D&D 5E People didn't like the Psionic Talent Die

[Parmandur]

Yes, because I should have been able to do a detailed and exhaustive comparison of every bit of crunch in an hour, so I guess my point is invalid.

I mean, your point is wrong: there are a few more spells, but there are more Race and Class combos, not to mention Feats and Backgrounds, in 5E. It's no contest.

 

[Undrave]

Not quite what he said. He's saying "different" and "own mechanics" might be fine provided its easily understood and played as quickly as just sitting down at the table to start playing.

For example, I strongly suspect survey respondents wouldn't have those issues with a mechanic which applied advantage or disadvantage to damage rolls. It would be it's own mechanic and different, but it would be similar enough to existing stuff that people can just sit down at the table and immediately play it because it's so easy to understand. Similarly, "You can permanently give up a 3rd level spell slot to gain a new cantrip" would be new and it's own mechanic, but also likely pass the "I can grok this the moment I sit down to play" criteria.

So it's not just anything which works different or with its own mechanic - it's a question of complexity and ease/speed of use. Which leaves room for something different, it's just more difficult to design that.

But the Psionic Talent Dice was really easy to understand.

 

[Mistwell]

But the Psionic Talent Dice was really easy to understand.

The feedback, which apparently was consistent and widespread, is it was not.

 

[Parmandur]

But the Psionic Talent Dice was really easy to understand.

I liked it, you liked it: but apparently at least a third of respondents found it frustrating.

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

The feedback, which apparently was consistent and widespread, is it was not.

What I got from it was that people didn't like it as a subsystem, not that it was difficult to grok. If the majority of the feedback in fact was about it being a complicated mechanic, then we have a real problem here. The psionic die is easier to track than superiority dice or bardic inspiration dice; you don't get much easier than that unless you go Champion.

 

[Guest 6801328]

See... I had more time to think about the question 'SHOULD the game evolve'...

People often mistakenly consider evolution as being a thing a species does to get 'better', or that evolution is a constant progression. Truth of the matter is that evolution is about adapting to your environment. It's not the 'strong' who survive, it's those that are the best suited for their current condition, and if those conditions change they either adapt or die.

In the case of D&D, or any product of its kind, if it doesn't adapt to changes in its environment then it will 'die' by losing too many customers.

And here's the thing... people change ALL the time. I'm not the same person I was 10 years ago, 8 years ago or not even 5 years ago. My tastes change, my opinions can change, and I'm not alone... In other words, this mass of people's opinions, of ever changing people's ever changing opinion, IS D&D's environement.

If the game doesn't evolve and just keeps pumping out Adventures that you can solve with the same ol' skills and same ol' spells on the same ol' classes or the same ol' characters... Well maybe you'll have people who will be content with this, and that's fine... but there's also a large portion of the player base that'll get bored. They'll get bored of the classes they've been playing for 10 years+ and want to try something different... And if D&D no longer has anything different (For exemple, if you're into mundane characters, D&D has a VERY Limited range of options. Out of the PHB alone there is the Berzerker, the Champion, the Battlemaster, the Thief and the Assassin who don't have supernatural powers, wth Berzerker (and Open Hand Monks) being very borderline. You'll run out of those options fast) people are just going to go elsewhere.

Maybe that stable core will attract new players to replace the ones who leave... but will that be enough? Is that a risk WotC is willing to take?

A commercial product is like a living animal, and the more it engages people in complex ways, the way D&D does, the more evolutionary pressure there is to keep evolving because the 'environment' is constantly in flux. Even Monopoly comes out with new versions from time to time, even if the classic is always on shelves.

By that analysis, chess should have disappeared a long time ago.

 

[Mistwell]

What I got from it was that people didn't like it as a subsystem, not that it was difficult to grok. If the majority of the feedback in fact was about it being a complicated mechanic, then we have a real problem here. The psionic die is easier to track than superiority dice or bardic inspiration dice; you don't get much easier than that unless you go Champion.

Well that's a fair read of it. He said, "we dig kind of a neat, sometimes spooky psychic theme, we just want it to work like how things work generally in fifth edition." There were a lot of people bouncing not just on the Psionic talent die, but just on there being a different mechanic at all. People are just like, "Can't I just sit down and play this cool thing please?"

 

[doctorbadwolf]

But the Psionic Talent Dice was really easy to understand.

The feedback, which apparently was consistent and widespread, is it was not.

I think it was more about the mechanic being counter-intuitive, not about it being hard to understand. Many, many, people just don't enjoy using counter-intuitive systems. It's annoying. It actively takes them out of the fun of the game. One my close friends has a PHD in mathematics, and is like that. He hates using counter-intuitive math in games. He definitely understands mathematical systems more fully than the guy in the group who misses thac0.

The psionic die is easier to track than superiority dice or bardic inspiration dice; you don't get much easier than that unless you go Champion.

IMO, this is the opposite of the case. A resource of which you have a specific number, that runs out and then is fully refreshed all at once when you do a specific thing, is much easier to track than the psionic die. Both are easy, but one is vastly more straightforward, and it's not psionic die.

 

[Maxperson]

For me, character concepts are about literary and psychological tropes, not math. Just by introducing Backgrounds and the Ideals/Traits/Bonds/Flaws, 5E is infinitely more than 3E in terms of character concepts. Less mathematical cruft and traps are a big part of the bonus.

I very strongly disagree with that. Backgrounds and character traits have been around since 1e. They may not have been written into the books, but players have been playing with them for decades. The only thing 5e introduced that wasn't present in 3e is inspiration, and we forget about inspiration most of the time.

3e was not only capable of every 5e character you can possibly create via backgrounds, ideals/traits/bonds/flaws(otherwise known as personality), but it also had far more classes, subclasses and feats, which allowed you to achieve many more concepts than are available only through backgrounds and personality.

 

[Parmandur]

I very strongly disagree with that. Backgrounds and character traits have been around since 1e. They may not have been written into the books, but players have been playing with them for decades. The only thing 5e introduced that wasn't present in 3e is inspiration, and we forget about inspiration most of the time.

3e was not only capable of every 5e character you can possibly create via backgrounds, ideals/traits/bonds/flaws(otherwise known as personality), but it also had far more classes, subclasses and feats, which allowed you to achieve many more concepts than are available only through backgrounds and personality.

I am familiar with 3E, and while there are more mathematical objects, there really wasn't any more narrative depth in place. The formalizing of Background goes a lot further to provide character concepts than a slew of minor Feats.