Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

From my understanding the rule set leans more towards 2e/3e, so I'm guessing that LFQW is, sadly, back in.

Really hoping to be proven wrong though.

I think I understand the 'Linear Fighter' thing, but... what's the rest all about?

 Alpharius wrote:
what's the rest all about?

In 3E, casters became much more powerful (quadratic or exponential progression) over the course of 20 levels than non-casters (linear progression). This was actually solved by 4E. Despite being severely misunderstood and under-appreciated, 4E improves on 3E in many ways. I hope the best ideas of both will make it into the final 5E product.

 streamdragon wrote:
I'm guessing that LFQW is, sadly, back in

I think that is very unlikely.

Alpharius wrote:I think I understand the 'Linear Fighter' thing, but... what's the rest all about?

Quadratic wizard (although really the problem included clerics and druids as well).
As Manchu said, basically the power of casters racked up at a much higher rate than non-caster classes. About level 5 it got silly. Beyond that it went insane, with non-caster classes being essentially completely ineffectual by end-game.

Manchu wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:
what's the rest all about?

In 3E, casters became much more powerful (quadratic or exponential progression) over the course of 20 levels than non-casters (linear progression). This was actually solved by 4E. Despite being severely misunderstood and under-appreciated, 4E improves on 3E in many ways. I hope the best ideas of both will make it into the final 5E product.

 streamdragon wrote:
I'm guessing that LFQW is, sadly, back in

I think that is very unlikely.

I really, really hope you're right, I do. I loved 4e since it actually gave my fighters the tools to do the job they're supposed to do. But my initial looks into the 5e playtest stuff (and I admit I stopped caring about halfway through the playtests) showed nothing for martial classes really. Fighter turns were basically back to "I swing my sword" and that was it. Oooh, a couple extra dice so I can ... swing my sword better? And that's it?

I am okay with the fighter swinging his sword.

Mechanics should not be confused with narrative. One of the worst things about 3E is the way it discouraged narrative creativity. A lot of players never thought of trying anything that wasn't spelled out on their character sheet. Unfortunately, 4E closely followed this model by making everything about combat into a mechanic. (Which is probably why it makes for such a good board game but not the best RPG.)

If I am playing a fighter, it's up to me to make his moves interesting when I describe what I do to the group. It is then up to the DM to figure out what I need to roll for my character to attempt what I described. If I can't come up with the description, then I need more practice as a player. If the DM says I can't do that because it's not in the rules, he needs more practice as a DM.

I envision the classes reflecting play style. The Fighter is for a more swashbuckling sort of player who uses his iniative and takes risks. Casters, by contrast, are for players who like to stick their noses in the books, carefully reading the spell texts, and doing the calculations about exactly when/where is the right moment to use up a precious spell.

What 5E does NOT need is books and books and books of "feats" or "maneuvers" or "powers."

 Manchu wrote:
What 5E does NOT need is books and books and books of "feats" or "maneuvers" or "powers."

Yeah, but that's kinda D&D's thing. Produce splat forever until the next edition. At least since 2nd.

 Alpharius wrote:
I think I understand the 'Linear Fighter' thing, but... what's the rest all about?

If you sketch out 'power curves' for the various classes, in most editions of D&D fighters are a relative straight line from the bottom left (1st level, low power) to the upper right (high level, high power). Spell casters are more of a curve as they start out worse than a fighter (a fighter can swing his sword all day as long, while a wizard casts his spell or two and goes to take a nap) but gain massive power as they level (common example is Fireball becoming available at whatever level: The fighter can swing his sword a couple times, while the wizard can trash a small army, and still has several 'lesser' spells before needing that nap. This continues, as warrior-types get smallish upgrades to hit a little better, maybe a few fests based around tricks (in 3rd) while the spell casters get wish spells and can otherwise remake reality.

