A good read. Thank you.

Excited again now.

Thanks, Rob. This kind of concrete information, conveyed with personal impressions from someone with no personal or (yet) professional stakes in the matter, lends an immense degree of credibility and positive vibe to 5e discussions. Well done!

Quote from: estar;758607TI guess the best way to put it is that it more like OD&D than anything else. Everybody does everything but some people are really good at certain things. [...] For those who don't watch I am talking about with OD&D. In the 1974 rules, everybody started on the same to hit chart. If you played with the three core rule book only, everybody did the same damage. Moreso, the hit points were not as dramatically different. A magic user could have 5 hits points and a fighter 8.

The only mechanical difference is that Fighter and Clerics could wear any armor while magic user couldn't.

I'm interested to see how and whether this changes as PCs go up in level? One of my favourite D&D 3.x sessions was a 1st level one-shot where someone played a bard with 18 Strength. He smashed that goblin cave to pieces and put our fighter to shame. But that was because, at 1st level, 3.x PCs are more stat-heavy than later, when more and more class abilities (or feats) kick in.

PS. Not a fan of hp-inflated monsters, but as 4e has proven,this can be houseruled easily.

Estar, it sounds like your experiences match mine pretty much exactly with all of the playtest docs, so it's nice to have some sort of informal confirmation that yes, the final game is pretty much close to the final playtest packet.

When I say that I'm an old school player who enjoys 5e because it allows me to play the same style as 1e, I get accused of being a 5avior, or that I'm obviously wrong and you can't play 5e in an old school style (ahem Cadriel).  so hopefully the more people who say the same thing as you and I have done, people might start actually believing it.

On a side related note, I am very anxious to see first hand how bounded accuracy works with numorous low level monsters vs. mid to high level PCs.  That's one thing I never really got a chance to work out.  But I do have an adventure where there is a clan of kobolds, and the PCs will be expected to be around level 5-7 by then.  I suspect kobolds + giant rats (both level 1, but both with pact tactics) will make them still deadly to higher level PCs.

Quote from: Windjammer;758764Thanks, Rob. This kind of concrete information, conveyed with personal impressions from someone with no personal or (yet) professional stakes in the matter, lends an immense degree of credibility and positive vibe to 5e discussions. Well done!



I'm interested to see how and whether this changes as PCs go up in level? One of my favourite D&D 3.x sessions was a 1st level one-shot where someone played a bard with 18 Strength. He smashed that goblin cave to pieces and put our fighter to shame. But that was because, at 1st level, 3.x PCs are more stat-heavy than later, when more and more class abilities (or feats) kick in.

PS. Not a fan of hp-inflated monsters, but as 4e has proven,this can be houseruled easily.

We need to know how much damage the pc's put out to decide if monsters have too many hp.

Quote from: Bill;758828We need to know how much damage the pc's put out to decide if monsters have too many hp.

Disclaimer: this is based off of the latest playtest, so there may be some minor changes, but the general idea should still be sound.  also, 90% of my experience playing 5e is at levels 10 and below, so I can't speak from experience on high level damage.


That said, some numbers (assuming every attack hits):

Barbarian:
level 1: 1 attack, typical +2 or +3 bonus to damage from ability.  Damage = 1d8+3 (+2 if raging), or 8-9 points of damage per round
level 10: 2 attacks, typical +3 or +4 due to ability, +1 or +2 from magic weapon = 2(1d8+4+1), or 18-20 points of damage per round, rage up to total 24-26 points of damage per round
level 20: 2 attacks, typical +4 from ability, +2 from magic item = 2(1d8+4+2), or 19-21 points of damage per round, rage up to 27-29 points of damage per round
Special:  high level barbarians have abilities to get an extra attack in, or do an additional die of damage, but they are highly situational

Fighter:
level 1: 1 attack, typical +2 or +3 bonus to damage from ability.  Damage = 1d8+3 = 7-8 points of damage per round
level 10: 2 attacks, +3 or +4 from ability, +1 or +2 from magic item.  Damage = 2(1d8+4+1) = 18-20 points of damage per round
level 20: 4 attacks, +4 from ability, +2 from magic weapon.  Damage = 4(1d8+4+2), or 40-44 points of damage per round
Special: fighters have action surge, which is a one or two time extra action (double attacks)

Rogue:
level 1: 1 attack, typical +2 or +3 bonus from ability (finesse weapon mostly).  Damage = 1d8+3, or 7-8 points of damage.  Sneak attack = 10-12 points of total damage
level 10: 1 attack, typical +3 or +4 from ability, +1 or +2 from magic item.  Damage = 1d8+4+1= 9-10 points of damage, sneak attack = 19-23 points of damage
level 20: 1 attack, typical +4 from ability, +2 from magic item.  Damage = 1d8+4+2 = 10-11 points of damage.  Sneak attack = 34-36 points of damage per round
Special:  In 5e, sneak attack is applicable a lot more frequently than in older editions.  with tactics and character planning, you could apply it on nearly every attack.  Assassins also automatically do max damage (55-57 points at level 20) if attacking from surprise.  All level 16+ rogues also do double damage if attacking from surprise if the target fails a CON saving throw (so up to 110 points if you're an assassin).

