Second 5th Edition Survey! Plus Results of the First Survey: The Ranger Gets Some Attention!

Moorcrys said:

Maybe if they got the first berserk rage for free per long rest and then one level per berserk rage after. And berserking doesn't remove levels of exhaustion already incurred for the duration of the rage, which I think it should - they should at least be able to rally for short bursts while they're slowly killing themselves.

My experience with it had been less than satisfactory.

Click to expand...

It's important to note that it's Frenzy that causes exhaustion, not Rage.

I guess it depends on how you interpret the wording of Frenzy, the problem you are having is fixed if you look at it the way @Staffan and our table does where you can choose to go into a Frenzy and get your additional attack for a BA separate to your normal Rage.
That way you can Rage and get the benefits the class requires without adding levels of exhaustion which can quickly lead to death.

steeldragons said:

QFT.

But still, the Beastmaster is "wrong" because it isn't giving people what they want...which is ultimately, if not solely, "powergamey enough" options...like their <insert video game/edition X/game system Y/whatever "proof"/justification they choose to use> "gives" them...so obviously 5e has "taken [something] away from" them.

Click to expand...

That's essentially it.
Many want the ranger to be fighter variant. Many want the beastmaster to have an independent beast with level appropriate stats. The first is a fighter/rogue with certain skills. The second costs the highest level spell of a full caster.

5th edition determined the costs for these. The part the designers got wrong is many hate that cost. Now they have to do some work and find another cost which will be more widely accepted.

I just want the rangers beast to not go down so easily. If their HP matched the rest of the game for challenges it would work better.

Moorcrys said:

One level per long rest. Or one level removed per casting of greater restoration, a fifth level spell I believe.

They're penalized from the first time they do it. Then they're walking around at disadvantage (at the very least) for all ability checks until they take a long rest or they have a 5th level spell cast on them. No other class ability incurs this level of pain. God forbid they use their class feature twice between long rests...

In play it's a pain. I'm all for players making tough decisions but this is a decidedly unfun decision - don't use it or only under the most dire circumstances. At least it has been in the games I've played or DMed.

Maybe if they got the first berserk rage for free per long rest and then one level per berserk rage after. And berserking doesn't remove levels of exhaustion already incurred for the duration of the rage, which I think it should - they should at least be able to rally for short bursts while they're slowly killing themselves.

My experience with it had been less than satisfactory.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I see what you mean. I'd buy into your fixes, if it came up in my game.

steeldragons said:

The entirety of the "problem" with the Beastmaster seems to be people up in arms that you "lose" your action to direct the animal to attack instead. You're not "losing" anything. You are using your action to do something else. That one round you can't do something else. Ergo, it is said, two-weapon fighting is "ruined" because [for that one round] you can't make your second attack. No. Your beast companion that you chose to have will instead be taking a multiattack. How dare they not let me do both!

Click to expand...

I think people talk about it in terms of balance but Wizards is smart enough to listen in terms of perception. The Beastmaster is balanced, but it 'feels' weak, mostly because your bad-ass animal buddy is, in terms of in-game fiction, kind of slow on the uptake. It works out so that about 1/4 or 1/3 of your power is invested in the beast, when players were expecting about 1/2. I hope they find a way to switch more power into the beast, maybe by forgoing spells.

Hopefully they'll find a way to make it feel more satisfying without rocking the balance boat. I heard about a similar problem in FPS development, actually. Player's complained that the silencer made the weapons too weak, when in fact it barely changed the damage. So the devs switched out the "pew pew" sound the silencer made with a popping sound and the complaints stopped. I think that is what we are looking at here.

Survey 2 completed! Overall very happy to see that the overwhelming majority of feedback has been positive for 5e and great to hear that its attracting lots of new players! This is great news for D&D. Im also really happy to hear that UA will release added/expanded/tweaked contents; hope this makes its way into an actual UA book at some point in the future.

bolo__ said:

It's important to note that it's Frenzy that causes exhaustion, not Rage.

I guess it depends on how you interpret the wording of Frenzy, the problem you are having is fixed if you look at it the way @Staffan and our table does where you can choose to go into a Frenzy and get your additional attack for a BA separate to your normal Rage.
That way you can Rage and get the benefits the class requires without adding levels of exhaustion which can quickly lead to death.

Click to expand...

Ugh.

Yeah, sorry. I've been in Chicago working for the past month and didn't bring my books so the specific names of powers got a little fuzzy while I was typing... and I was typing on my phone, which is always an adventure, so my post may have been a little confusing.