The impact of this differs by edition, but many seem to feel the peak is 3rd which spawned the term 'CoDzilla' (for Cleric-or-Druid-Zilla) as the divine spellcasters took the lead for once. "Caster dominance is certainly not limited to making warriors feel inadequate either: I saw a commend from a 3.5 edition player that got discouraged as he realized that his thief was mathematically less useful to the party than a handful of wands to detect traps, open locks, etc. He felt that his character was taking a share of XP and loot for something that would be better served by a handful of magic items. (and 3.0 made magic item crafting a more common and easy PC 'thing' than previous editions.

I feel 3rd may have encouraged this by actually trying to think about balance and consistency more, which begat more discussion of 'winning builds' and 'tiers' of classes and such. Earlier editions could certainly have issues like that (2nd edition spell casters could certainly remake reality easily, ad fighters tended to not even have bad options besides attacking, much less good options.However, I do feel these had certain design decisions which damped this effect, like more random spells and a general tendency against 'ala carte' magic items so building a character around a specific combination of spells, magic items, etc. was less likely to be workable unless the DM made things available.

4th did some clever things to avoid this. The base classes all used a common power structure so everyone had some tricks and was relatively balanced, A lot of spells that violated the idea of 'niche protection' became 'rituals' which were more expensive in both character-building and usage costs.

Consider opening a locked door in a 'stressful' situation: In 2nd, the Rogue can try (percentage chance to make it or not). If the Wizard has it memorized, knock makes this pointless. 3rd is broadly similar, with the option that the Wizard might be a sorcerer and can choose the spell on the fly, or making a Wand of Knock is a relatively trivial outlay by mid-level. In 4th the Rogue can roll the skill check, or a caster can use the Knock Ritual which takes something like 10 minutes (so "no" in combat) and costs a significant amount.

I'm not sure how 5th is dealing with this concern. In a lot of ways it looks like a reset to 3rd or 2nd: I've heard it described as '3rd edition from an alternate universe' and dealing with this concern is something I'm interested in seeing.

I'm sure there will be players option type books eventually. I am saying that the game does not NEED to reduce everything down to a purchasable mechanical widget. There are people who, taking their cue from video games, think that's what RPGs are all about.

 Manchu wrote:
I'm sure there will be players option type books eventually. I am saying that the game does not NEED to reduce everything down to a purchasable mechanical widget. There are people who, taking their cue from video games, think that's what RPGs are all about.

Right, I get that. The problem is that the business model for D&D has been selling books with more purchasable mechanical widgets for years. Fluff/setting books don't seem to sell as good as the Complete Book of X.

Naturally. There is usually only one DM per group after all and he's the most likely to pick up a campaign setting or module.

But I think you've missed my point. Sure WotC will publish splat, players will purchase it, and they will want to use it considering that they paid for it. That's fine. I got no beef with WotC selling "players options" books and no beef with players buying it.

The problem is when players forget the narrative and just want to shout the name of some power (like in anime) and roll dice. Because at that point, we might as well just play a board game or even better a video game. Or maybe just watch some anime.

 Manchu wrote:
I am okay with the fighter swinging his sword.

Mechanics should not be confused with narrative. One of the worst things about 3E is the way it discouraged narrative creativity. A lot of players never thought of trying anything that wasn't spelled out on their character sheet. Unfortunately, 4E closely followed this model by making everything about combat into a mechanic. (Which is probably why it makes for such a good board game but not the best RPG.)

If I am playing a fighter, it's up to me to make his moves interesting when I describe what I do to the group. It is then up to the DM to figure out what I need to roll for my character to attempt what I described. If I can't come up with the description, then I need more practice as a player. If the DM says I can't do that because it's not in the rules, he needs more practice as a DM.

I envision the classes reflecting play style. The Fighter is for a more swashbuckling sort of player who uses his iniative and takes risks. Casters, by contrast, are for players who like to stick their noses in the books, carefully reading the spell texts, and doing the calculations about exactly when/where is the right moment to use up a precious spell.

What 5E does NOT need is books and books and books of "feats" or "maneuvers" or "powers."

