|
Post by Finarvyn on Aug 4, 2014 17:37:21 GMT -6
I can't wait for the DMG. My 5E "insider" friend has a preview copy of the 5E DMG. Since the Player's Handbook got leaked somewhere, WotC is really being picky about anyone getting to see the DMG early so he won't show it to me, but he did give me some hints as to what it will contain. He said it will be a lot like a toolbox, where you can turn to certain sections or chapters and it will explain how to use 5E to simulate other editions of the game. Using 5E to create an "OD&D-like" feel would be really cool, I'm thinking. Anyway, just another thought to spark some conversation.
|
|
|
Post by TheObligatorySQL on Aug 4, 2014 18:17:25 GMT -6
This sounds so cool! I can't wait either!
|
|
|
Post by Vile Traveller on Aug 5, 2014 2:50:13 GMT -6
I have some hesitation about the "toolbox" concept, probably because I tend to be a minimalist. One of my other favourite games is Chaosium's Basic Roleplaying, but the BGB (Big Gold Book) has a plethora of options to sort through and discount or not, depending on your game and personal taste. That can add quite a lot of bookkeeping, especially at the table. While I'll probably buy the core books, I may find myself editing the PDFs and printing the bits I really want for the table. Assuming there will be PDFs.
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Aug 5, 2014 5:58:09 GMT -6
I know what you mean, but if you recall at the onset of the 5E development they said that their goal was to create a game where anyone from any edition could play and enjoy the new edition. I think the "toolbox" approach sounds like this design goal is still alive, even if folks scoffed at WotC being able to pull it off. This suggests that there are rules in even the free Basic PDF which will become "optional" when the DMG comes out, if you decide to emulate a particular edition. For example, and I'm just speculating, perhaps the DMG might say "okay, if you want to run OD&D take the Basic rules and ignore all references to skills and backgrounds." Heck, maybe they might say "if you want to run OD&D ignore stat checks and use this saving throw table instead." I don't know. There would be different instructions for folks who wanted to run 4E. Maybe the 3E entry would suggest a point-build way of doing skills. That kind of thing. Anyway, I'm excited about it and hope it's as cool as my imagination is building it up to be.
|
|
|
Post by funkaoshi on Aug 5, 2014 10:50:24 GMT -6
5E seems well suited to be hacked. It seems easy to just drop parts of the game (like skills and backgrounds) and the rest of the game keeps chugging along. In software development we call that idea loose coupling. I'm also looking forward to the DMG. From the tidbits they've dropped so far it sounds like it'll be an interesting book.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Aug 6, 2014 13:34:12 GMT -6
Hmm, it seems to me they ought to have built this modularity into the PHB. It’s pretty difficult to override what’s written in the PHB, and I don’t see how advice in the DMG would change that. Unless it’s assumed that the players will be allowed to own and read the DMG, which IMO would be terrible.
|
|
zeraser
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 184
|
Post by zeraser on Aug 6, 2014 14:56:06 GMT -6
Unless it’s assumed that the players will be allowed to own and read the DMG, which IMO would be terrible. I think players are allowed to own whatever they want, within all applicable municipal, state, federal laws...
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Aug 7, 2014 4:48:00 GMT -6
Hmm, it seems to me they ought to have built this modularity into the PHB. It’s pretty difficult to override what’s written in the PHB, and I don’t see how advice in the DMG would change that. Unless it’s assumed that the players will be allowed to own and read the DMG, which IMO would be terrible. Here's a theory: if the information is in the PH then the players will feel as if they are entitled and get the choice, but if the information is in the DMG then clearly it's in the territory of the DM to make those decisions. In a sense the modularity is built into the PH. There will be sections on skills and backgrounds and feats and whatnot. The Dungeon Master will get to decide which of those sections will be used and which will not.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Aug 7, 2014 8:47:32 GMT -6
I think players are allowed to own whatever they want, within all applicable municipal, state, federal laws... But not in the rules of the game (at least in 1e).
