D&D 5E How many fans want a 5E Warlord?

[steeldragons]

Did anyone else notice that the poll percentages don't add up to 100%?

I see 62.40% and 76.80% as the results right now -- which add up to 139.20% -- which means this poll has other problems, too.

Was wondering about that myself. Also it claims that there are 126 voters...but by the numbers of votes for each, there are 1,075 [atm].

All I know is, consistently and nearly since the poll began, lemon curry has been averaging 10-20 votes and/or 5-10ish % higher than people that are interested in/want a dedicated warlord class for 5e.

 

[MechaPilot]

A lot of video games show HP loss as taking a physical hit. However, they also often show food giving you back your "life." The most rational evaluation is that video games simply eschew the internal consistency that table-top RPGs strive for, and that the audience for those games usually doesn't mind the lack of consistency.

If that's the case, it's not a new thing. Video games have been around as long as D&D. So I don't think it's a generational thing where new gamers equate hp with physical damage only because that's how it's handled in video games. If that were the case, we would have seen it just as frequent in the early 80s as we do now.

I agree that gamers seeing HP loss as physical damage is not a generational thing. I don't know what the first video game was that used "hit points" to describe health, perhaps one of the D&D games for the Intellivision, but it's been used for a long time in other games as well. The first time that I can recall seeing hit points used to describe health in a game was FF2 for the NES.

Of course, physical damage in video games has always been somewhat nebulous. This is especially true in older games where touching an enemy hurt you but not the enemy, or in those cases where an enemy's hitbox was larger than their sprite, and you could get hurt by not even touching them.

Warrior needs food!

Then I'll leave that wall chicken for you, because this valkyrie has already eaten.

 

[steeldragons]

I agree that gamers seeing HP loss as physical damage is not a generational thing. I don't know what the first game was that used "hit points" to describe health, perhaps one of the D&D games for the Intellivision, but it's been used for a long time in other games as well. The first time that I can recall seeing hit points used to describe health in a game was FF2 for the NES.

The first game, as far as I know, that used "hit points" for tracking health was....D&D, the table top pen-and-paper role-playing game. So, we can reasonably presume they were present in D&D's predecessor, Chainmail...Maybe they were a measurement of something similar (though clearly not individual health) in the wargaming roots of the rpg.

Soooo, yeah...well before there was a FF2 or an NES.*

*SD's universal post disclaimer: In case it's not obvious and/or for the thick of skull or thin of skin, as with all posts on the interwebs, all of the above should be read/taken as "IMNSHO" and is not intended as insult or attack to anyone involved with this thread.

 

[MechaPilot]

The first game, as far as I know, that used "hit points" for tracking health was....D&D, the table top pen-and-paper role-playing game. So, we can reasonably presume they were present in D&D's predecessor, Chainmail...Maybe they were a measurement of something similar (though clearly not individual health) in the wargaming roots of the rpg.

Soooo, yeah...well before there was a FF2 or an NES.*

*SD's universal post disclaimer: In case it's not obvious and/or for the thick of skull or thin of skin, as with all posts on the interwebs, all of the above should be read/taken as "IMNSHO" and is not intended as insult or attack to anyone involved with this thread.

Sorry. I meant first video game. I thought that was obvious from the context. Clearly I was wrong.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Well, here's a really simple idea for an ability to give to all PCs that I've never seen anyone advocate before.

Inspiring Word
You rally an ally through stirring speech, inspiring her to fight with renewed vigor. Make a DC 15 Charisma (Persuasion) check. If you succeed, an ally of your choice may spend up to half of her Hit Dice to recover Hit Points on her next turn. A character can only benefit from this ability once per short or long rest.

I kind of like it. I would probably force the ally to spend a reaction though to bring it in line with battlemaster Commanding Strike.

It's kind of gamey, and I don't regret it not being in the PHB, but as a house rule it seems okay to me. Wouldn't turn me off a campaign or anything.

 

[Lanefan]

As I, and El Mahdi, have said elsewhere: you are assuming that the poll is about determining whether MORE of the community wants it than doesn't. It's not, and he was pretty clear about that in the OP. This is not a survey. It's a petition. It just happens to be in poll form because forums don't have a "petition" format that can collect together all the "signatures" in a convenient numerical fashion.

In that case, you currently have 81 "signatures" as I type this. This thread's been viewed about 3500 times; 81 names out of 3500 is not a spectacular capture rate for something that's in theory so popular.

As I type this there's 99 votes for "Lemmon Curry", each indicating either a no vote or a spoiled ballot; meaning the other 3300-odd viewers didn't even care enough to vote.

And to add to the fun: as has already been noted the total percentage of votes adds to considerably more than 100; this is because the poll allows you to vote for both options, meaning that '81' number is further diluted by about 20-ish of them voting for both options.

Lan-"I'm no statistician, but I think we might have a non-starter here"-efan

p.s. even though the forum doesn't let you collect a direct petition it's pretty easy to word a poll to have the same effect if you just think it through. The "question" in this case would look something like "Petition: vote YES here if you'd like a 5e Warlord class." Make the poll public (this forum allows that) so those who vote yes can be tallied and listed. Then have two poll choices: "YES" (or "SIGN PETITION") and "null vote, ignore". Count up the yes votes and *boom* there's yer petition. It's really not that hard.

 

[CapnZapp]

I think what this thread REALLY wants is a 4e to 5e conversion document that doesn't suck.

That is, something that turns 5e into 4e.

Sadly, I believe that will never come to pass. Much like the rest of the conversion documents.

 

[El Mahdi]

[Edit - Ninja'ed by Umbran!] If you really want a warlord class to eventually become an official class, your best bet is to change the minds of people who don't care about it or don't want it. That's hard to do, I know. But it's really your best option. There are a lot of reasons to like the Warlord - why not focus on explaining all the good things about Warlords and why you like to play them? Then once you've changed some minds, a petition done through a better site for petitions, linked through Twitter and Facebook, has a better chance of working.

I'll keep that in mind. Thanks.

 

[El Mahdi]

Did anyone else notice that the poll percentages don't add up to 100%?

I see 62.40% and 76.80% as the results right now -- which add up to 139.20% -- which means this poll has other problems, too.

No, it just means I made it multiple choice. I didn't want people using the Lemmon Curry option as fuel to say there shouldn't be a Warlord. The Lemmon Curry option can be selected by both those that want and don't want a Warlord - purposely making that aspect even more irrelevant...

 

[Mephista]

I think you're also missing my point or delving deeper than my statement goes... do you ever take hit point damage in any of these games and the fiction not show a physical hit? I can't think of any... so hit point loss equates to taking physical damage... the kind of wounds you seem to be talking about here are different from the point I am making... now you're trying to quantify levels or verisimilitude from the physical damage in the games. This is going to vary wildly depending on the particular game and really isn't center to my broader point about physical damage. My Point was simply that hit point loss is equated to physical damage in most gamer's minds.

I also disagree with your contention that most view hit points as a game construct as just hit points since most use "life" interchangeably with (and arguably more than) the term hit points... so there is definitely a common viewpoint around what they represent.

Actually, its also physical damage in the writer's minds, not just the gamers. Physical pain is the rationale used to justify using CON for Concentration checks when you get hit. Sure, there's a mix of luck and drive in there, but there's aslo a notable portion of pain. Even 1 hp worth of damage is enough pain that it can make a 20th level wizard drop a spell with high frequency.