Ideas for D&DNext
The most important thing to me in the next iteration of Dungeons & Dragons, however, is a reintroduction of multiclassing. For me, the system built into D&D 4E for expansion beyond your core class choice was far too constrained. I have come up with an idea for a system that, while raw, I think could be developed into a level progression/multiclass system that would serve every player, from someone still playing D&D Basic to the most hardcore minmaxing 4E tactician, all while assuring balance at the table across all classes, all levels, and all play styles.
This idea is based on a number of sources. The first of which is my favorite D&D multiclassing system: as it was presented in the video game Neverwinter Nights. This system was based on 3rd Edition’s multiclassing system, however, I have not played 3E beyond a Game Day, so I cannot say how closely those systems those two systems resemble each other. I also steal from 4E Essentials’ class design, sprinkling in a dose of 4E’s Dark Sun Themes.
Under this system, each class is a finely streamlined entity, much like Themes in Dark Sun 4E. I envision a focused character concept, a single granted attack at each level, and a limited number of class features that tightly integrate with the class’ concept. The class features would be pulled from the standard class’ features that the concept is pulled from.
While I would like D&DNext to no longer use the term “Powers” I would like those abilities to remain in the game. (I’d prefer to use the terms Prayers, Exploits, Spells, etc. without saying “powers.” Perhaps calling them attacks or abilities? Powers just seems to have too much of a link back to video games and super hero comics, which old-schoolers aren’t going to be accepting of -and honestly, I don’t particularly accept either.)
Under this system, each class receives a single at-will, as well a single power at each level that grants a power (Encounter/Daily/Utility). Each class would have access to a pool of class features, not unlike those granted in Essentials. However, a 1st level character would not have all of the ones granted to a 1st level Essentials character.
At first level, you choose two class features. You may take both features from a single class; for example, a wizard character could take the Essentials features: “Apprentice Mage” and “Mage’s Spellbook”, however, another character might take “Mage’s Spellbook” and “Sneak Attack” instead, creating a mage/thief hybrid.
A character should also be able to acquire additional class features as it levels up. This would allow a character to gain additional class features from other classes, which it could freely take as it levels in the same manner as 3rd edition. At set intervals in level you can pick any class feature available to any class you currently are. You would not automatically receive any class features when acquiring a new class, only having the opportunity to add one at specific levels, though you might choose to retrain a class feature you already have for one from your new class.
In addition, whenever you would have access to a feat, you can also take a class feature. If you later acquire the class feature you had used a feat to acquire, you could then retrain that feat for something else. (There may be arguments whether allowing feats to be used for features is balanced, but obviously if this were introduced WotC would balance all feats on this scale.)
As an example, we will begin with a class called Elementalist Mage. This class’ concept should be a studious type, who has mastered elemental magic. This class has the following Class Features available to it: “Apprentice Mage”, “Mage’s Spellbook”, “Mage Cantrips” and “Lightning Darts” (which would be an element-fluffed “Magic Missile”). Our character chooses “Mage Cantrips” and “Mage’s Spellbook” as initial features. As a smart student, she foresees that there might be times when a quick and decisive strike might come in handy, so she uses her 1st level feat to acquire “Lightning Darts” as well.
As her 1st level at-will, she has trained in the use of “Arc Lightning.” For her first level encounter power she has studiously trained in the use of “Burning Hands.” “Fountain of Flame” long ago seemed to be a good idea for extra-fried enemy while not causing harm to any of her classmates. (These three choices are the only ones available to her, since she is only an Elementalist Mage, and these are the spells for first level for this class. Had she chosen a second class at first level, she would have access to that other class’ list as well.)
At second level, “Flame Shield” opens to her, which she happily takes after a number of close calls during her early dungeon-delving adventures. (This spell is actually the same as Essentials’ “Shield”, except that it’s flavored as flames surrounding the caster and only available in this form to an Elementalist Mage. Obviously there would be some overlap between spells for individual classes based on the same standard class. There would likely be a plethora of wizard-based classes, for example.)
Our mage has also been working with her friend, a roguish sort, on the art of dagger-play, and so Light Blade Expertise becomes her feat choice at level 2. (She could have chosen a different class at level 2 and grabbed a class feature with this level’s feat. She also could have chosen “Apprentice Mage”, but her relationship with the rogue and a desire to have a fallback option when an enemy gets too close again was too hard to pass up.)