Mage (evoker, at will cantrip = ray of frost, using fireball as damage spell)
level 1: at will: 1d8, or 4-5 points of damage.  Level 1 burning hands (use 2x): 3d6 if fail dex save = 9-11 damage
level 10: at will: 3d8, or 12-15 points of damage.  Level 5 fireball (use 2x): 8d6, or 24-32 points of damage.  Level 4 fireball is 7d6, and level 3 fireball is 6d6.  If you used all your level 3, 4, and 5 slots for fireball, you can cast it 8 times before long rest
Level 20: at will: 5d8, or 20-25 points of damage.  Level 9 fireball does 12d6 damage, and works it's way down like above.  If you used all of your level 3 and higher slots on fireballs, you could cast a total of 12 before long rest.
Special: evokers can do max damage with any spell level 3 or lower.  Use one time (without risk) between long rests.  Also, level 20 evokers can cast fireball or lightning bolt pretty much as at will (so their level 20 at will = 6d6 damage, or 18-24 points of damage)

TL;DR version:

Level 1:
barbarian: 8-9 points per round
fighter: 7-8 ppr
rogue: 7-8 ppr
mage: 4-5 (with limited big shots)

Level 10:
barbarian: 25 ppr
fighter: 19 ppr
rogue: 22 ppr
mage: 13 ppr

Level 20:
barbarian: 30 ppr
fighter: 40 ppr
rogue: 35 ppr
mage: 22 ppr

Quote from: estar;758610D&D 5e will likely be your second favorite game and a common ground you can share with the general mass of D&D players.

High praise indeed, especially the comparison with Blood & Treasure (our Non-TSR D&D of choice). Also the best report to grace this forum.

It's good to hear that you all had a positive role playing experience and that the game wasn't *utterly ruined* by all the little fiddly rules we've all been arguing about over the past month. The game you described sounds like D&D to me.

Quote from: languagegeek;758855High praise indeed, especially the comparison with Blood & Treasure (our Non-TSR D&D of choice). Also the best report to grace this forum.

It's good to hear that you all had a positive role playing experience and that the game wasn't *utterly ruined* by all the little fiddly rules we've all been arguing about over the past month. The game you described sounds like D&D to me.

It probably does help to play it before one decides they don't like it.

Quote from: Bill;758856It probably does help to play it before one decides they don't like it.

Inconceivable!!!

Quote from: Bill;758856It probably does help to play it before one decides they don't like it.

  Why should this edition get special treatment as compared to the last?

  (Before anyone gets after my user name, I've played 1.66E, 2E, Black Box Basic, 3E, 3.5 and 4E to at least some degree. And I freely admit that many of my issues with 1E and 3.X are flavor-oriented and/or theoretical. )

Quote from: Bill;758856It probably does help to play it before one decides they don't like it.

... or decides it's 'the best game EVER!'

Quote from: Simlasa;759410... or decides it's 'the best game EVER!'

We are on to something here....

Several months ago, after digging into the playtest rules my feeling this sounds a LOT like my Majestic Wilderlands rules + Swords & Wizardry. Of course there are differences.

Probably the biggest intersection point is MW Abilities vs 5e Skill. In both games any class can attempt any skill. In both games some classes are better at some skill. Both are d20 roll high versus target difficulty. With target number at intervals of 5 (10, 15, 20, etc). Both list are of similar length.

Then there the big difference. In MW I have a fixed skill progression chart unique for each class with no choice. In 5e you have a proficiency bonus that is applied equally to all skills you are proficient in.

The rest of 5e has a similar progression to OD&D which is what Swords & Wizardry is based on. So the short of it that playing a 5e game felt a lot like playing my S&W + MW game.  My recent experience at Origins confirmed that nothing has changed that regard and I feel it won't change when the Starter Set is released.  

That even with the advanced books it not likely to change but there will be a wider variety of characters compared to Basic 5e or my SW + MW game.

Thank you for this report, Rob!  And for the record, MW was one of the old-school products I put on Mearls' "required reading" list.  It showed very well (along with DCC) just what you CAN do in terms of innovation and still be "old school".

How did advantage/disadvantage work during the game? I was prompted to ask by discussion in another thread, but this thread deserves more love because it's actual first hand play, of course.

Quote from: Natty Bodak;759944How did advantage/disadvantage work during the game? I was prompted to ask by discussion in another thread, but this thread deserves more love because it's actual first hand play, of course.

It worked and made sense where it appeared. I planned my tactics to avoid sneaking around because I was at a disadvantage because of armor. The one time I had to I roll a pair of 13s with a target of 10. So amazingly I made it.