New D&D Monthly Survey: Mystics & Psionics

The new D&D monthly survey is up - it asks about last month's Unearthed Arcana psionics rules. Additionally, WotC reports on the results of the last survey about settings, classes, and races. It turns out that the top tier settings in terms of popularity are Eberron, Ravenloft, Dark Sun, Planescape, and the Forgotten Realms, followed by Greyhawk, Dragonlance, and Spelljammer. Additionally, popular character types were led by the artificer, shaman, and alchemist; while the most popular races were thri-kreen, goblin, and aasimar.

Find the new survey here. "This month, our survey looks at the mystic character class and our first draft of psionics rules for fifth edition. Your input is an invaluable tool that helps shape how we develop new material for D&D. If you love the rules, hate them, or have a specific issue you want to address, let us know."

 

[JEB]

Not too surprised on the setting rankings. Only mild surprise was that Dragonlance was second-tier - I guess most of the fanbase is more interested in the novels than the game side of things.

I expected artificer and shaman to be on top, but not the alchemist. Maybe people are thinking of the Pathfinder version? Anyway, would love to see the artificer and alchemist as subclasses of some general "inventor" sort of class, but shaman should stay its own thing (and preferably not a subclass). I worry a warlock-shaman or a druid-shaman would wind up resembling the wizard-artificer, too bound to the rules of the base class.

Surprised that cavalier didn't even rate a mention, however, I figured its veteran status would count for something. (BTW, anyone else think Mearls is hoping to use the Samurai as a way to get those Tome of Battle classes into 5E? Maybe I'm reading too much into it, though.)

Top races are pretty random, though goblin isn't a big surprise. That second tier is pretty random, though I guess I can see why those all did well. (There are definitely audiences for catfolk, pixies, and revenants, even if they don't do much for me.) I do like the idea of tying in the rakasta with catfolk, especially since I may be doing a 5E Isle of Dread run later this year...

What book was an alchemist base class in?

You have to all the way back to 2E's Player's Option: Skills & Powers to have a major Alchemist class, though they were also a prestige class in 3E and a theme in 4E. And as mentioned - and probably significantly - the alchemist is also a base class in Pathfinder.

 

[Evenglare]

It's incredibly frustrating reading Mearls views on the Aasimar especially since he claims that they are his favorite race. I don't know how or why they think that the community sees Aasimar as boring and lame. I can only assume a few things that would lead him to that conclusion but if so then how big of a hypocrite can the guys over at WOTC be? First I assume they think that Aasimar are being that are purely good and wholesome so no one wants to be a goody twoshoes or something. If you are treating Aasimar that one dimensionally then why do they keep insisting that Tieflings are anything but evil? You can't cherry pick this stuff since the races are really mirrors of one another. If a tiefling can act with mortal human-esque intentions even though they have blood related to an unholy past why can't Aasimar do the same thing. It feels to me they treat the Tiefling along the lines of "Oh man this race has had so much to overcome fitting into society, they are so deep and interesting, oh Aasimars are just good guys who aren't compelling". I mean.. just.. wtf.

How can you treat the two races so differently? Ever watched Supernatural with those ****ing angels? I mean they were ridiculously harsh with justice, smiting stuff left and right. Infact in just about every angelic source angels are bad ass beings who are on par with doling out justice in the most brutal of forms. I have no idea where the whole "divine-good-angel" stuff morphed into the stereotype of a goody goody who doesn't do any thing wrong and doesn't like to make waves. Seriously, where the hell did that stereo type come from? Playing devil's advocate here, let's say WOTC is right. Let's say that Aasimar are just good guys who just follow the law and don't do anything wrong so they are boring to play. If this is true of that race then the corresponding class of the classic Paladin is surely the same, thing. So why include the Paladin at all? Why not just include death knights if being "good" is such a bore? I mean, which is it, are paladins awesome because they are complete arbiters of good? If so how hard is it to make that assumption about the Aasimar? Or is it that playing good characters are boring, like the Aasimar, so why do we have classically good paladins available for play?

