Café de Nuit

OK, tip of the iceberg so far for me (just looked a couple of pages)

Advantage/disantvantage: Awesome rule. More or less, feats and stuff allow you to roll 2d20 for something and get the best/worst of the two. Easy, simple and harder to predict.

HP/lvl: A nice touch here. If you roll lower hp than your con modifier you get the modifier instead. I.e. if you roll 1 and you have 16 con, you get 3 hp.

Surprise in a round: No extra attacks, suprised people get a -20 to their checks. I don't particularly like that rule.

Mundane healing: I particularly like this rule. You need a healing kit of somekind to mundanely heal during a short rest. Also, unlike 4E you can't heal many times your hp. If you're 3rd lvl cleric for example you may gain in a whole day 3d8 + 3xcon mod hp.

Intoxicated condition: You suffer hefty penalties and you get 1d6 less damage.
I believe we won't see that condition again.

Saves: Aside from being "Ability saves" now, i.e. str save to break out of roper's grip etc... they don't seem to increase with level.
Also classes don't seem to confer bonuses to specific saves anymore.

Spell effects: they all stack (except the same spell).

Spell duration: Also doesn't increase with level.

Automatic success on an ability check: When you have 5+ over the DC, usually you auto succeed. I.e. if you have str 18 and the str DC to move a boulder is 13 or less, you autosucceed.

Cleric spells: It seems clerics prepare a number of spells, like 3 in 1st lvl but don't expend them; instead they spend spell slots. I.e. you prepare clw, shield of faith and command and you can cast clw twice or clw and command etc.

Magic missile: Hilarity again... it's an at will ability now = you can spam it. It's a spell that breaks from the rule of "fixed damage" as you can throw up to 4 missiles in 9th lvl. They automatically hit.

Ray of frost: 100' range, ranged attack. Target's speed reduced to -0- till the end of your next turn. No save. Sounds good? It's a minor spell. You can spam it as an at will power.

SO FAR: It seems a bit more complex than 4E but deals with most of my problems with that edition. Also brings back some interesting memories, of simpler times.
Can't wait to playtest it, problem being finding the time to do it.

Suggestions so far:
-Classes to confer a +1 to one save (i.e. fighters +1 save to str, clerics +1 save to wis)
-Races confer another +1 to one save (i.e. dwarves to dex, elves to dex)
-Feats/class features that rise DCs for spells
-Ability modifiers to increase with level or at least with feats.
- Spell effects to not stack or at least specific types of bonuses to not stack to avoid the "Christmas tree" of 3E and even late-lvl 4E. Please, please no "divine favor + divine power + divine justice + divine coolness + divine wrath + divine revenge" for a +80.
- Some spells should have duration based on level
- Magic missiles should be lvl 1/5/9 i.e 3 on lvl 9 for an insta 3d4+3 damage at 9th lvl and 2d4+2 at 5th lvl.
- Ray of frost: Change it to 1/2 speed for the target or make it 1st lvl spell

Alhoon, you should probably alter your post. See below.

Eh, I was less than impressed for a few different reasons. Most notably:
1. The Wizard's spellcasting concentration rules.
2. Characters seem to have a strange hp formula (hint: try subtracting 11). That's fine, but Con mod stops adding on after first level apparently.
3. Some of the monster hps seem a bit extreme and unexplainable.

Please note, I'd like to be more specific with my examples but the play test agreement actually forbids making specific examples! So much for discussion.
This is probably what annoyed me the most. An open play test that forbids you from discussing things openly.

alhoon wrote:Surprise in a round: No extra attacks, suprised people get a -20 to their checks. I don't particularly like that rule.

But if the surprisers all act first, how is that not an extra attack? It prevents the standard surprise bonus attack immanently followed by extra attack from high initiative.

alhoon wrote:Intoxicated condition: You suffer hefty penalties and you get 1d6 less damage.
I believe we won't see that condition again.