|
|
joseph
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 142
|
Post by joseph on Aug 7, 2014 9:26:32 GMT -6
Hmm, it seems to me they ought to have built this modularity into the PHB. It’s pretty difficult to override what’s written in the PHB, and I don’t see how advice in the DMG would change that. Unless it’s assumed that the players will be allowed to own and read the DMG, which IMO would be terrible. Here's a theory: if the information is in the PH then the players will feel as if they are entitled and get the choice, but if the information is in the DMG then clearly it's in the territory of the DM to make those decisions. In a sense the modularity is built into the PH. There will be sections on skills and backgrounds and feats and whatnot. The Dungeon Master will get to decide which of those sections will be used and which will not. Absolutely. The DM always has the right to say "no, we're not using that." That power was really taken away in 3.x and 4e... If the DM chose not to allow feats (as an example) the game really wouldn't work. It looks like this will not be the case with 5E and the referee will be able to tailor his game in a number of ways. Also for the DMG, I'm hoping to see some short introductions to classic settings - Mystara, Greyhawk, Al Qadim... we know the FR will be the supported setting, so brief outlines for some alternatives would be a great addition.
|
|
Koren n'Rhys
Level 6 Magician
Got your mirrorshades?
Posts: 355
|
Post by Koren n'Rhys on Aug 8, 2014 8:35:18 GMT -6
Hmm, it seems to me they ought to have built this modularity into the PHB. It’s pretty difficult to override what’s written in the PHB, and I don’t see how advice in the DMG would change that. Unless it’s assumed that the players will be allowed to own and read the DMG, which IMO would be terrible. I think this ship has long ago sailed, Falconer. In today's world, there's no secret DM books that the player doesn't see, beyond the module being run, anyway. Most players will own all three core books, so it falls to the DM to put his foot down on what will or will not be allowed in his campaign. I sincerely hope that eventually there is a decent license and SRD, so that we can easily cut and paste together a customized campaign guide for our players. Just the classes, races, backgrounds and so on that we will be using in our game. THAT would be fantastic.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Aug 8, 2014 12:04:56 GMT -6
I think this ship has long ago sailed, Falconer. In today's world, there's no secret DM books that the player doesn't see, beyond the module being run, anyway. Most players will own all three core books That’s not my experience, but maybe by “In today's world” you mean “in d20,” because both editions of AD&D (which are still played today and are even in print) sternly discourage players from accessing the DM books. I really don’t understand how it could be otherwise, but there are many things about d20 that I don’t understand.
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Aug 8, 2014 12:53:45 GMT -6
I'm lucky if my players will bother to buy a Player's Handbook, let alone invest in a Monster Manual or DMG. My "rules lawyer" types are mostly AD&D holdovers who owned the books back in the day and still know which monsters could do what.
|
|
|
Post by Zenopus on Aug 8, 2014 13:07:40 GMT -6
If the DMG actually has options that include ditching portions of the PHB, then Players owning the DMG might be more likely view these options as legit. Perhaps. But then those the Players with the DMG also gain familiarity with all of the magic items and behind the scenes campaign info etc, which I assume is what Falconer doesn't like.
|
|
zeraser
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 184
|
Post by zeraser on Aug 8, 2014 13:11:16 GMT -6
I think this ship has long ago sailed, Falconer. In today's world, there's no secret DM books that the player doesn't see, beyond the module being run, anyway. Most players will own all three core books That’s not my experience, but maybe by “In today's world” you mean “in d20,” because both editions of AD&D (which are still played today and are even in print) sternly discourage players from accessing the DM books. I really don’t understand how it could be otherwise, but there are many things about d20 that I don’t understand. Accepting that the books "sternly discourage players from accessing the DM books" (and swallowing, for the moment, my distaste at being "sternly discouraged" by a book about playing a game from doing anything) - is it so hard to imagine that AD&D players in the early days who were eager to get their hands on any and all gaming materials would have violated this "rule"? People who are into D&D quite naturally want to avail themselves of as much knowledge as possible about it, and this desire springs as much from the kind of wide-eyed curiosity that draws us into the hobby in the first place as from a base urge to get a leg up in-dungeon.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Aug 8, 2014 13:24:49 GMT -6
Is that your experience, though? My experience is more like Finarvyn’s, that the players will gladly show up for a game and immerse themselves in the wonder of the fantastic world, but outside the game there is no way they would care to “study up” on, say, the combat numbers, or the properties of magical items, or any of that stuff they are not supposed to know, let alone the stuff they are supposed to know like the campaign backstory. I mean, isn’t it true, guys, that the game is more fun for the players if they don’t have the monsters memorized? If they gain all their knowledge solely through adventure? Isn’t that more of a “wide-eyed” experience? And the only reason they even own Players Handbooks is because I stock up and gift them.
|
|
EdOWar
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 315
|
Post by EdOWar on Aug 8, 2014 13:28:53 GMT -6
I'm curious about the attraction of spending $50 to buy a book that lets you convert 5E into a version of the game you already own? I'm not trying to troll or anything, I'm just wondering what the new version of D&D brings to the table that you can't already get by adding ascending AC and advantage/disadvantage to your OD&D game? I wonder what I'm missing, and whether it'd be worth it for me to do the same.
