Last D&D Survey Results In! Plus What's Up With The Ranger?

As you may know, WotC has a monthly survey/feedback system going. I report on it each month. Last month's survey was about product expectations Gen Con, and the results report was much shorter than usual - just a couple of sentences. "In terms of product, setting books and monster books proved the most popular. We were also happy to see that many of you had played in our published campaign worlds or wanted to try them out. We also saw plenty of support for new character options, with a consensus that most players are happy with our current pace of "slow but steady." I personally feel that my - anecdotal - experience with the online community says the opposite about the current pace, but a survey's a survey!

There's a new survey up, covering the recent Ranger playtest. As WotC mentions, the Ranger is the least popular class, and they intend to approach the class in a number of different ways over the coming year. The Ranger is interesting, because it attracts a lot of snotty comments (not as many as the very concept of a Warlord, but that's another thing).

Click here to take the Ranger survey.

 

[Orlax]

Who else answered other for every question they could

 

[ad_hoc]

Personally I am quite happy with the rate of releases.

Probably a combination of people who are upset make more noise and people who post on forums are more likely to want more products to talk about than those who don't post on forums but still play.

 

[Grimstaff]

I still don't get the ranger hate. The ranger in my group is awesome.

 

[EthanSental]

Now that they know what we want in terms of setting books, monster books and new character options, lets see how long it takes to meet those wants. Hopefully sooner for all 3!

 

[werecorpse]

I want another Monster Manual, including a further NPC appendix. That's my main desire. I would think they already have the inspiration for this stuff and it wouldn't be too hard to convert mechanically the missing monsters and put it out.

I would like some other stuff but prefer the slow, get it right mechanically, release schedule to one that's rushed and produces OP player options.

 

[Minigiant]

I started writing my comment and ended up with a 300+ word bloggy post which sounds like a ranger fluff article or the intro to the ranger section of a new rules books.

 

[Psikerlord#]

i reiterated my ideal ranger is a "wilderness commando with a pet" with herbalism/primal abilities that are spell like effects. i said i prefer a buffing pet combat wise, i feel that will be easiest to balance (i dont mind if spirirt or real animal). the pet should also scout etc and have hp, be vulnerable to being destroyed. i voted remove favored enemy altogether - too situational /hard to balance.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I was tempted to troll the survey and say they should make a full caster 1-9 ranger... but I didn't Idid rate the 1e ranger higher then 2 or 3e though...

 

[JohnTitusRenzi]

My latest comments.

The legal dept. should C&D people trying to sell their online applications and pdfs without a license. But should not C&D people like hobbiest only Pathguy who made a character generaton application that is just a simple but useful notes summary. I just have a negative image of the company that produces 5e.

There are still too many redundant spells. Many spells send messages with 25 words or less.
None of the rules are standard for Class Features and spells. For example, Turn Undead among different archtypes is confusing.

The formatting of Class Features is near unreadable.

As said, the CR system is bad. Good thing hit dice is still a thing.

I like everything else.

I would like to see all the AD&D modules from 1st Edition be officially released for 5e.