Cherry picking much? Let's say Aasimar do have that divine blood. Is it REALLY that hard to think of an interesting way to represent them? What instantly comes to mind is that , like Tieflings over coming their "evil" stereotype, how about we have Aasimar's falling under the pressure to be a shining beacon of a mortal? How do they cope with the stress society puts on the race to always - not matter what- do the noble thing? It's really just the flip side of the Tiefling having to overcome or handle the stigma associated with their ilk. I have pretty strong feelings on the way that Aasimar have been handled throughout 4th and 5th edition. They are making this WAY more complicated than it should be.

 

[Dire Bare]

I think that is what a lot of us that like Greyhawk get from it. While FR has a ton of really powerful entities just running around in the real world, in Greyhawk there are less of these in the bigger scene and more "backroom" type things going on that the players may never even see.

As far as what they would do with it? I think redressing it up and making a combo book of all the living Greyhawk items, the advanced storyline and whatnot would really do it a service and make it useful for folks that weren't around during it's hay-day. Having a timeline in it where it shows the differences that happened and possibly a really good map with the advance of Iuz and then his slow withdraw would be nice.

Really it isn't so much to make it new as much as it is to bring it to the new edition of D&D and an option for folks that may have never even heard/dealt with it before.

I'm with others though, I bought into Thule for the really dark, Greyhawk is darker but not Conan.

As others have pointed out, Greyhawk has it's share of uber-powerful NPCs. However, the tone/feel is certainly different. The NPCs that are "equivalent" to Elminster and all the various Chosen of FR is the Circle of Eight . . . but most Greyhawk players know these NPCs are famous and important BECAUSE THEY ARE THE ORIGINAL PCs!!! The only reason Mordenkainen is who he is, is because he was Gary's player character! (or, one of Gary's players/friends, can't remember anymore) So, the feeling that I got from the setting is that Mordenkainen and crew weren't there to play deus ex machina, but served as inspiration for my own character's exploits.

I don't see Greyhawk as darker, but certainly more gritty and more in tune with older sword-and-sorcery influences. It's tone and feel certainly offer something different from D&D's other settings . . . and nostalgia is a powerful drug . . . but ultimately, I don't see Greyhawk as being worth WotC's time (as a business) to redo.

I mean, I'd almost certainly purchase a 5E Greyhawk as would other long-time fans . . . but I don't think WotC doing Greyhawk justice and also making some profit really go together. What I would love to see is a coffee-table style book with NO CRUNCH (because, it isn't needed) that presents the original Greyhawk, has a chapter outlining the "future history" developed in later game products, and a chapter with advice on how to GM that "old school" feel. Beautiful maps and art, fresh writing . . . I'd buy that! But I don't think WotC would sell enough copies to make it worthwhile . . .

 

[Dire Bare]

So they do consider Kara-Tur and Zakhara part of the Forgotten Realms setting, and not as entirely separate things. (It was unclear when Kara-Tur showed up in the survey but Al-Qadim didn't.) Which means... even if all they support in published adventures is FR... they could still do setting and adventure material for Kara-Tur and Zakhara!

I think we are more likely to see a "Kara-Tur Adventurer's Guide" or "Zakhara Adventurer's Guide" coupled with an appropriately themed Asian or Arabian adventure path that we are to see an "Sea of Fallen Stars AG" or "Shining Sea AG". As far as Faerun goes, I think the Sword Coast AG is all we are going to get (which, IMO, is reasonable), but the more "exotic" locations of the Realms provide enough spice that they might get the spotlight at some point. Of course, is also very possible that WotC sees Kara-Tur, Zakhara, or Maztica as too niche to support an adventure path and associated "transmedia".

 

[Dire Bare]

You said it more politely than I would have.

Is there a reason to be impolite? Did WotC do something to us that I missed, other than put forth a playtest design that some fans did not care for?

 

[Dire Bare]

Shamans in D&D have been pretty varied, so "what do you mean by Shaman?" is a pretty relevant question. Old 2e-style humanoid-priests? Spirit-talkers who divine illness? Spellcaster-monks?

