D&D 5E Additive versus subtractive modularity

[Umbran]

So do you believe there will be a module for the following....
1. Straight hit points
2. Slow natural recovery anywhere from 1hp/day to level hps/day.
3. No non-magical hit point recovery besides #2

As has been noted - this hasn't been the way the core game has worked in a long time. #2 and/or #3 get violated in various editions.

So, it looks rather like a case of unrealistic expectations. They aren't giving you something they have not provided in the past? Horrors!

 

[BryonD]

You claim to want the following:

1. HP as partially meat - HP/WP does this, check.
2. No non-magical healing - HP/WP does this, check.
3. Slow natural recovery of meat - HP/WP does this check.

This module does every single thing, covers every single thing that you claim you want.

(I recognize you are responding to E, my reply isn't intended to imply anything about the validity of your post as a reply directly to him)

For me, I want a module that will look and feel like the 1E-3E HP / healing system. HP/WP does not achieve this.
Another module that we simply have not seen yet might.

And, as previously described, I can even house rule it.

My concerns with house ruling are:
Isn't this something that should be an obvious expectation for a stated goal of appealing to all historic play styles? If they are not doing this then it becomes easy to doubt anything else.
and
Why not do something so obvious unless the system just doesn't hold up under the change.


Again, we will see. Another module that simply hasn't been mentioned so far may make this entire conversation an overreaction.

 

[Agamon]

...may make this entire conversation an overreaction.

Just like 2 out of 3 threads on this board (conservative estimate, I know).

 

[Umbran]

For me, I want a module that will look and feel like the 1E-3E HP / healing system.

And here, we see a challenge. You want the look and feel of 1e-3e. Emerikol wants something similar, but didn't quite exist in 1e-3e.

How many different modules are they expected to put out to meet very specific desires?

 

[Hussar]

What's the problem with a wounds/vitality system? It should achieve exactly what you say you want. So where's the problem?

 

[BryonD]

And here, we see a challenge. You want the look and feel of 1e-3e. Emerikol wants something similar, but didn't quite exist in 1e-3e.

How many different modules are they expected to put out to meet very specific desires?

Well, the difference is that WotC stated they were going to support the play styles specific to prior editions and that is all I'm asking for.

 

[BryonD]

What's the problem with a wounds/vitality system? It should achieve exactly what you say you want. So where's the problem?

3E was not W/VP. I want 3E style.

I'm not saying anyone *owes* me 3E style.
I'm saying I want it. And I'm saying WotC claimed they would offer it.

 

[evileeyore]

As has been noted - this hasn't been the way the core game has worked in a long time. #2 and/or #3 get violated in various editions.

So, it looks rather like a case of unrealistic expectations. They aren't giving you something they have not provided in the past? Horrors!

Actually... both Emerikol and ByronD were strongly supported in 3e (as long as they disallowed non-core 4 classes)... and they obviously like 3e...

So you can see why they are crying foul. At least I can.

However since that "playstyle" is very, very, very, likely included in the 5e rules (probably DMG optional mod) I'm not sure why they keep on as though the sky were falling.



And if it isn't... seriously how hard is it to just say: No to those handful of small corner case abilities?

 

[BryonD]

And here, we see a challenge. You want the look and feel of 1e-3e. Emerikol wants something similar, but didn't quite exist in 1e-3e.

How many different modules are they expected to put out to meet very specific desires?

Actually, a better answer to your question is: *at least* enough to have enough paying fans to satisfy their business goals, and hopefully a lot more than that.

Excluding me or any other individual is absolutely fine, so long as they don't exclude too many people.

People can still complain if WotC doesn't do what they said they would do. But if tons of happy fans are keeping WotC rolling in revenue then WotC is free to not care. The key word is "if". I'm not saying it won't happen. But we can look at history and conclude that it doesn't always work out as planned.

 

[Umbran]

Well, the difference is that WotC stated they were going to support the play styles specific to prior editions and that is all I'm asking for.

I get that. I think my question is still a valid one, in general.

I mean, "playstyle" is a pretty nebulous concept. We are talking about how hit points are regained, and claiming that is a "playstyle"? But it isn't really. It is one mechanical detail that is only a part of an entire style of play. It is entirely possible for two people to think they have the same general playstyle, have them each look at a game, and have one say it supports the playstyle, and another say it doesn't - that discussion happens on these boards all the time!