Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

Dark Dreams of Furiae - a new module for NWN:EE! Buy now
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

D&D 5ed just released

ajwzajwz Member Posts: 4,122
D&D 5ed just released their basic rules, which you can download online for free here: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/basicrules

What are your first impressions? It seems much closer to 3ed than 4ed from my perspective, which is good because I hated 4th ed.

Adaptable for any potential sequels to baldur's gate perhaps? *wink wink*

jackjackCorvinomeaglothRavenslightAwong124thespaceJuliusBorisovkaguanabooinyoureyes
«13456789

Comments

  • CrevsDaakCrevsDaak Member Posts: 7,152
    I'm sticking with 2E until I can get more on information on this Edition. Seems better than 3E and 4E, that's a good point to start with.

    elminsterjackjack
  • elminsterelminster Member, Developer Posts: 16,050
    edited July 2014
  • meaglothmeagloth Member Posts: 3,806
    edited July 2014
    Oh. I just want 2e. From what little I know about 3and up I don't like it.

    Not like I care though. I think I'd be cool to play table top but I don't know anyone who does.

    Deceonbooinyoureyes
  • CaloNordCaloNord Member Posts: 1,807
    Happy with 2nd and 3.5 I don't see any reason to change my edition now. :) Just got to learn new rules and be annoyed by all the changes. :)

    Corvino
  • meaglothmeagloth Member Posts: 3,806
    The gnome thing is new, right?

    Anduin
  • DreadKhanDreadKhan Member Posts: 3,859
    Mixed feelings based on a quick readthrough of the first 50ish pages.

    Pros:
    Flavour! seriously, this has some of that flavour from 1st edition, and some from newer DnD.
    Formating! Sweet googely moogely, this has very manageable subsections breaking up those walls of text! I may have enjoyed reading War and Peace, but I really think most people dont have quite that level of attention span.
    Options are present, an attempt to find a happy medium between 3.x making every character pretty unique and older DnD which had very limited choices to make your character mechanically unique.
    Stats matter, and looks like an emphasis on more 'average' characters at low level, and less min-maxing in stat buy.
    Spellcasting seems slightly nerfed, but with some versatility. This is just basic rules though, so yeah.
    I like basic classes vs ridiculous initial specialization, but it looks like more classes will be in standard rules.
    Looks like low level characters will have a hope of actually hitting higher level chsracters... in 3.x in particular, low level had very low attack bonus', meaning 50 guards with bows were only hitting on crits.
    Combat should be grittier, but HP will be better for vulnerable rogues and wizards.
    Rogues will be interesting for ambushes, if less so than in 3.x
    Casters have more abilities beyond spellcasting, so way less mechanically boring.

    Cons:
    Lots of nitpickery (ffs, scimitars arent suited to dual wielding! Weights of things are odd, but not ridiculous usually).
    Casters still look stronger than everything else, but actual spells could have changed.
    Rogues are MUCH weaker combatants at higher levels it looks like, same as earlier editions. Limited high level utility I worry.
    Archers could be ridiculous, but maybe not quite as awesome as in 2nd. Prof +2, Archer +2 and Dex bonus to hit AND damage will be nasty, easily +7, which can reliably hit a Plate wearing fighter with a shield and Defense... Having 3 or 4 would kill enemies before melee builds can get in range, but actual play might challenge this.
    Not happy with how skills are handled so far. GREATLY dislike the old skill proficiencies, but I suspect very few actual players really made great use of skills, unless they had certain expansion books.

    Things I am wondering:
    Gnomes?! Half orcs?! I miss those guys, but I suspect they'll be added to full version.
    Prestige classes and multiclassing? I liked some aspects of the 3.x multiclassing system, since it allowed you to build whatever character you want. The caveat being that in core rules, all numbers rounded down, and 'good' saves nabbed the +2, so multiclasses could be incredible defensively, yet possibly have an atrocious bab. Or, stacking bad saves could leave you brutally vulnerable. Sooo, I liked the versatility, but disliked how easy it was make a useless multiclass.
    How good will casting be, single difficult encounter or repeatability-wise? Repeatability should be for fighters and rogues, casters should be like archaic artillery: devestating in the right situation.

    Overall, interesting. Could be the bridge back to old editions, but still has nifty new stuff at many levels.

    JuliusBorisovButtercheese
  • elminsterelminster Member, Developer Posts: 16,050
    edited July 2014
    meagloth said:

    THEY DONT HAVE GNOMES!!! @Anduin‌ @Anduin‌ @‌Anduin!!!!! THERES NO GNOMES!!!!!!!
    O_O
    *stunned silence*


    Also, apparently my (real)name is a common halfling name. Who knew?

    Obviously they are holding back certain info. For instance they mention nothing on Duergar bonuses or Drow bonuses (other than to say its not included).

    meaglothjackjackCrevsDaakAnduin
  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,705
    3E was quite good. Different than 2E but quite good. Haven't heard anyone say anything good about 4E. Hopefully this 5E will be an improved 3E.

  • meaglothmeagloth Member Posts: 3,806
    I'm actually liking some of the flavor here, like dreadkhan said. I've only read like 20 pages and like I said, I'm not familiar with anything than the edited-for-bg 2e, so this is all pretty new to me. I don't know how the could do away with gnomes, and I don't see bard listed as a class. @jackjack‌ @CaloNord‌ we're finished.

    jackjack
  • meaglothmeagloth Member Posts: 3,806
    Also wizards can use small crossbows(yay! Finally!) and they seem to have merged Mage and sorcerers. Wizards gain 2 spells ever time they level up regardless, but I assume they still have scrolls. Will keep reading.