You hit the nail on the head with the shaman! This character concept has no clear archetype in the game, as just about every time it's been presented it's been wildly different than what's come before. Whoever designs the 5E shaman, I hope they research real-world shamanism as a start instead of just picking a "neat" mechanic to build a new class around.

In fact, maybe we could take the idea of different psionics stories, turn them into subclasses.

The Dreamer is an Eberron-style psionicist capable of dream-travel and dimensional rifts. Kalashtar love them. They have two minds - a dreaming mind and a waking mind.
The Evolved is a Dark-Sun-style psionicist who changes their body. They are mutants and seers. They master energy and shape.
The Outsider is a World-Axis-style psionicist who is linked to the invasions of the Far Realm. They have madness and insight in equal degrees. They are changed by things from behind the stars.

WOW! I know want to see KM's three mystic archetypes as a part of the official class!!! Those are really cool ideas! Mearls? Are you reading this? STEAL THESE IDEAS!!!

 

[Goemoe]

The artificer, the shaman, and the alchemist finished well in front in the survey. The alchemist is particularly interesting because we’ve never presented that as a class in a Player’s Handbook before. The crazy game designer in me thinks that all three of those character types could be represented in a single class (imagine a shaman who binds spirits by creating talismans). But that might just be all the caffeine I’ve consumed today talking.

Though I could see the shaman as a druid subclass, I like the idea. Go for it, really. Show us, what you can do with the 5E class mechanics.

But the artificer (reasearch/crafter and battle focused) and the alchemist(third option) fit well into one class anyway. Go for it. They named Eberron first and work on psionics, the artificer won the race (with shaman and alchi)... does this look like a Eberron central book in 2016? Yes? Yes?

Great work anyway. Ask the community, answer the community... is a great way to go TSR! ops... um... Wizards... yes

 

[Li Shenron]

I think it will be very tricky to design classes/subclasses based on creating consumable equipment i.e. Alchemist and Artificer.

During the playtest, an attempt was made at some point to give Wizards the ability to create Scrolls and Potions, and it was clear that you have to create a limit. But how the limit is enforced has to make some narrative sense too, and that's the tricky part. A lot of people reacted with rage at that Wizard's hard-coded limits, if the explanation is too feeble, it just doesn't cut it for a portion of the gamebase.

 

[Li Shenron]

You hit the nail on the head with the shaman! This character concept has no clear archetype in the game, as just about every time it's been presented it's been wildly different than what's come before.

Indeed. I suspect that most people just find the word "Shaman" pretty cool so they want to play one, but have only a vague image about what it means.

 

[CapnZapp]

Honestly the problem with Greyhawk is that it hasn't had good representation. As the base setting of 3.x it got watered down heavily. Since most people these days know of Greyhawk only through 3.x, it's no surprise that it's not high on their priority list. I bet if a rocking return was made to Greyhawk that had it's sword and sorcery ferocity turned back up to 11, you could change hearts and minds and separate it from the High Fantasy of FR.

I understand that because the base assumptions of 5e fit will with GH already, however, it's probably low on the list. A man can dream, though.

This.

People treating Greyhawk as a distinct setting of its own are simply a fading minority.

While you could say "...until WotC brings it back" the question is: why, as in what would Wotc gain?

I personally believe Greyhawk is gone. Any product that would fit Greyhawk fits "better" in Forgotten Realms in the sense that the audience and thus profits are much higher. And indeed this is what we have seen and probably will continue to see.

Wotc is savvy enough to never publicly acknowledge any of this. But I belive Greyhawk is clearly dumped as a setting in the "clearly defined destination for product".

In less kind words, hoping for official support for Greyhawk is... Very optimistic indeed.

Any time Wotc is going to deviate from their genericized FR products, they will want to take a much bigger step away (to Dark Sun, to Ravenwood, to Eberron etc) than the, frankly, miniscule step that Greyhawk represents for all the gamers that aren't aware of AD&D era products.

Put simply, I think some of you allow nostalgia to cloud your estimation of Greyhawk's brand value. I believe that value (of Greyhawk minus generic D&D) to be near zero, I'm afraid.