I kinda dig it.

alhoon wrote:Cleric spells: It seems clerics prepare a number of spells, like 3 in 1st lvl but don't expend them; instead they spend spell slots. I.e. you prepare clw, shield of faith and command and you can cast clw twice or clw and command etc.

A nice way to fix the cleric potentially having to heal a bunch.

alhoon wrote:Ray of frost: 100' range, ranged attack. Target's speed reduced to -0- till the end of your next turn. No save. Sounds good? It's a minor spell. You can spam it as an at will power.

Except you're giving up your attack to do so. One target for a turn, and they can still make ranged attacks.

Jester of the FoS wrote:

alhoon wrote:

alhoon wrote:Ray of frost: 100' range, ranged attack. Target's speed reduced to -0- till the end of your next turn. No save. Sounds good? It's a minor spell. You can spam it as an at will power.

Except you're giving up your attack to do so. One target for a turn, and they can still make ranged attacks.

"I Thorag am migty 20th level barbarian! Me crush you!" Thorag goes berserk. Several 1st level wizards ray of frost repeatedly while others pick him apart with magic missiles. Thorag puts on sad face and cries.
But seriously that ability completely neutralizes several threats from the bestiary who don't have ranged attacks.

starfalconkd wrote:Please note, I'd like to be more specific with my examples but the play test agreement actually forbids making specific examples! So much for discussion.
This is probably what annoyed me the most. An open play test that forbids you from discussing things openly.

I don't see anything about not making examples. You can't copy, excerpt, etc. yadayada, but it specifically says you can publicly discuss your thoughts. Having downloaded the materials but not yet read them, I can't make much sense of alhoon's post yet, and I think that's as it should be. they want you to have to get the material through them to see it. I don't think talking about specific issues is going to give people much insight into the material as a whole if you haven't seen it yourself.

Gonzoron of the FoS wrote:I don't see anything about not making examples. You can't copy, excerpt, etc. yadayada, but it specifically says you can publicly discuss your thoughts. Having downloaded the materials but not yet read them, I can't make much sense of alhoon's post yet, and I think that's as it should be. they want you to have to get the material through them to see it. I don't think talking about specific issues is going to give people much insight into the material as a whole if you haven't seen it yourself.

I was concerned what that all meant. It seemed like a lot of legalese to just say "don't copy/paste." I thought (by excerpt) it meant don't put the specifics on line.

starfalconkd wrote:I was concerned what that all meant. It seemed like a lot of legalese to just say "don't copy/paste." I thought (by excerpt) it meant don't put the specifics on line.

Unfortunately, like all legalese, as much as is it would like to be specific, it's fuzzy enough to be argued with. That's what lawyers are for, after all. Anyway, I'm not one. (HuManBing, up for some pro bono work?) So I may wrong, but like you said, it's not a very Open playtest if you can't talk about what you like and don't like. So I have to believe stuff like what alhoon wrote is allowed, at least for the most part.

starfalconkd wrote: Please note, I'd like to be more specific with my examples but the play test agreement actually forbids making specific examples! So much for discussion.
This is probably what annoyed me the most. An open play test that forbids you from discussing things openly.

They specifically say we can discuss our opinion in forums, as long as we don't copy-paste stuff.

starfalconkd wrote: 2. Characters seem to have a strange hp formula (hint: try subtracting 11). That's fine, but Con mod stops adding on after first level apparently.

Still, it adds in a way, since if you have 16 con and you roll 1 or 2 hp you get 3 hp instead. It also adds in the HD you use to heal, so you can go further.

Jester of the FoS wrote: Except you're giving up your attack to do so. One target for a turn, and they can still make ranged attacks.

One dragon 50' from the ground is hit = Dragon crashes on the ground. No save. Even a WHITE dragon, that is immune to cold damage.

What I mean is that often, it's very useful to give up your attack to immobilize an enemy. Take a bear for example, when you have an elf wizard with dex 14 and a wand.
+5 to hit the bear, that is easy to hit.
You give up your attack, but the whole other party gets a free ranged attack on the bear.

