More 5E and Writing

We managed to gather for another session of 5E this weekend.  There were a couple of new players, and really it might have been just a bit too much.  One player had her character perform a single action during the course of the evening.  I felt bad for her.  The character was a cool concept, but was out of her element in a haunted keep with a mystery to solve.

The other new character was iffy.  He was a half-orc monk (a combo I always liked), but he didn't really play him how one would expect a monk to be played.  He acted more rogue-ish, using persuasion to get the unwise fighter to do questionable stuff.  Regardless, it was still a fun time.  Many jokes were thrown about, including a reference to Conan the Librarian.

Speaking of 5E and playing your character well, there is an article over at Wizards about Roleplaying, and how it will be encouraged and handled in 5E.  If you have your doubts about the Roleplay aspect of 5E (or any edition), I suggest you check it out.  It's well-written, and has me just that much more in support of this whole thing.

Over in the Star Frontiers section of my brain, I'm dreaming up some ideas for adventures to write, as well as other content for that game.  I think once we get settled into our new apartment (moving at the end of this month), I might see about starting a Star Frontiers game.  Not sure how I will do that, as my schedule is usually pretty full, and my wife already has plans to eventually run a Shadowrun game.  But, I will still give it a shot.  Even if it's just a few one-shots and whatnot.

I've thought about trying to get into a Skype game or some other online format.  But with a 4-year old kid around, and my computer being in the living room, I doubt I would get the privacy I would need to do so.

We'll just have to see.

More 5E!

So, we got to play yesterday after all. My wife wasn’t there for most of it due to a work obligation. But two of the other regular players from our 3.5 game showed up too, and much fun was had. As expected, the story and game itself were good. The addition of the new players (as well as the in-game explanation of my wife’s character’s absence) went well.

On the rules, some progress was made in understanding the intricacies of 5E. We finally all understand how the streamlined skills system works. We are also beginning to get a handle on the whole “saving throw” concept in 5E. Basically, it’s gone, and everything is an attribute check. Some may think this makes it too simple, but honestly, I like it. No one who actually takes the time to learn the rules and play this game can complain about the rules getting in the way of the story, or the role-play.

Another interesting point I noticed yesterday may just be an epiphany on my part. In the past, in all other editions, I had always been very concerned with having good stats. I was always convinced that those +1’s or +2’s would make all the difference. In this group, my character has the overall worst set of stats. Mine is the only one without at least one “18”, even after the bonuses for race and class that 5E grants. And yet, he still manages to hold his own, just as well as anyone else.

In fact, my character’s Intelligence is only 8, and it’s been a fun exercise to figure out how to RP that. He is a cleric with a 14 Wisdom, so basically he is a slow and deliberate thinker who focuses on the long term, and has a hard time with snap judgments and short-term plans.

This may or may not be a reflection on 5E itself, though I’m inclined to believe it is, at least a little. None of the skills or abilities in the game are highly influenced by your stats. They add to (or subtract from) your ability to perform certain functions, but really the emphasis is laid back on the dice, as it has been in past editions. But without convoluted tables and matrices.

Over all, I’m enjoying 5E a lot. I figured I would at least buy the core books, like I always do. And, if it continues to develop along these lines, I could see running campaigns using this system. One thing I would like to explore, though, is how backwards compatible it is with previous editions, especially the older ones (like B/X and 1E).

Thoughts on Next II

Over the course of the last few days, I have managed to print out all of the Player-relevant documents for D&D Next. Made a nifty cover using some artwork from Pathfinder (because I like it, that's why), and put it all into a binder. We're hoping to play again this weekend, but it all revolves around my wife's work schedule (she owns her own hair salon). Either way, I'm a bit more prepared to delve into the rules and the game itself. Not to mention that my friend has created a pretty neat story, which always makes any D&D game just that much better.

