D&D 5E Really concerned about class design

[generic]

So the DmsGuild doesn't buy anything? Because that seems to be the division. Most people seem to be okay with the release schedule and if you really need more variety its a few clicks away.

I'm fine, as I develop and use homebrew classes, but I would prefer that official options are released for people who (unlike me) play in the AL or are new to D&D concepts.

 

[Oofta]

I'm fine, as I develop and use homebrew classes, but I would prefer that official options are released for people who (unlike me) play in the AL or are new to D&D concepts.

Based on recent UA articles and surveys I wouldn't be surprised if they release a player's options type book sometime next year. I'm sure it won't be enough for some people though because they didn't create a new Shaman class or whatever other class they personally desire.

Considering how many people play the game, they can't satisfy everyone. But even if they do create [insert class here] you'll just get a bunch of people saying they didn't do it "right". All while either not coming up with concrete examples of what they want or contradictory opinions.

 

[Salthorae]

But even if they do create [insert class here] you'll just get a bunch of people saying they didn't do it "right".

Not to mention the calls of "but they created [insert x class]! Why can't they do [insert Y class] too??" that would come!

 

[Einlanzer0]

Not to mention the calls of "but they created [insert x class]! Why can't they do [insert Y class] too??" that would come!

So why develop anything ever then?

Seriously these posts blow my mind sometimes.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

It's really not though.

When they're challenging a status quo for a business that is experiencing continued double digit growth in sales doing exactly what they're doing now, there is no "challenging the status quo" on this one.

OP can state their dissatisfaction all they want, but it's not going to change the WotC design philosophy.

Everything you just said is 100% irrelevant to a discussion about whether or not the status quo is good, or should change.

 

[Oofta]

So why develop anything ever then?

Seriously these posts blow my mind sometimes.

It blows my mind that people aren't satisfied with the options we have now if we include the hundreds if not thousands of options posted out on the DmsGuild with WOTC's blessing.

As a DM I'm glad they've slowed down the release schedule so I don't have to deal with the never-ending stream of new rules. I am merely stating my opinion that no number of options would satisfy some people. That I'd rather have a slow release schedule than the flood of product we had in previous editions. YMMV.

 

[Einlanzer0]

It blows my mind that people aren't satisfied with the options we have now if we include the hundreds if not thousands of options posted out on the DmsGuild with WOTC's blessing.

As a DM I'm glad they've slowed down the release schedule so I don't have to deal with the never-ending stream of new rules. I am merely stating my opinion that no number of options would satisfy some people. That I'd rather have a slow release schedule than the flood of product we had in previous editions. YMMV.

That's... not really the point of the thread. At all.

 

[Oofta]

That's... not really the point of the thread. At all.

Then what exactly is the point?

 

[Einlanzer0]

Then what exactly is the point?

I dunno, maybe, just.. actually read the original post?

 

[Salthorae]

Everything you just said is 100% irrelevant to a discussion about whether or not the status quo is good, or should change.

The bottom line is that ... there is no reason to not take the time to develop it into a full class instead of band-aiding it as a nonsensical subclass tacked on to an arbitrarily chosen class.

The OP's statement boils down to this quoted above.

My statements are directly responding to that, so no. Not irrelevant at all.

Yes, there is a reason not to take the time to develop it into a full class.

Because it is niche (i.e. not high demand and/or data to support broad appeal) and doesn't fit their design philosophy and release strategy. THAT is a reason.