I can't believe I'm actually excited about this new edition. After feeling burned from 3e and 4th, I figured I would never buy another Wotc product again, but I REALLY like this old school feel it has. In fact, the only thing I don't like is the way the spells are presented but I can get over that if everything else stays like it is between now and the final version.

starfalconkd wrote:

Jester of the FoS wrote:

alhoon wrote:Ray of frost: 100' range, ranged attack. Target's speed reduced to -0- till the end of your next turn. No save. Sounds good? It's a minor spell. You can spam it as an at will power.

Except you're giving up your attack to do so. One target for a turn, and they can still make ranged attacks.

"I Thorag am migty 20th level barbarian! Me crush you!" Thorag goes berserk. Several 1st level wizards ray of frost repeatedly while others pick him apart with magic missiles. Thorag puts on sad face and cries.
But seriously that ability completely neutralizes several threats from the bestiary who don't have ranged attacks.

"Thorag sit there while wizard uses all his attacks to immobilize me, unable to do anything. Until he misses a ranged attack and then I squish, squish, squish!"

I find hypotheticals like that silly. It's just as silly as all the talk of level 1 wizards being killed by house cats or level 1 strikers killing a level 28 minion and gaining three or four levels.

5e is also not meant to be a hard rules game but a DM adjudication game. If that happend at my table Thorag would throw his axe, or heft a rock from the ground and hurl that.

Or he'd sound a horn and call more Thorags to join the fight. ^

Jester of the FoS wrote:I find hypotheticals like that silly. It's just as silly as all the talk of level 1 wizards being killed by house cats or level 1 strikers killing a level 28 minion and gaining three or four levels.

5e is also not meant to be a hard rules game but a DM adjudication game. If that happend at my table Thorag would throw his axe, or heft a rock from the ground and hurl that.

I'm not talking about 20th lvl characters Jester. I'm talking about the possibility where you can use a spell and immobilize the minotaur for a round of free ranged attacks. That's what the spell does. You give up one attack, and everyone else in the party gets a round of hits against the owlbear or the minotaur or the troll etc.

alhoon wrote:

Jester of the FoS wrote:I find hypotheticals like that silly. It's just as silly as all the talk of level 1 wizards being killed by house cats or level 1 strikers killing a level 28 minion and gaining three or four levels.

5e is also not meant to be a hard rules game but a DM adjudication game. If that happend at my table Thorag would throw his axe, or heft a rock from the ground and hurl that.

I'm not talking about 20th lvl characters Jester. I'm talking about the possibility where you can use a spell and immobilize the minotaur for a round of free ranged attacks. That's what the spell does. You give up one attack, and everyone else in the party gets a round of hits against the owlbear or the minotaur or the troll etc.

Works nicely against single targets. Less great against groups. No worse than at-will powers that immobilize.

Besides, I'm pretty sure the Caves of Chaos is the perfect way to test out how overpowered spells like that allegedly are. There's more than enough opponents (including a minotaur) to test out your theory.

Jester of the FoS wrote:I find hypotheticals like that silly. It's just as silly as all the talk of level 1 wizards being killed by house cats or level 1 strikers killing a level 28 minion and gaining three or four levels.

That really was supposed to be a joke. I guess it didn't relay well. Sorry.
Since my opening was complaints, here's my list of positives:
1. Characters have a choice in not only race and class but backgrounds and themes. While some may see this as making back story about rules (turning fluff into crunch), I see it more as defining and rewarding the choices of back stories.
2. Simplicity. The basic form of the rules will be easier for people to learn.
3. Spell system. I'm a fan of Vancian magic, I won't lie.
4. A saving throw for each stat. This keeps with 3rd editions saving throw rules while expanding on them into the realm of 1st and 2nd editions multiple saves.
5. The adventure pitch idea in Caves of Chaos gives an excellent set up for how adventures are designed. If they follow this formula (which has an almost 1st edition feel) I think this will do well.
6 sort of. This is silly but the opening art for Caves of Chaos has Regdar, Lidda, and Mialee the 3rd edition iconics. It's good to see them.