On a side note, back in the day everyone had access to all the books, PHB, DMG and MM. It didn't seem to ruin the game for us one bit.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Aug 8, 2014 13:42:14 GMT -6
Long ago there was a claim that, in 5e, “Your 1E-loving friend can play in your 3E-style game and not have to deal with all the options he or she doesn't want or need. Or vice versa.” A bold claim, especially the “vice versa” (what is a 1e-style DM supposed to do when the 3e-style player starts invoking feats?), though already even the Basic 5e Fighter is way more complex than the 1e Fighter. Maybe the DMG will “allow” you to somehow make a 1e-style character, but I am skeptical.
|
|
EdOWar
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 315
|
Post by EdOWar on Aug 8, 2014 14:05:45 GMT -6
Long ago there was a claim that, in 5e, “Your 1E-loving friend can play in your 3E-style game and not have to deal with all the options he or she doesn't want or need. Or vice versa.” A bold claim, especially the “vice versa” (what is a 1e-style DM supposed to do when the 3e-style player starts invoking feats?), though already even the Basic 5e Fighter is way more complex than the 1e Fighter. Maybe the DMG will “allow” you to somehow make a 1e-style character, but I am skeptical. I remember those claims and I was skeptical they could pull it off. I'm wondering if the options in the new DMG will allow every player to play the way they want, or if they just allow the DM to set the style of play to which the players must comport. I suspect it'll be the latter. However, even if they can pull it off, it seems to me that if some players are playing with 3e/4e style characters, and I'm playing a 0e/1e style character, all their "options" still affect me because I'm loosing good playing time every time the game stops to look up the rules for their additional feats and class abilities. I can't count the number of times our PF games have come to a screeching halt while the GM has to look up how some feat interacts with the rest of the rules. Just saying.
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Aug 8, 2014 14:41:01 GMT -6
I don't remember the claims that way. My memory is that one could use one rules set to run either 1E or 3E campaigns (to follow the earlier example), not that one player of 1E and another of 3E could be sitting at the same table playing in the same game together.
Of course I may be mis-recalling...
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Aug 8, 2014 15:12:05 GMT -6
I was quoting verbatim.
|
|
zeraser
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 184
|
Post by zeraser on Aug 8, 2014 15:21:45 GMT -6
Is that your experience, though? My experience is more like Finarvyn’s, that the players will gladly show up for a game and immerse themselves in the wonder of the fantastic world, but outside the game there is no way they would care to “study up” on, say, the combat numbers, or the properties of magical items, or any of that stuff they are not supposed to know, let alone the stuff they are supposed to know like the campaign backstory. You may be right - I guess this depends on the players in question. Those that harbor DMing aspirations might be drawn to the guide, but maybe those who haven't bought in as fully just can't be bothered. That's a good question. I bet the game is more fun if everything is being newly discovered by the players. On the other hand, there's a deep well of system-independent D&D lore that most adult players probably share - umber hulks can confuse you with their weird eyes or whatever, etc.; if this knowledge is a problem, the only solution is to make all monsters, treasure, etc. unique in one's campaign... ...which is pretty cool! But also very time-consuming.
