Dungeons And Dragons 5th Edition Announced!

I forget if I've mentioned this, but one thing about fighters was intensely gratifying for me: the two weapon fighting style. It's so simple and perfect. Instead of making you take a chain of feats to mostly mitigate the horrendous penalties on two-weapon fighting, it just states that if you have a one-handed weapon in each hand, you can attack with both of them when you attack. "You want to fight with two weapons? Here! Grab two weapons and fight!"

Yes but you only get to add your bonus on the first one.

Something my table got wrong, then. I even asked if that was the case. Ah, well.

well if it's a mistake in your favour keep it to yourself!

edited 1st Dec '13 11:59:07 PM by joeyjojo

Of course!

It does make more sense though. You have your primary attack which you are committed to and then you have your secondary 'off hand' attack you're taking a potshot with. Thinking of it as firing suppression fire in one hand while no scoping with the other.

Actually I do like the way that Next simplifies a lot of game concerts. Wilfully abandoning straight numerical balance in favour for playing in a more intuitive 'tactical' manner.

The player getting a hit dice per level they can roll is a lot neater then tracking their heal surge values for example.

edited 2nd Dec '13 12:54:42 AM by joeyjojo

"Wilfully abandoning straight numerical balance in favour for playing in a more intuitive 'tactical' manner."

Problem: "Tactical" means "bitching at the GM until you get advantage" or "playing a caster."

Intuition and tactics are an important part of any game. So is numerical balance. In going back to AD&D, they're flat-out saying "we don't give a shit if more than one person in the party can meaningfully contibute."

Which was always the case with D&D after all, minus 4th where most classes could contribute something.

Otherwise: "Do you have a Druid and/or Cleric in the party? Okay, get in there, it's a Dracolich."

edited 2nd Dec '13 6:48:37 AM by Alkonost

Yes, it has been the case. And that's the problem. "I have class features more powerful than your entire class!'' IS NOT A THING THAT SHOULD EVER HAPPEN.

I think it's fine for one class (or several classes) to be objectively more useful than the others, as long as they depend on others. Such as, a Wizard flings status ailment and debilitating spells to lock down the enemies far better than anyone else, but has difficulty dealing decent damage to anything not weak to magic. So, they would still depend on others to get things done.

Too bad that was never the case in 3.5/Pathfinder.

Sorry that should of been 'tactile' not 'tactical'.

4th edition was very balanced between powers and party members. But it's insistence on making sure everyone's powers and class features couldn't be over exploited by attaching disclaimers and necessary conditions on each and every power ironically brought an unnecessary level of complexity to the game.

Take the Ranger Stance Utility Power Aspect Of The Pack Wolf in 4e and Weave Through The Fray. Both gave bonuses against opportunity attacks but took very different ways of doing it.

Pack Wolf meant do you did not provoke opportunity attacks when leaving squares adjacent to your allies. These conditions sounds useful, fair and balanced but in practised it was adding an extra letter of complexity to an game that already had overtly complicated rules on combat.

Weave Through The Fray. On the other hand just outright said that any and all opportunity attacks against you are at Disadvantage. This might be more powerful (to the point a really savvy player could craft a perfect defence built). But it's also a lot more simple and playable.

edited 2nd Dec '13 1:27:18 PM by joeyjojo

that was never the case in 2nd edition either. Where by high level a wizard or psionicist could basically tear the game balance to shreds while laughing.

To unearth this thread years into the future...

Any tips for aspiring D Ms going into this edition? Now that you all have had some time to play around with it

Sure. Advice related to 5e D&D specifically:

1. If you have played or GM'd for a tabletop RPG before: start with the basic rules or maybe the starter game to see if you enjoy the system, then get the Player's Handbook if you do. The System Reference Document available on the official site also has at least one subclass and subrace for each class and race in the PHB.

2. If you happen to have access to the playtest material, "Caves of Chaos" is a great starting adventure too.

3. If you haven't played before, get the starter set. I haven't played it, but hear it's a decent enough entry and pretty cheap on the internet. It comes with dice. If you do enjoy the system, Player's Handbook is a must. If you're new to Dungeon Mastering, Dungeon Master's Guide is good, otherwise I would get the Monster Manual next. However, a good chunk of the essential bits of both are available in the System Reference Document.

4. In my experience, since a character's background is mechanically incorporated into the character creation system, and is essentially a third of the character creation process, even new players get way more excited about their characters as characters and roleplay them more. (Or maybe it's just me getting a clearer picture of their character?) I would encourage basing adventures around character backgrounds. Someone's a dragonborn noble? Their clan has a problem. Someone's a guild artisan? They're responsible for hiring security for an art show or auction or caravan.

For additional material, Wizards of the Coast have the "Unearthed Arcana" articles on their official site. They're basically "official" homebrew with varying levels of balance. There's also the DM's Guild, which has a lot of free or cheap stuff. Plus there's plenty of homebrew on any D&D-centric message board or gameplay wiki (as opposed to a lore wiki).

edited 18th Aug '16 9:42:03 AM by Braincogs

How weird is it that this thread gets rezzed on the very same day I'm looking into dnd. I had some questions for some veterans

1: So I read the basic rules on the website and it's still all sorta complicated. I think I get the general gist of things but outside of rolling a d20 for attack rolls and adding modifiers I have no idea what I'm doing and I'm not even sure I'm picturing that right.

2: What level of technical knowledge do I need before trying to find a newbie group?

3: Where do I find a newbie group?

4: what sorta stuff am I expected to bring? Do I need to get dice and things to not seem like a layabout?

Well, you don't really need a "newbie" group. I think most groups would welcome new players.

1. Makes more sense once you start playing. Basically whenever there's a chance of both failure and success you roll a d20. There are three major types of d20 rolls, attacks (rolls to hit), saving throws (rolls to avoid special abilities or spell effects), and ability checks.
2. None.
3. High school/college club, hobby shop, maybe even nerdy co-workers?
4. If you're a new player, you don't really need dice. It's nice to have, but if you're just trying it out you don't really need it. If you plan to DM for friends who are also new, dice are a necessity.

edited 19th Aug '16 7:49:32 AM by Braincogs

Thanks for the advice, Cogs.

Just received my Player's Guide and DM book in the mail yesterday actually. Glancing through it, I'm pretty stoked to get a campaign going.

I have played a few times and I am looking to find a group in a new city. How have you guys found other Dungeons and Dragons fans looking for a group?

Edited by kenneth_the_page on Feb 18th 2019 at 7:56:59 AM

I found my first group on the LFG sub-Reddit - https://www.reddit.com/r/lfg/. My current group I found through Meetup.