    Buttercheesekaguana
  • meaglothmeagloth Member Posts: 3,806
    Alright, looks pretty good. Something mentioned sorcerers and bards and multiclass, so it's ok. Has a good feel to it, but it's still new, I guess. Thumbs up.

    jackjack
  • CaloNordCaloNord Member Posts: 1,807
    Any bugs and problems will very soon become clear when the hard-core player base try it out and report in! :)

    jackjack
  • WalstafaWalstafa Member Posts: 116
    meagloth said:

    I'm actually liking some of the flavor here, like dreadkhan said. I've only read like 20 pages and like I said, I'm not familiar with anything than the edited-for-bg 2e, so this is all pretty new to me. I don't know how the could do away with gnomes, and I don't see bard listed as a class. @jackjack‌ @CaloNord‌ we're finished.

    meagloth said:

    Also wizards can use small crossbows(yay! Finally!) and they seem to have merged Mage and sorcerers. Wizards gain 2 spells ever time they level up regardless, but I assume they still have scrolls. Will keep reading.

    Sorcerers and (I think) Gnomes will be in the full PHB. The basic rules are there to give you the classic D&D options and core rules for free to get you started. If you want more rules, then you have to buy the PHB.
    Squire said:



    3: Scimitar as a finesse weapon...I guess every rogue in the world is going to use that, now, instead of the rapier. In the play-test they did a similar thing with the katana; again we have this whole "western weapons are for brute force and ignorance while eastern weapons are for grace and dexterity!" rubbish, and I'm sure we'll see this in the hardback version, when they add exotic weapons. Why does everybody think that the katana is so much faster than the longsword? It isn't! They both move at similar speeds, the difference is down to the wielder not the weapon! *sigh*

    Rogues don't get proficency with Scimitars, and probably won't unless you implement the optional feats system in the PHB. The only swords they get are Shortswords, Long Swords and Rapiers.

    CaloNord
  • ajwzajwz Member Posts: 4,122
    first impression is that I quite like the changes to the spell memorisation system

  • CaloNordCaloNord Member Posts: 1,807
    Wait Bard's aren't a thing anymore...? That better be in some of the other books... *Runs in circles panicking*

    jackjack
  • ajwzajwz Member Posts: 4,122
    PHB is out next month. With missing playable races and classes, including bards.
    This pdf is intended to be the online rules reference sheet, just with enough information to start playing 5ed to a basic level about a couple of months before the full game releases

  • FinneousPJFinneousPJ Member Posts: 6,456
    @meagloth and others:
    Anyone want to try an internet game for those without play groups IRL? Anyone done that before? How's it work?

  • WalstafaWalstafa Member Posts: 116
    edited July 2014
    CaloNord said:

    Wait Bard's aren't a thing anymore...? That better be in some of the other books... *Runs in circles panicking*

    As @ajwz‌ says, they'll be in the PHB. I should also point out they're explicitly mentioned several times in the basic rules, and from what I've seen in the regular WotC updates they'll be getting the same spell progression as full-blown Wizards & Sorcerors.

    Best to think of these rules as a free demo of the game. You have to pay to get all the content. ;-)

  • WalstafaWalstafa Member Posts: 116
    I think there's a lot to like in the new rules, I like the streamlined rules for Advantage and Disadvantage, and Resistance/Vulnerability (although the latter might have been in 4e, it's been ages since I played it). Anything that reduces the amount of situational modifiers you have to apply is fine by me. I've seen a lot of players get flustered because they forgot a stray +1. I love the fact that it gives you an entire chapter on building your character which is, Backgrounds aside, almost completely non-mechanical.

  • WalstafaWalstafa Member Posts: 116
    edited July 2014
    Squire said:



    Rogues don't get proficency with Scimitars, and probably won't unless you implement the optional feats system in the PHB. The only swords they get are Shortswords, Long Swords and Rapiers.
    True, but they only need to take one fighter level...anyway it's more the fact that it makes the scimitar better than both the shortsword and the rapier, which are both stabbing weapons. Plenty of things can be cut but not stabbed, but I've seen nothing that can be stabbed but not cut.

    Interestingly, an early version of the playtest had the quarterstaff as a two-handed finesse weapon that did 1d8 blunt damage, but they seem to have dropped that.

    Yeah, there's always going to be people who power game, fair play to them. I'm glad they've made dual-wielding scimitars viable because if you're going to have one of your more prominent characters do it, there may as well be some mechanical benefit.

    On the powergaming side, I'd be more worried about Great Weapon Fighting Style Fighters with Greatswords to be honest. 2d6 damage and rerolling 1s and 2s? GreatAxes aren't going to get much of a look-in from that build.

  • WalstafaWalstafa Member Posts: 116
    To be honest, I'm more sad that they stopped Longswords from being used as a main hand in 2-weapon fighting now.

    Awong124
  • meaglothmeagloth Member Posts: 3,806
    jackjack said:

    $50 a pop for those sourcebooks? No thank you :|

    Yea really.

Sign In or Register to comment.