I should be clear that "Swing my sword" wasn't a descriptive, but rather an "effects-based" annotation of what the fighter was doing. It doesn't matter how fancy you describe the fighter swinging his sword, when the end result is "roll a d20 vs AC" with exactly 0 changes mechanically from "I attack" to "I drop low, switch my grip on my longsword and slash upward through the monster's throat!". Anything the GM fiats is just that: fiat.

I'd also point out that in a world of "I describe what I do and let the GM fiat it all he wants" there is (and really should be) nothing preventing a caster class from doing the same thing. "I cast magic missle" vs "I summon bonds of eldritch might, forge them into silvery shards of magic and send them careening through the monster's throat!"

Whether the DM "needs more practice" for not wanting to fiat every single descriptive attack is up to you and your group. Some prefer more straight forward things, other are willing to bend every rule in the game. Both of these situations are independent of class balance however.

You have, I believe, previously said that you were fine with the implementation of the Tome Of Battle giving other abilities to non-caster classes, whereas the majority opinion on the matter seemed to be "omg suddenly fighters are OP!" (which I have never agreed with). If 5e lacks for that sort of alternate ability for non-casters, I fail to see how it won't be another "casters run away with the edition" ... edition, unless magic has been SERIOUSLY toned down.

Well, I think that's being a little intolerant of other people's fun, Manchu. I certainly prefer narrative games, but if people want to play it like a computer game and they enjoy that, I'm not going to say they're doing it wrong.

From what I've seen btw, casters have been scaled in a couple of ways:
1. They get less spells, period, but some minor damage abilities that "recharge".
2. The damage and effects of the spells they do get are more limited in scope. Spells either do similar damage to a fighter on a good round for that level, or they do weird stuff but take a while to cast and so on.
3. Melee is not out of the question for wizards, since everyone gets a similar bonus to hit and not all monsters are out of range of those attacks.

I suppose there will probably be balance issues, but those sorts of things have never killed a roleplaying game for me. Sometimes it's fun to play the underdog or everyman in a super team.

Fiat, huh?

TBH it sounds like you are talking about Descent.

Perhaps you have read some of my posts about Old School and Modern RPGs? Quick summary: Old School rules require interpretation. Modern rules (theoretically) just need to be executed as-written. Each approach has totally different game play emphases: Old School is about exploration and is mostly played in the form of conversational narrative. Modern is about combat and is mostly played with grid mats and miniatures. Each approach also has a totally different kind of DM. The Old School DM is a neutral story moderator. The Modern DM is an enemy combatant.

The kind of "fiat" you are talking about assumes a very Modern sense of RPGs. That happens to be exactly the type of thing I am generally arguing against. Why? Frankly, there is a purely practical reason: RPGs are not as good at being tactical board games/miniature skirmish games as ... well, tactical board games/miniature skirmish games.

The larger reason is, the main thing RPGs are actually good at is generating characters and stories. The tendency in Modern games, following video games, is to reduce a character to a character sheet and a story to a series of combat/resource management scenarios. Computers are better at handling that sort of thing, making the table top redundant as a kind of analog version for luddites.

Not sure if that last post is at me, but isn't:

If I am playing a fighter, it's up to me to make his moves interesting when I describe what I do to the group. It is then up to the DM to figure out what I need to roll for my character to attempt what I described. If I can't come up with the description, then I need more practice as a player. If the DM says I can't do that because it's not in the rules, he needs more practice as a DM.

Pretty much describing GM fiat? Or are we having a symantic issue?

 Da Boss wrote:
if people want to play it like a computer game and they enjoy that, I'm not going to say they're doing it wrong

But in fact, I am talking about people playing it like a computer game and not enjoying it. Pointing out that D&D is not a computer game is a pretty good way to explain why someone playing it like one is not having fun.

 streamdragon wrote:
Pretty much describing GM fiat? Or are we having a symantic issue?

