D&D (2024) D&D playtest feed back report, UA8

[Dannyalcatraz]

Mod Note:
@Mistwell @CapnZapp

I’m seeing 2 people basically confronting each other with decreasing levels of civility, and I’m not the only one. How about the pair of you disengaging from each other?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

So we can just agree that making the game better and increasing the sales again are not two mutually exclusive goals?
And both are important going forward?

Mindboggling, isn't it?

 

[Remathilis]

So we can just agree that making the game better and increasing the sales again are not two mutually exclusive goals?
And both are important going forward?

Mindboggling, isn't it?

But if WotC doesn't fundamentally change D&D, how can I claim the moral high ground to advocate leaving WotC's ecosystem and advocating for my personal choice of 5e clone? (Except for all the other reasons I advocate for leaving WotC's ecosystem and advocating for my personal choice of 5e clone.)

 

[Parmandur]

See, you have to understand. Lack of guidance and lack of mechanics is support for playstyle. The fact that it's a major PITA for everyone else doesn't seem to matter. Nor anyone's ability to actually just ignore supplied guidance. No. We must absolutely force every single DM out there to make these determinations in order to support DM's.

How many people is "everyone else"? I would theorize that the answer to that question explains a lot about 2014 and 2024 rules provide loose guidance.

 

[Stalker0]

Edit: I'll just add that doing this in isolation - for one spell - is within reach of most GMs. However, having to track multiple spells that disrupt exploration across a party... and come up with creative interesting narratives/complications/choices around them (in a non-escalation/adversarial way)... that becomes much more taxing on the GM.

Yeah this is often my counter when people say “don’t ban spells there are always interesting ways to work around them”

It’s true that as a dm I can design workarounds for various spells…and as a one off kind of thing that’s not a problem. The issue is when you have to do again and again and again. Good berry means that if I want any amount of resource based exploration in the game I am going to constantly be considering workarounds or special ideas or xyz. As a dm that gets tiring really quickly.

It’s my same problem with the OG counterspell. I of course could create ways (and did create ways) for my monsters to work around it…but i got tired tbst any time I wanted a monster to be a spellcasting threat I had to use them.

In quick summary: if a dm has to spend an inordinate amount of time adjusting their encounters for a single spell…maybe the spell is the problem not the dm

 

[Stalker0]

to me the answer is that if the Barbarian is now OP, you need to fix the Barbarian, not buff all monsters to even it out again.

That way lies madness, and no compatibility with 2014 whatsoever…

As mentioned, they are not looking for balance in the feedback, they are looking for whether we like a change or not. Balance is done internally

Problem is power is absolutely a factor in people’s satisfaction. The monk didn’t score so high because kd new ability X, it’s because for the first time ever this monk looks POWERFUL! Wow they are a great 1 on 1 tank, wow look at how much their damage improved at 11th level!

But now let’s say they come back with the same mechanics, but deflect attacks only reduces damage by half of what it does right now, or monk damage gets reduced somewhere else. The monk is not going to look as good in sastifaction

 

[Vaalingrade]

Sometimes players taking Goodberry is them signaling that they don't want to do resource-based exploration activites.

 

[Stalker0]

You'd think that people who don't want working rules for the other two pillars could just... not use those rules and keep playing it the way they do now?

Impossible, I know!

I think this mindset underestimates just how many people out there are very rules oriented. No matter how many times you say that all rules are optional, until you put a big label on rule x that says optional, there are people that will say canon is canon

 

[Quickleaf]

Yeah this is often my counter when people say “don’t ban spells there are always interesting ways to work around them”

It’s true that as a dm I can design workarounds for various spells…and as a one off kind of thing that’s not a problem. The issue is when you have to do again and again and again. Good berry means that if I want any amount of resource based exploration in the game I am going to constantly be considering workarounds or special ideas or xyz. As a dm that gets tiring really quickly.

It’s my same problem with the OG counterspell. I of course could create ways (and did create ways) for my monsters to work around it…but i got tired tbst any time I wanted a monster to be a spellcasting threat I had to use them.

In quick summary: if a dm has to spend an inordinate amount of time adjusting their encounters for a single spell…maybe the spell is the problem not the dm

Yes, 100% agree. And very well articulated.

Sometimes players taking Goodberry is them signaling that they don't want to do resource-based exploration activites.

That's a tricky one, because the character sheet is also the menu of "what the player wants to see in the game." For example, taking Counterspell can be construed as "wanting to face spellcasting enemies" or being a warlock of The Fiend can be construed as "wanting to deal with fiendish creatures/themes."

Aaaaand then you have things like the Outlander background, ranger's Natural Explorer feature, and Goodberry... where on one hand the player may be selecting these things thinking "yeah I don't even want to deal with that so I'm taking this option"... OR on the other hand the player may be thinking "I want to explore places and guide my party."

In this case, however, only that first player is getting their wish fulfilled.

The second player is SOL - unless the GM puts in some mental gymnastics effort.

 

[Vaalingrade]

"I want to explore places and guide my party' is not the same as 'I want to deal with ration logistics'.