In looking at the rules, I have noticed a few things that I hadn't before. Some of it is pretty important, from a player's perspective, and some of it is more in the DM's domain. The first discovery that I made was in regards to the Wizard, which my wife is playing (a chesty little halfling who is probably too cute and intelligent for her own good). When she rolled her up and started playing her, we hadn't had the chance to really read the rules. So, she was falling back on her knowledge of previous editions, and playing her like a standard Wizard. What I discovered is that the 5E Wizard is now a blend of the 3E Wizard and Sorcerer (which explains why the Sorcerer is absent from 5E).

Basically, she still has to study her spell book, and memorize her spells for the day. But, she is able to cast them like a Sorcerer. For example, if she has two "spell slots" per day, she could choose to memorize Detect Magic and Burning Hands. But, while in an encounter, she can choose to cast her spells as she sees fit. If she wants to she can either cast each spell once, or one spell twice. I think this is brilliant! It gives her the freedom to prepare for a wide vairety of possibilities, but she can change her tactics on the fly. In previous editions, she would need to try to predict what she would need for the day, and choose accordingly, hoping that she chose correctly.

I've also managed to get a better handle on how skills and feats work, so there will probably be some modification there as well.

The other thing I noticed is that there is no Experience table, to designate how many experience points a character needs to level up. Apparently there was one in a previous release of the rules, but it has been removed (based on some perusing of the WotC Forums). Not a huge concern for me as a player, but I'm interested in how my DM will handle this. We are gamers, after all, and we like leveling up.

All in all, 5E (which is easier to type and understand than "D&D Next") is shaping up to be a decent outing. I was asked how it compares to 4E yesterday, to which I was forced to reply that I don't know. I've only played 4E a couple of times, and was not all that impressed with it (it felt too "button mashing" to me). So, I have to compare it to 3E and earlier. And in that, it seems to be a decent progression so far.

What’s Next…?

My regular, bi-weekly 3.5E game is on hold while the DM is off gallivanting around the galaxy (and by “galaxy” I mean on vacation in Japan with the family).  We will probably resume in a few weeks.  We were left with a nice little cliffhanger, and my character can almost taste the ubersword that we came to this phantasmal island looking for.  Too bad that bastard minotaur (who was my friend at one time) got here first…

Anyways, in the meantime, my other friend has taken it upon himself to start up a less formal campaign, set in Greyhawk, and using the D&D Next playtest documents.  At first I was kind of “meh” about it.  I had a cool concept for a 3.5 character, using a variant class from Unearthed Arcana.  But, now that we have officially settled on Next, I have rethought that.

My current character concept is that of a Hill Dwarf Monk, who will probably serve as the bodyguard for my wife’s character.  Although she is playing a ranger in our current game, she is more inclined towards the “squishy” classes, and I would be willing to bet she plays a wizard.  Which is cool, because she’s good at it.  I’m usually the burly fighter/barbarian type, so playing a monk should be a nice change.  Though still technically a combat monster, it’ll be from a different angle.

As a long-time fan of martial arts, I have played a couple of monks in the past.  However, they’ve always been humans, so being a dwarf presents some challenges, IMO.  Not so much with the mechanics.  The rules work regardless of race.  However, in my mind a dwarf monk would be aesthetically different due to his height, and the personality of dwarf characters.

So, the way I will play him is that he is laconic, and neutral.  He tends to remain quiet and take in all that he sees and hears, and only then will he be forthcoming with advice or ideas.  His fighting style will be nearly bereft of kicks, relying on mostly hand-techniques.  I imagine him using a style similar to a combination of Wing Chun and Hung Gar Kung Fu.

Interestingly, the Next Monk chooses a Monastic Tradition, and the four styles they list in the playtest analogous to Spirit, Fire, Air and Earth.  Four of the five elements of traditional Eastern philosophies.  I assume that when the final product comes out, this list will be expanded a lot.  But right now, it’s almost as if they are hinting at the various nations of the Avatar: The Last Airbender.  I’m going to go with Fire Nation.

So, yeah, I’m kind of excited to get started on this.  And I’m sure I’m annoying everyone in the Facebook group.