No, it's not semantic. I understand what you mean; it boils down to "disregarding the rules" or even "cheating." In older editions of D&D, this isn't an issue because the DM's job is to interpret the rules. That means, you describe what your PC is doing and the DM tells you what is going on mechanically. In modern rules, you tell the DM what mechanic you are using and the DM watches as you roll your dice, marking off the monsters' HP as necessary. In the Modern context, Old School DMing is "fiat." Old School style still survives somewhat in Modern games: in 3E, for example, the DM could give a +/-2 modifier to reflect circumstances.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Coincidentally, here's what Mike Mearls (lead on Fifth Edition) said about the topic in 2011:

"I have a theory about RPGs," Mearls said. "When 2nd edition really got focused on story [in 1989], we had what I call the first era of RPG decadence and it was based on story. The idea that the DM is going to tell you a story, and you go from point A to point B to point C. The narrative is linear and [the DM is a] storyteller going to tell you a static story, and you would just get to roll dice occasionally. 3rd edition came out and said 'To Hell with that,' it's all about players, we're going to give you some really cool options, it's all flexibility in the DM and for the players, there's this meaningful choice.

"I think we've hit the second era of RPG decadence, and it's gone the opposite way," he continued. "It's all about player power now - the DM is just the rules guy - and the DM can't contradict what the players say. [The game] is taking away from the DM, and that's where I worry because other types of games can do that better. I might as well play a board game, 'cause I'm just here enforcing the rules. Without the DM as the creative guy, what's the point?"

Mearls admits 4th edition might have gone too far in creating a perfectly balanced game. "We've lost faith of what makes an RPG an RPG," he said, admitting that in trying to please gamers with a limited imagination, 4th edition might have punished those with an active one. "There's this fear of the bad gaming group, where the game is so good that even playing with a bad gaming group, you'll still have fun."

Read the whole article here.

Amazon has pre-order pages up for all of the currently announced 5E products, see OP for links.

WotC has also announced D&D Adventurers League, the new organized play structure -- which has some interesting features. Here's the full article.

Also, here are some larger versions of the cover art for the PHB and DMG:Finally, could this be teasing some kind of 5E SRD:

Were they always $50? I could have sworn they were $40. Either way, my Gencon money is going to be tight this year. D&D, 40k Conquest, KD at the CMoN booth, Forgeworld, and all the other dealers there to tempt my money... I may have to make some hard decisions.

$50 is fairly close, if not the same in some instances, and seems to be a pretty common price for hardback gaming books. Codex's and Supplements ar $49.99, for example. Someone made a list adjusting for inflation.

Looks like only the Starter Set and PHB will be available by GenCon. Note the release date of the PHB is actually immediately after GenCon but I cannot imagine WotC will not have copies there.

As far as the price, I don't know that you can compare the 4E core books with these. They were never meant to be complete and I don't know if that is what's going on here or not. And we certainly can't compare the 5E books with 3E ones, considering they came out 11-14 years ago.

I am not at all surprised by the price. D&D books have always been expensive so this is no change. Consider that the original box set cost about 48 USD in 2014 money.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ninja'd

It's a sign of mortality that there has been almost 100% inflation since the black cover 2nd ed books, which is when I started gaming.

No wonder I'm always confused at how expensive books seem! Even if they tend towards full color now, instead of black and white, or two color text.

 Manchu wrote:
Looks like only the Starter Set and PHB will be available by GenCon. Note the release date of the PHB is actually immediately after GenCon but I cannot imagine WotC will not have copies there.

Man, the GenCon WotC booth/area is going to be crazily packed this year. Lines longer than FFG has been having on Day 1 the last few years.

 Polonius wrote:
It's a sign of mortality that there has been almost 100% inflation since the black cover 2nd ed books, which is when I started gaming.

No wonder I'm always confused at how expensive books seem! Even if they tend towards full color now, instead of black and white, or two color text.

heh. Yep. Prepare yourself for the cold embrace of death.

 kronk wrote:
Man, the GenCon WotC booth/area is going to be crazily packed this year. Lines longer than FFG has been having on Day 1 the last few years.

You're not kidding. The D&D event tickets sold out like lightning. I missed the All-Access Pass. They took in $36k just on those.

 kronk wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Looks like only the Starter Set and PHB will be available by GenCon. Note the release date of the PHB is actually immediately after GenCon but I cannot imagine WotC will not have copies there.

