D&D 5E "Damage on a miss" poll.

[Herschel]

What does Mearls have to gain by spinning it as testing well? Is he secretly holding a grudge against you, FS and a few others?

 

[lutecius]

didn't they also have data when they wrote 4e? I also remember critics being called a vocal minority many times on this board. I think WotC is right to at least take "the margins" into consideration this time around.

 

[herrozerro]

Yes, would you and those three others please stop.

Take a look around, it's literally 2 or three posters continually making these threads.

 

[Weather Report]

Take a look around, it's literally 2 or three posters continually making these threads.

And you're in every one, on these and other boards.

 

[Wicht]

didn't they also have data when they wrote 4e? I also remember critics being called a vocal minority many times on this board. I think WotC is right to at least take "the margins" into consideration this time around.

I find some of the arguments pro-5e to be extremely evocative of the arguments pro-4e, creating a real sense of deja-vu all over again.

I am especially noticing a body of proponents claiming that 5e is a breath of fresh air in that it frees them to tell the kind of stories they want to tell and makes the mechanics just fade into the background. Which is weird because, and it may just be my imagination, but it seems that many of them said the exact same thing right before 4e was announced.

I think that means something, but I am not sure what.

 

[Tovec]

What does Mearls have to gain by spinning it as testing well? Is he secretly holding a grudge against you, FS and a few others?

I highly doubt he would spin it to further some grudge against anyone. I do think it is likely he would spin it so you can view his company and his efforts in a better light.

"Oh the playtests are going well, that means the game is improving," is a likely reaction to what he said. Similarly, "Oh, Mearls says that they are having a hard time deciphering what is coming out of the playtests, do they know what we want?" would be a poor outlook. I have no doubts why he would want to make us think things are going forward.

As others have said, it is impossible for us to judge how things are polling until we have the data. Right now we just have to listen to what they are saying about big picture concepts and hope we can sway the issues in ways we appreciate. We further (which you seem to) would have to automatically believe people like Mearls when they say that the feedback has been good, a trust that many of us no longer have in the good people over at WotC (at least no longer automatically).

And [MENTION=78357]Herschel[/MENTION] if your objections to my (or anyone) participation in these threads stems from "you don't like it, so go away" then I don't appreciate it and won't respond. These forums are open to anyone to put forth their opinions on the topic. I don't like this fighter option, I'm giving reasons why not, and I hope and seek for it to be changed going forward. Many people have similarly agreed to aspects of those arguments (going back to the beginning of these threads) if not all of them. So, I know what I'm contributing. Now, if you want to reply to the content of my arguments then we can have a conversation, if you want to talk about the content of my character (or signature) then I won't.

 

[herrozerro]

And you're in every one, on these and other boards.

Hey your right! I guess that means that the whole hate it, love it parties are really only 3 people.

 

[Ahnehnois]

What does Mearls have to gain by spinning it as testing well? Is he secretly holding a grudge against you, FS and a few others?

He has product sales to gain. If they release a product without putting it through the kind of substantial testing and revision that eliminates things like this, but they market it aggressively and make it sound like they've put a lot of effort into it, used a lot of input, and written a better game than they actually have.

Ninja'd a bit by [MENTION=95493]Tovec[/MENTION] ; well put.

didn't they also have data when they wrote 4e? I also remember critics being called a vocal minority many times on this board. I think WotC is right to at least take "the margins" into consideration this time around.

I don't think they had all that much data, but you're right.

 

[Herschel]

He has product sales to gain. If they release a product without putting it through the kind of substantial testing and revision that eliminates things like this, but they market it aggressively and make it sound like they've put a lot of effort into it, used a lot of input, and written a better game than they actually have.

It's one of three available build features in a playtest, not the final release of the game. If it didn't test well, why say it is and "keep" it? That makes no sense. We've seen lots of things included in one version and not in others. Why is this one so much different?

Hint: it's not.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

It's one of three available build features in a playtest, not the final release of the game. If it didn't test well, why say it is and "keep" it? That makes no sense. We've seen lots of things included in one version and not in others. Why is this one so much different?

Hint: it's not.

Because some designers are so proud of what they come up with that they will keep it in the game just to satisfy their ego.