D&D 5E I feel like the surveys gaslit WotC about """"Backwards Compatibility""""

[Micah Sweet]

Where is this rule printed?

I'm not sure. It might have been one of those public statements some people treat like they're rules in the book.

 

[Imaro]

If they had made it 6e, they could have done those things and it would have been more acceptable IMO, since it would more clearly be a new game.

Well since you don't actually play D&D and haven't since before the revised corebooks came out and you also seem to dislike WotC as a company... I'm not sure why they would have been trying to create a game that's more acceptable for you. They are trying to create an evergreen game... a goal I find much more intriguing and interesting than continuing the constant cycle of totally new games we have to both buy and relearn every couple of years that's been the norm for D&D

 

[Scribe]

Complexity is only the enemy subjectively (ie, if it's a problem for you).

Sure. I also think that that kind of complexity (even the kind added from 5 to 5.5) isnt a benefit for the majority of 5e gamers, but that may be my bias as I've swung alllllllll the way to the other end of the design spectrum.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Well since you don't actually play D&D and haven't since before the revised corebooks came out and you also seem to dislike WotC as a company... I'm not sure why they would have been trying to create a game that's more acceptable for you. They are trying to create an evergreen game... a goal I find much more intriguing and interesting than continuing the constant cycle of totally new games we have to both buy and relearn every couple of years that's been the norm for D&D

I never said more acceptable for me. WotC 5e started moving away from me around Tasha's or so, so I jumped when a better for me version of 5e (A5e) became available. 5.5 just made that slide at a steeper angle IMO. But whether I played it or not I still think 6e as a clean break from the 5e system would have been better for WotC fans and for me, if in the latter case only for 3pp releases (I already miss 3pp products not based on 5.5).

 

[mellored]

too much bonus action things from the start.

Choices are good.
If everything was a free action, you would just do it everything every turn. Now you need to choose between lay on hands or smite, or polearm master, or..m

smite is great for paladins, it gives option to play a simple character. just use all slots for smite.

That didn't change.

But my point was that I would of split paladin to be defensive and ranger to be offensive.

i.e. paladins get Ensnaring Stike, and Rangers get Smites. And of course variety with the subclasses.

Not going to happen, but that's what I would give each one more of an identity.

and it's a mistake, not everything more complicated that getting dressed in the morning needs to be a spell.

Ok, but your haven't really given a reason why it shouldn't be a spell.

Reason it should be: because it uses spell slots, and all the other smites are spells.
Reason it shouldn't be: ???

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

Part of the reason I feel they didn't spark joy is because they came out of nowhere and with little to support them. It was as if WotC didn't want to give these ideas a full chance and jumped at the chance to can them. But even then, class groups is just one of several things that got rolled back in the name of backwards compatibility.

Did the actually say class groups (which I liked) were removed for backwards compatibility? I don’t remember that, I just recall them being unpopular

 

[Imaro]

I never said more acceptable for me. WotC 5e started moving away from me around Tasha's or so, so I jumped when a better for me version of 5e (A5e) became available. 5.5 just made that slide at a steeper angle IMO. But whether I played it or not I still think 6e as a clean break from the 5e system would have been better for WotC fans and for me, if in the latter case only for 3pp releases (I already miss 3pp products not based on 5.5).

I thought the IMO was implying for you since I'm not sure how else you'd determine it for others... especially for WotC fans since you aren't one... 5e probably has the largest user base of any edition of D&D and one of if, not the most, mindshare of any D&D edition with the mainstream public... and you think it would be best if they risked alienating a large segment or possibly throwing it all away by ending 5e and creating an untested, and for most fans anew edition that wasn't asked for... that sounds more like sabotage than anything most fans or 3pp wanted.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I thought the IMO was implying for you since I'm not sure how else you'd determine it for others... especially for WotC fans since you aren't one... 5e probably has the largest user base of any edition of D&D and one of if, not the most, mindshare of any D&D edition with the mainstream public... and you think it would be best if they risked alienating a large segment or possibly throwing it all away by ending 5e and creating an untested, and for most fans anew edition that wasn't asked for... that sounds more like sabotage than anything most fans or 3pp wanted.

It would be a risk, but I think 6e would have ended up a more focused and even more fun game for its intended audience than 5.5 is.

 

[Imaro]

It would be a risk, but I think 6e would have ended up a more focused and even more fun game for its intended audience than 5.5 is.

Eh.... I think their audience is pretty happy with getting more options for their 5e games, with more to come throughout the year...

What exactly do you think 6e would have offered the vast majority of fans that are playing D&D 5e?

 

[TiQuinn]

Is it just me or is the number of double quotes in the title growing? I could’ve sworn yesterday there were only four total.