Man, the GenCon WotC booth/area is going to be crazily packed this year. Lines longer than FFG has been having on Day 1 the last few years.

No doubt. I believe I may just pass on fifth edition for now, or wait for the discounted boxed set that'll eventually find it's way to market.

Now I see where I was confused. I was thinking of the pricing for the original 3.5 books, and other than the Core, pathfinder books are $39.99.

 Manchu wrote:

 kronk wrote:
Man, the GenCon WotC booth/area is going to be crazily packed this year. Lines longer than FFG has been having on Day 1 the last few years.

You're not kidding. The D&D event tickets sold out like lightning. I missed the All-Access Pass. They took in $36k just on those.

Event tickets are on sale? feth! How did I miss opening day AGAIN? Aren't I supposed to get an email?

 Sinful Hero wrote:
wait for the discounted boxed

Discounted boxed set?

Er, do you mean a starter set? You can pre-order it from Amazon for $18. It comes out July 15. Or do you mean the "gift set" slipcased thing? Was that discounted?

 kronk wrote:
Event tickets are on sale? feth! How did I miss opening day AGAIN? Aren't I supposed to get an email?

That's what I said!

Yes, it opened on Sunday (of all days) and everything is gone. I know exactly how you feel right now BTW.

Damn it! Again, I miss out on FFG's In Flight Report.

WHEATON!!!

Edit: Just nabbed a ticked to the In Flight Report. My GenCon must do item! Reaper's Speed Painting is sold out, though. Sad.

 Manchu wrote:

 Sinful Hero wrote:
wait for the discounted boxed

Discounted boxed set?

Er, do you mean a starter set? You can pre-order it from Amazon for $18. It comes out July 15. Or do you mean the "gift set" slipcased thing? Was that discounted?

 kronk wrote:
Event tickets are on sale? feth! How did I miss opening day AGAIN? Aren't I supposed to get an email?

That's what I said!

Yes, it opened on Sunday (of all days) and everything is gone. I know exactly how you feel right now BTW.

A friend of mine when on at noon when they started and tossed in all his registrations real quick, as he was a prepared little bunny, and ran to checkout to get a message that he was 4,965th in line to checkout and was in queue. Being there when registration starts isn't much of a guarantee either.

 Manchu wrote:

 Sinful Hero wrote:
wait for the discounted boxed

Discounted boxed set?

Er, do you mean a starter set? You can pre-order it from Amazon for $18. It comes out July 15. Or do you mean the "gift set" slipcased thing? Was that discounted?

 kronk wrote:
Event tickets are on sale? feth! How did I miss opening day AGAIN? Aren't I supposed to get an email?

That's what I said!

Yes, it opened on Sunday (of all days) and everything is gone. I know exactly how you feel right now BTW.

I meant the bundle they generally put out of the PHB, DMG, and the MM1. Usually with a small discount on buying seperately.

They've had the same date for months guys, reminded every one via email, and post reminders on facebook(and possibly twitter) constantly. They even made a big announcement about the event list being open last week. There have been big clues.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ahtman wrote:

 Manchu wrote:

 Sinful Hero wrote:
wait for the discounted boxed

Discounted boxed set?

Er, do you mean a starter set? You can pre-order it from Amazon for $18. It comes out July 15. Or do you mean the "gift set" slipcased thing? Was that discounted?

 kronk wrote:
Event tickets are on sale? feth! How did I miss opening day AGAIN? Aren't I supposed to get an email?

That's what I said!

Yes, it opened on Sunday (of all days) and everything is gone. I know exactly how you feel right now BTW.

A friend of mine when on at noon when they started and tossed in all his registrations real quick, as he was a prepared little bunny, and ran to checkout to get a message that he was 4,965th in line to checkout and was in queue. Being there when registration starts isn't much of a guarantee either.

I hit the button at the turn of the second and ended up 2987th myself. Managed to get everything I wanted anyway

I got no emails this year, Sinful Hero.