To clarify a little: I don't mind the drawbacks for Frenzy - it's a great ability. But I also believe that you should at least be able to use your cornerstone class ability, which is really what it is for the berserker class imho as all barbarians regardless of path choice can rage, once per day without shooting yourself in the foot. After that, stacking exhaustion levels doesn't bother me too much, though I've already house-ruled that lesser restoration removes one level of exhaustion. But in that vein I'm also toying with the idea of undead creatures with 'drain' abilities adding levels of exhaustion rather than hit point thresholds dropping, so I wanted an easier way at lower levels for characters to 'heal' exhaustion levels anyway.

And as I said, I also think that frenzy should ignore exhaustion while it's happening, since it doesn't really make sense to me that you're exhausted and in a frothing rage at the same time. Kind of the dramatic point of a frenzy is that you don't feel anything and that you're pushing yourself beyond your limits - it gets a little meh if you're in a frenzy but at disadvantage to all ability checks, moving at half speed, and disadvantage to attack rolls... let all that happen after your blood stops boiling and you come to your senses again. But that's just me, so I'm house ruling that as well. I know I'm repeating myself, but I thought I would try to write something clearer now that I'm at an actual computer and am using the proper terms.

Bottom line for me is - they asked us what we like and what we don't... I don't think anyone's betraying the foundations of D&D society or misguided by delusions of powergaming grandeur by letting them know via the survey precisely what WotC asked: what things are working for you and your group and what are things that you think aren't? After that, it's on the design team's table to decide whether the issues brought up are due to clarity, due to something being over-powered or under-powered enough to warrant a change, or whether it's simply a matter of personal preference that isn't a significant issue for most tables using the same rules. I was actually surprised on both surveys how much I marked down as 'very satisfied' or 'satisfied' - the vast majority of my answers were very positive. But I'm all for gamers letting them know what they're thinking, no matter what that thinkin' is. In capable hands, I believe that's how the game gets cleaner, tighter, and presents a system that brings about the greatest amount of fun to the greatest number of people - and so far I feel like 5e has been designed by some pretty capable hands.

Cheers!

Moorcrys said:

Cheers!

Click to expand...

Cool.

I'm fine with it the way it is - I have a lot of fun playing an exhausted Dwarf - but I could fully get behind the idea of overcoming the exhaustion whilst raging, that makes a lot of sense.

I'm also looking forward to lvl 15 where Permanent Rage removes the negative affects of Frenzy as the Rage never ends.

I went off on the warforgew, changing and esp horrible artificer design. My main beef with the artificier is the complete lack of realistic benefits. Other than infuse potions which is pretty good, the other class features are crap. Master artificer especially is terrible. Most of the magic items in the list can be made in 4 - 20 days normally, and by the time your 14th level in I'm sure the money saved is not going to be an issue. also the loss odd theives tools is terrible.

AverageCitizen said:

The Beastmaster is balanced, but it 'feels' weak, mostly because your bad-ass animal buddy is, in terms of in-game fiction, kind of slow on the uptake. It works out so that about 1/4 or 1/3 of your power is invested in the beast, when players were expecting about 1/2. I hope they find a way to switch more power into the beast, maybe by forgoing spells.

Click to expand...

This is close to true, I think. This is ESPECIALLY in comparison to other kinds of "bonus critters." Conjuring wizards and familiars and those riding mounts don't have to choose between their actions and the actions of their friendly ally, but beastmaster rangers do have to make that choice. Even those who wield two weapons just get to make that extra attack.

Your pixie or celestial weasel or whatever can fly around on her own and even harass the enemy and deliver touch spells for you, but my fierce wolf of the wilds won't do a dang thing unless I glad-hand it the entire frickin' time? Feels like I got not just the runt of the litter, but also the world's stupidest pet. It doesn't match the expectations in part because it does not take a police officer's intense focus and concentration to say "sic 'em, fido," and watch Kujo go crazy. Why is it my deeply-in-touch-with-nature ranger who is one with the mind of the beasts can't get a companion better trained than your average German shepherd?

Also, why can't I have a bear, or a horse? Circus trainers can make bears do things, and my ranger can't? And my ranger can't have a pony that is also her best friend, because if I can't play Black Beauty in D&D, I don't know what I'm doing here!

Trading an attack for a beast's attack is OK, but I shouldn't HAVE to.