D&D (2024) My wishes for 6e: less dark vision and spellcasting classes

[Micah Sweet]

Pretty much, yes. That's the actual reason for Rule 0; for the DM to adjust the game for the group, not to assert their dominance.

I'm never going to be ok with the desires of the players always coming first. There needs to be some give and take, or the DM becomes a cruise director.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Pretty much, yes. That's the actual reason for Rule 0; for the DM to adjust the game for the group, not to assert their dominance.

Also, if the game intends session 0 to be, "How can the DM change what and how they run to accommodate the players, who are more important" then they should say so.

 

[Vaalingrade]

'For the group'.

It's right there in the post.

The DM is part of the group, but they have to accept they're just part instead of the leader or most important Gary Stu who should always get their way above and beyond everyone else. They chose the job where their responsibility to making sure everyone has fun and they should not abuse it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

'For the group'.

It's right there in the post.

The DM is part of the group, but they have to accept they're just part instead of the leader or most important Gary Stu who should always get their way above and beyond everyone else. They chose the job where their responsibility to making sure everyone has fun and they should not abuse it.

Everyone includes the DM. You shouldn't make someone run a game they don't like.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Everyone includes the DM. You shouldn't make someone run a game they don't like.

Then don't run it if you can't compromise.

 

[TwoSix]

Everyone includes the DM. You shouldn't make someone run a game they don't like.

The sweet spot is that everyone involved, players and DMs, should be flexible and accommodating. Don't walk into a game with a hard opinion about how the game should be played or what should be included or excluded.

 

[tetrasodium]

The sweet spot is that everyone involved, players and DMs, should be flexible and accommodating. Don't walk into a game with a hard opinion about how the game should be played or what should be included or excluded.

The trouble with the gm doing this in 5e is that the players don't " need" anything from the gm. From the players perspective the gm doesn't have anything to give in a flexible give & take so it becomes take and take. That was not always the case & saying that the gm should have a discussion with their players over all of this does not change the lack of things to give in exchange for taking off the cruise ship guide hat that expects the gm just give the players everything they want.

 

[CreamCloud0]

What I would love to see in the next version of D&D 6 is a much lower frequency of:

1) dark vision. The poor races that do not currently have it are at a disadvantage compared to the majority that have it. And in a dungeon, it's common for the party to have to light a torch for the human PC only, while the other 3 would be fine without it.

2) magic in the form of spells. All classes currently have access to magic in the form of spells. I would like the spells to be distinctive of rare classes that might use it. I imagine for example the classes of ranger, fighter, rogue and barbarians without magic; and even the paladin could easily be differently designed. Then monsters too could have some powers, but fewer spells.

Regarding this last point, from the 4th edition, I would like them to bring back interesting powers for monsters, which are not necessarily spells. That was cool.

I think darkvision in most races should be nerfed, bring down the standard range from 60 to 30 feet (is the baseline 60ft?) except in a few choice cases like drow or duregar(?) dwarves, so that it’s more beneficial to more races to bring a torch.

As for the topic of magic, a few things: firstly the wizard, the most common complaint is that they can do everything and anything with their massive spell lists, so to combat this I think that favoured and forbidden schools should be brought back in addition to capping their other nonspecialised spells at spell level 5 or something, this also benefits the sorcerer who while having less magic is also less restricted in their use of it, just, give them a few more sorcery points please.

Next the half casters ranger and paladin (im aware Artificers exist but I haven’t seen their abilities so I’m ignoring them) I think they would benefit from being bumped down from half casters to one-third casters, with their signature abilities becoming powers more like 4e, hunter’s mark is just something the ranger can do, paladin’s smite gets ‘uses’ like the bardic inspiration, spend more uses of it to deal more damage rather than higher level spell slots, lay on hands has a bigger hp pool to compensate for less uses of spell healing and so on and so forth, the ranger now draws from the druid spell list and paladin the cleric’s, I know alot of people want magicless ranger so like someone else mentioned earlier put the spellcasting into some subclasses ranging from none magic to some magic to magic prioritised.

 

[TwoSix]

The trouble with the gm doing this in 5e is that the players don't " need" anything from the gm. From the players perspective the gm doesn't have anything to give in a flexible give & take so it becomes take and take. That was not always the case & saying that the gm should have a discussion with their players over all of this does not change the lack of things to give in exchange for taking off the cruise ship guide hat that expects the gm just give the players everything they want.

The DM has to run the game. Even novices to the game are aware that DMing takes more effort than playing, and the DM absolutely should walk away if they don't feel the players are respecting the time they put in.

Edit: To be clear, this isn't a 5e issue, as 5e makes no instruction that the DM has to accommodate the players no matter what their request. This is just a general TTRPG issue when it comes to establishing a group that understands and respects the social contract at the table.

 

[Vaalingrade]

The DM has to run the game. Even novices to the game are aware that DMing takes more effort than playing, and the DM absolutely should walk away if they don't feel the players are respecting the time they put in.

And the players should know it's not that much effort and they should take over if the DM thinks their choice of taking up the role make them the most important person at the table.

If the job is so onerous that the only reason one would do it is UNLIMITED POWER, then please don't do it.