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Aug 8, 2014 16:34:02 GMT -6
I bet the game is more fun if everything is being newly discovered by the players. This is my group (mostly). I have one player who is my resident "rules lawyer" but the rest of my group has little interest to "master" the rules; they'd rather just play so I end up having to carry the bulk of the load rules-wise. If I throw a monster at them and don't tell them its name, there is a good chance that none of them (except sometimes the lawyer, and he's good at being cryptic and saying nothing) will guess what they are fighting until the battle is over. After they fight something I often will tell them what the monster was, with the idea that next time they will recognize it faster. Heck, most of them have never heard of "Appendix N", let alone actually read many of the books there. Most have read Tolkien, but I don't think they've read Howard or Moorcock or Leiber. What this means is that things that seem old hat to me are often very new and refreshing to them. That can be good or can be bad, as it does mean that they think I'm a genius with amazing creativity, but I have to be the one to oversee almost every aspect of character creation and upkeep. Often I will just create pregen characters to their vague request -- they tell me basically what they want to play and I deal with the details. That's one thing I love about OD&D/AD&D and hate about 3E/4E, that OD&D/AD&D characters can be built so quickly. 5E isn't as fast but gives more options, so it's a mix of good and bad. More good than bad so far, but we'll see how that shakes out after we play a while longer.
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on Aug 11, 2014 12:01:27 GMT -6
Falconer--those claims were largely (I believe) made by Monte Cook who shortly after this left the design team.
The modularity goal remained but the "we all play characters from different editions" thing was de-emphasized quite noticeable. However, you might still see vestiges of this in the way they approached feats. If you want you 3E style fighter who is tricked out with feats you can play that, but the guy who wants to play an old school straight forward fighter still can--you just take the bonuses instead of the feats.
Of course this all should ultimately be up to the DM which is why Monte's idea seemed problematic to me. I don't want 4E Superheroes standing alongside my grimfaced OD&D characters but that's just me.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Aug 11, 2014 13:25:43 GMT -6
If you want you 3E style fighter who is tricked out with feats you can play that, but the guy who wants to play an old school straight forward fighter still can--you just take the bonuses instead of the feats. I’m sorry, but I must challenge that. I have seen a pregen fighter from the Starter Set, and it doesn’t at all resemble an “old school straight forward fighter,” and I assume (wrongly?) that that pregen is as simple as they come in 5e. Second wind? Action surge? Sounds like a video game!
|
|
zeraser
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 184
|
Post by zeraser on Aug 11, 2014 15:33:09 GMT -6
If you want you 3E style fighter who is tricked out with feats you can play that, but the guy who wants to play an old school straight forward fighter still can--you just take the bonuses instead of the feats. I’m sorry, but I must challenge that. I have seen a pregen fighter from the Starter Set, and it doesn’t at all resemble an “old school straight forward fighter,” and I assume (wrongly?) that that pregen is as simple as they come in 5e. Second wind? Action surge? Sounds like a video game! That fighter pregen is indeed about as simple as a fighter gets in 5e, to the best of my knowledge. More complicated than an old-style fighter? Certainly. On the other hand, it's vastly simpler than a 4e fighter and quite possibly a fair bit simpler than a 3.5e fighter. May I ask - is there any chance you'll be asked to buy or play 5e? In other words: what are the stakes, for you, of how closely 5e can approximate old-style D&D?
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Aug 11, 2014 19:25:13 GMT -6
May I ask - is there any chance you'll be asked to buy or play 5e? Very small! High enough for me to rant online about it. I freakin’ love old school D&D. I think this forum in particular has been ground zero for an exceptional movement that has made leaps and bounds in rediscovering what makes D&D badass awesome, and has successfully articulated that to a wider audience that had never before experienced a whole side of what D&D can be. I want to keep preaching the old school gospel because I naturally want as many people as possible to know about it and come to love it like I do. I want hobby shop owners to high-five me rather than sneer when I mention anything old school. That sort of thing. Now, in the past few years, we have actually had it pretty good. For the most part, the conventional wisdom is that there are many valid styles to play D&D; broadly speaking: - Old School
- d20/Pathfinder
- 4e
I like that. It’s a world where there is no “badwrongfun,” because we all have our preferred games, and no-one is constantly made to justify their preference. What worries me with the advent of 5e is that the conventional wisdom may change; that the impression will take hold that there is “no point” in playing by old school rules, anymore, because 5e has it covered. (I am not accusing WotC of pushing this line, by the way.) Because, as I see it, 5e does not have it covered — DMG notwithstanding. It’s a character-building game at its heart. That’s why I am pushing back against this notion, because I am hearing it just about everywhere. The OSR must live on! But there’s more to it than that. I do wish 5e were more old school. I’d love to swap stories with Joe Gamer on the street and for us to be speaking basically the same language (the 5e jargon is so different; and familiar terms mean different things; and the numbers are all on a different scale). I’d love to be able to pick up a Basic Set at Target or Toys “R” Us, to put under the Christmas Tree for little Johnny. I want to share the Old School D&D experience with him, AND I want him to feel like it is a sweet new game made for him. Right now, I have to choose one or the other. And I want my friends, who know I am a “D&D guy,” to be able to browse the books in Barnes & Noble, and get a respectable “Tolkien and Greek Mythology” vibe, not a nerdy “Anime and Video Games” vibe. So, those are the stakes!