At level 3, our elementalist has mastered the ability to cast “Shock Sphere” a few times each day (encounter power), and so she adds that spell to her spellbook.
At level 4, she has had time to work further with the rogue on her blade mastery, and so she veers a bit off her formerly chosen path. She becomes a Nimble Cutter (a variant of the Rogue class), which allows her access to the Essential’s Rogue exploit “Weapon Finesse”, which she uses her feat to train. She has also boosted her Intelligence and Dexterity.
At level 5, she goes back to her roots and scribes the “Fireball” spell into her spellbook.
At level 6, the Rogue “Swift Parry” seems like a really good idea. With her feat, a “Rogue’s Trick: Tumbling Trick” seems like a smart call as well.
Rather than pursue any of the rogue abilities, she could have just continued along the same path she began her career on. Going forward, she might choose to keep mixing class features between her two classes, or even choose additional classes to open further features!
This system allows people to choose to play streamlined characters with a tight focus by staying completely within the theme as presented and accepting the single granted ability at each level, or greatly expanded characters spanning a number of roles/abilities. This should well cover all styles of play in a way that everyone has access to the type of game they want.
Obviously this system lacks any sort of polish or balance. It’s not meant to be a final presentation, but more a jumping off point for the new edition’s designers to consider. What do you all think? Is this a system that can serve to make you happy at the table, regardless of whether your fellow players choose a streamlined character or one who dabbles a bit in multiple careers? Talk back to me in the Comments below.
(Just FYI, I wrote this post before this week’s Legends & Lore column, so it’s quite possible this issue has already been deeply considered, but I’d still like to throw it out there.)
This is the funny thing about D&D. Some of these I think are good ideas, and others I would be very sad if they make their way into my game. The game designers are going to have a heck of time making this next rule set. :)
For ability scores, if you’re going to let people take any 2 stats they want for ability score boosts, you should just give them more points to buy stats with in the first place. But of all your ideas, I dislike this concept the most.
At first, I liked the essentials method of ability score boosts, but now I’ve come to dislike it. I think races should be pushed into niches. I think players should have to make a few hard decisions, a few sacrifices here and there. But not quite as many as they’re forced to make now.
While races should have niches, I don’t think we should push them into that niche quite so hard. Give each race a bonus to only a single stat. So there might be more halfling rogues around, but not so many that it forces you to play halfling artful dodger rogues because you get a DEX and CHA bonus. And don’t let feat trees focus on a single race/class combo that encourage an already strong race/class pairing. I like the idea of specific race feats to go along with specific classes, but they should be focused more on off-beat race/class combos in order to prevent compulsory combinations. That way, each combination is truly unique in the way it plays out. The rules should give a slight advantage to certain race/class combos, but it shouldn’t be such a huge advantage that you are forced to play that combo to be competitive.
I think psionics were a great method for powers. I also think some fire and forget is good as well. And Essentials showing us that combining different power types is worthwhile. I’d like to see the different classes have different ways of managing their powers so they all feel different to play.
Multiclassing. I’ve written a blog post for changing 4e multiclassing and it’s not too far off from yours. Choose your normal class at first level. To gain a second class, use the current multi-class feats. They’re pretty good, so need to change those. You can even take it at first level. Then you should be able to gain non-power abilities from your second class through the use of feats, similar to how hybrids can improve their abilities. You can take powers from your new class as well, you just have to make sure that none of your secondary class’s powers are of a higher level than your primary class’s highest level power.
In my search for a game system, because I was simply bored of D&D 4E and bored to search fix for the game to simply work (shorter combat, better multi-classing ,etc), I found True20, by Green Ronin.
I know it’s been a while since it’s release, but this game system, is exactly what I wish D&DNext will look like.
Simple rules, based on the old D20 model. And, like an Unhearted Arcana book, many rules options, that you can swap in and swap out. By default it comes with no HP and rather use toughness safe to soak damage. But you can convert every thing in the book to use HP if you’d like.
