the players I guess.
Quote from: cranebump;771589103 pages bitching about "boring" fighters. Shoes fit the players I guess.
There are no boring fighters. There are only boring players.
But we already knew that.
Quote from: Sacrosanct;771602There are no boring fighters. There are only boring players.
But we already knew that.
+1,000. If you need a manual to codify everything, the player is selling his imagination short. Or admitting he has none.
Oh, it gets worse:
Quote from: GX.Sigma;6342258I think there's a very important about game design concept that you're missing. The thing about balance is that it makes the "imagination" aspect better. I mean, if there was an option that was perfect for your character concept, but actually sucked mechanically (to the point where your character was useless compared to the others), it wouldn't be as fun to play that character.
Great. So these guys expect me to believe that 4e encourages greater imagination than a game like 1e because you don't have to worry about "useless characters"?
SMH
There are so many things wrong with that quoted statement I'm not sure where to begin. This is the kind of mentality that needs to go away and stick with MMOs.
Quote from: Sacrosanct;771630Great. So these guys expect me to believe that 4e encourages greater imagination than a game like 1e because you don't have to worry about "useless characters"?
The comparison is more often made to 3E, which suffered from serious issues where building to concept was an easy way to produce a character much more or less powerful than the game's assumed norm, and included no warnings to that effect. Other editions of D&D generally didn't suffer from that issue to the same degree, or if they did, only at levels that hardly anyone actually played. :)
QuoteThere are so many things wrong with that quoted statement I'm not sure where to begin. This is the kind of mentality that needs to go away and stick with MMOs.
The mentality is an opposition to things like "fighters should be inferior to spellcasters because MAGIC!"
Quote from: Sacrosanct;771602There are no boring fighters. There are only boring players.
But we already knew that.
You can have boring fighters. Sometimes it's nice to roleplaythe boring solid guy that makes sure the party have enough rope, makes sure the horses are hobbled before the party go to sleep, that guards are set etc etc.
You can't play Leeroy Jenkins all the time.
Quote from: jibbajibba;771680You can have boring fighters. Sometimes it's nice to roleplaythe boring solid guy that makes sure the party have enough rope, makes sure the horses are hobbled before the party go to sleep, that guards are set etc etc.
You can't play Leeroy Jenkins all the time.
once again, that's a player decision
Quote from: jibbajibba;771680...
You can't play Leeroy Jenkins all the time.
Most of the fighter types I know do exactly that. The spellcasters and other tacticians huddle up and try to plan some nifty combination, and the next thing you know, they're all rolling for initiative because the fighter just kicked down the door and charged right into the fray.
And it looks like 5e fighters will be especially good at that.
Quote from: Sacrosanct;771689once again, that's a player decision
But not necessarily cos they are boring :D
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;771663The comparison is more often made to 3E, which suffered from serious issues where building to concept was an easy way to produce a character much more or less powerful than the game's assumed norm, and included no warnings to that effect. Other editions of D&D generally didn't suffer from that issue to the same degree, or if they did, only at levels that hardly anyone actually played. :)
Yeah, very often when people talk about "D&D" or "D&D before 4ed" they mean 3.5ed.
Quote from: Saplatt;771700Most of the fighter types I know do exactly that. The spellcasters and other tacticians huddle up and try to plan some nifty combination, and the next thing you know, they're all rolling for initiative because the fighter just kicked down the door and charged right into the fray.
And it looks like 5e fighters will be especially good at that.
Sounds about right in my experience. Most people that play pure fighters do it for the action they rarely like planning. And yeah in 5e if any class is overpowered it would be the fighter. Maybe the warlock or bard if you pick the right spells.