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Aug 11, 2014 20:45:47 GMT -6
Falconer, I like the passion that you have and have to say "amen" to your main points. Sometimes folks throw around the term "old school" without always having played OD&D, and that's a shame. Keep preaching the word of true "old school" and hopefully more folks will finally get it. I think this forum in particular has been ground zero for an exceptional movement that has made leaps and bounds in rediscovering what makes D&D badass awesome, and has successfully articulated that to a wider audience that had never before experienced a whole side of what D&D can be. I appreciate the kind words about this place. I created this board because I got frustrated that Dragonsfoot had all of the OD&D chatter hidden in the "classic" section and I believed that there was interest in discussing the original game and not just later versions. I agree that there have been huge strides in the past few years in exposing OD&D to the masses, and folks who had never heard of or had never experienced the freestyle RPG from 1974 are now hearing about it and thinking about trying it. I find myself at an interesting crossroads, however. I still love OD&D yet realize that it will never get the widespread support that the might of Hasbro can throw behind 5E. The reason that I created the 5E section of these boards was because I think that the new edition has the potential to be so much more "old school" than 3E or 4E ever was, and while it won't be OD&D I think it can be fun in much the same way that OD&D was. At least, I'm still hoping that it will be. What I know is that my OD&D players are really enjoying 5E, both in playtest and now in actual release. This board will always be an OD&D board, but I'm finding that 5E may be my second favorite edition.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Aug 12, 2014 8:35:47 GMT -6
This board will always be an OD&D board, but I'm finding that 5E may be my second favorite edition. Hey I called it On a slightly more serious note. Before I got caught up in making up Wilderlands Maps and running 5e. I was working on a full rulebook that combined Swords & Wizardry and my Majestic Wilderlands supplement. I don't have a great desire to get yet another retro-clone out there. But I find myself in need of having a nice full set of rules that I can give away or sell particularly when I am dealing with physical copies sold to game store. The project has low priority but I was thinking with the release of 5e of changing things up a bit with it. In my Majestic Wilderlands I added abilities. They are similar to skills but any characters can use any ability, just some are better at certain abilities than other. Like Burglars are best at opening locks. But a wizard and attempt it as well. If he had a high enough dex he may even be the party's regular lockpicker. This is similar to 5e use of skills. So it go me thinking why don't I go all the way and tweak the humbers to be more like 5e. Where AC and the to hit bonus are flattened, hit points are boosted a bit. But keep the classes and spells like how they are in OD&D/Swords & Wizardry. In short OD&D with 5e math and some of 5e's options namely abilities i.e skills. I been running Swords & Wizardry plus Majestic Wilderlands continuously since 2009. There is little difference in my 5e sessions compared to my Majestic Wilderlands sessions. Especially if you just using the basic set. I figure with a "Majestic Realms" ruleset I fee I can replicate the best feature of 5e but with more of a OD&D sensibility. Not Hit Dice healing, the traditional XP gains, a simpler progression of class abilities, etc. If the numbers could be calculated to make the two highly compatible in that you can take a 5e stated character or creature and use in a Majestic Realms campaign and vice versa. A likely side effect is damage and hit point would be greatly boosted compared to a OD&D game. Which may not be desirable. Not sure it would fare in download or sales but it is an interesting thought.
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Aug 12, 2014 9:16:56 GMT -6
I like most of what you said, but wanted to focus on one particular phrase: There is little difference in my 5e sessions compared to my Majestic Wilderlands sessions. Especially if you just using the basic set. This has been my experience as well, with the exception that 1st level in 5E is a lot more like 3rd level in OD&D. I'm glad to hear that others are having similar experiences. To me, OD&D is an attitude as much as it is a simple set of rules.
|
|