The magic system is based on fatigue from casting spell, so you have to roll to save from it after casting certain spells. Save that is based on will, but as the rule book specified you can also put it a fortitude save to alter completely how magic works. So, like D&D4e, simple spell can be cast at-will, but big one need to save for fatigue and the save increment for each spell cast in succession in a certain time frame (witch is up to the DM to determine, 1 hour, a Day ? all depend on the feel you want to give to magic in your game).
Is uses three main class, Fighter, Expert and Adept. You want to cast spell ? you have to take Adept levels, you want to have many skills ? you have to take expert levels, etc. And you can multi-class freely between them like in D&D 3e. Every class abilities that exists from D&D3e (sneak, trackless step, animal companion) are feats. And you gain a lot of those to customize your character. So it’s up to the DM to choose if a certain Feat is ok for your character and all that.
One other thing that is brilliant from this game system, is that it’s bind to no explicit setting. It’s design to be playable with Fantasy, Space Adventure, Modern even horror if you’d like to. Each of those comes in detail with sub-genre info to inspire the DM and certain optional rules that might be interesting in that particular genre.
There’s even a book available (True20 Worlds of Adventures) that come with 5 campaign settings to use.
So once adopted, this single game system can be use for many different campaign.
That was my Two cents.
For those interested in True20 you can go to :
http://www.true20.com
I will certainly use that game system until the release of D&DNext.
This seems like the easiest way to do a modular approachthat would encorporate every dnd to date. So this seems like a possible idea that they might be doing. BRILLIANT
@Sean: That’s exactly how I felt. It serves to give everyone the option for the style of character they want to play. Thanks!
@Groumy: I’ve never checked out True20. It sounds a bit like Wyrm (Warrior Rogue Mage) which is an interesting idea.
@QuirkyDM: I agree that making a “One System to Rule Them All” is going to be very hard to acheive.
As for ability scores, my most favored solution is to remove them from racial choice. As I said, it’s between a DM and his/her players to determine what a valid character should look like.
As for multiclassing, I don’t like the multiclass feats in 4E. I think we’re in the same ballpark there, but we definitely have a difference of opinion.
Thanks for taking the time to comment!
I like the idea of choosing what to recharge with a surge-like mechanic. If they do go with Vancian magic, I could see x number of “spell surges” per day making that decision less painful. For the record, I think there will be classes that have different ways of dealing with powers. I could see a vancian wizard (perhaps with spell surges or a few at-wills like magic missile) playing with a point-based psion and a AEDU sorceror.
For races I would like to see a lot of the grated abilities become more theme-like – options you can choose to upgrade your character throughout your whole progression. This would help to add the flavor of a race without pigeonholing it. Done well, there would be several options for each race. For example, elves have a link to nature, and they are nimble and they are skilled in magic – you could enhance any or all of these aspects as you went up.
For multiclassing, I like the idea of choosing your class abilities, but I think your way might allow too much cherry picking. If you pick the best options from each class you could end up as effective as both classes. I’d have two lists for each class. If you multiclass you get the options on the first list – these will be the basic iconic functions of the class, like spellcasting, sneak attack, healing. If you single-class, you get the options on both lists. The advanced list would include things that are more exotic – for a rogue they might be poison or acrobatics, for a sorcerer it might include bloodline abilities. It’s probably too complicated for the modular system they’re shooting for, but I think it would solve a lot of the problems about multiclassing in 3e.
@Philo Pharynx: I could see WotC making each class unique in the way it plays. I’m not sure if that’s something I’d like, but of course I’d have to see it before saying I liked or disliked it.
I think we agree on races. I’d prefer features to define the race, not ability scores.
I am sure my multiclass system allows some cherry-picking. My answer to that is “Who cares?” I really dislike the idea that the game should cater to powergamers. I have often said it, and I firmly believe that powergamers will ALWAYS be able to game the system. They will always find loopholes. They will always pick the “optimal” choices.
The system should natively support the rest of us, who are looking to tell our stories without constraint. Again, the powergamers will do what they do best, regardless of the number of premium choices, so they’ll get their way no matter what.
I wrote my “system” pretty quickly, but I’d expect it to be more streamlined. Perhaps even getting specific abilities at specific levels (like in Neverwinter Nights). I would have no problem with that at all. Then, you’d be unable to cherry-pick, but instead need to take class levels along the path for the feature you hope to gain. Would that make more sense?
Back with my True20 thing ;)
Seeing comments about the Healing Surge macanism remembered me of the Conviction Points mecanism of True20. Each character have un certain amount of Conviction point each levels and Conviction can be use in combat to heal (make a recovery chek), gain additional actions, reroll a dice and each class as it’s own special core ability that allow a Conviction Point to be used for a specefic effect. In the case of the spell casting class, the adept, it allow the player to lower the DC for the fatigue check (so in 4e term, use a power without expending it, or recover a power use and use it right away).
I’d like to point out that the bonus to abilities from racial backgrounds and there to represent that the elf or more nimble than humans, and the dwarf are more sturdy en endurant than humans … removing those benefit will not fix any problem.
The problem with the ability mod and the race, his a problem cause by the internet and the way peapole build their character. Sorry if it’s shock you, but that’s my perspective. There is too musch Mini-Maxing and too much optimisation out there. Your suppose to play the role of an imaginary character. And sorry to wreck your world, but to play a character with some flaws is actualy pretty awesome. It’s awesom, because you remember more the situation where your flaws had the follow spot than the countless situation where your good ability resovle in a success.
Any way, back with my True20 thing, but theres some guide lines to create background (racials, regional or what ever you whant) so you can mash it up the way you want. At least, you can do it without having to wreck apart the game system, it’s design to be fully custimizable for the DM, but base on simple rules for the players to be able to just focus every one on the story and not the rules.
Once again, this is was my opinion on the subject.
@Groumy: I don’t see ability modifiers based on race as a “problem” just something I’m not in favor of.
As for minmaxing, I’ll always say the same thing: “I don’t care about people who minmax. Do not build the game based on them.” They will ALWAYS find a way to squeeze a little more juice from the system. Building the game to fight them takes choices away from the rest of us.
You’re not wrecking my world in regard to flawed characters. I play flawed characters. My first 4E character was a high intelligence wizard with a low charisma. I played him as genius with a severe alcohol problem.
But that was my choice. Which is my point. I want the option to play the characters I want to play. Whether I put flaws in or not is up to me and my DM (or me and my players when I’m behind the screen).
I don’t want to tell others how to play and I don’t want the system to tell me how to play either. Everyone should play the game they want to play.
As for your opinion, you never need to clarify. I welcome any opinion, even conflicting ones!
I’ve thought more about the multiclass system again and realize that we’re actually talking almost the exact same idea, it’s only the presentation of it that is different. First, I didn’t make clear that the only multiclass feat I support keeping is the “entrant” feat, the one that let’s you start multiclassing at all.
After that point, we have pretty much the same idea. I think we both agree that power swaps should be free or almost free. You say you want to trade in class abilities on a per level basis. I say use a feat to gain your secondary class abilities. but by using that feat to gain your other class’s abilities, you are actually foregoing a feat that would normally be used to bump up your primary class, like staff focus or wand expertise. In essence, you are trading in abilities.
So our ideas might be closer than I first thought. It’s just the presentation that differs.
How about making it more of an RPG again and less of a plastic miniatures game.
I like the idea of spending Healing Surges to regain powers. But I’d limit it to Martial characters. A neat little perk for them to balance with being limited in other ways (pseudo-realism).
@Quirky DM: I’m not sure I want to see sacrificing feats for class features. Especially if you get class features from your single class as you level up for free. You’d simply be sacrificing honed focus in a single class for the versatility offered by mixing. In that way, it is equally viable to play a human fighter, a dwarf bard, or a half-orc wizard/rogue/warlock.
@BIG RICH: I’m going to assume you’re not just trying to troll and simply ask: why can it not be both? According to initial stories, the upcoming edition plays equally well with AND without miniatures. Personally, if miniatures play is excluded from the next edition, I’d have no interest in playing. That’s personal taste, and while you may disagree, it makes neither of us “wrong.”
@Jester David: I’d really dislike that. Why does a fighter get to recharge his abilities, while the Wizard hides in the back until after the next rest? That’s something I felt like 4E really got on the right track with, giving everyone the opportunity to always be involved. I’d expect that any recharge system be available to everyone in D&D Next.
To be quite honest, in 4E, I have always felt Martial characters were the least limited. Again though, that’s personal opinion/subjective observation.