D&D 5E 5th Edition and the "true exotic" races ...

[Zardnaar]

Are you including all of the spells the classes have access to in BECMI? Make an accurate comparison Zardnaar; include the descriptions of the spells and abilities the classes had access to in the page count and watch it balloon.

The spells are not tied to the classes as such though. Well maybe in BECMI. But a new class using spells is tied to the same mechanics though so a new spell caster in say 3.5 like the Beguiler uses the same spells in the PHB as the other spell casters. A new martial class in AD&D for example Barbarian fits on a few pages 2-3. The spells are independent of the classes and have been since 2E at least where you could make hundred of classes using the PHB spells.

That is what 4E needed IMHO was unified powers lists perhaps tied to power sources with the differences between a striker or whatever in the classes.

 

[MechaPilot]

THe spells are not tied to the classes as such though. Well maybe in BECMI. But a new class using spells is tied to the same mechanics though so a new spellcaster in say 3.5 like the Beguiler uses the same spells in the PHB as the other spell casters. A new martial class in AD&D for example Barbarian fits on a few pages 2-3. The spells are independent of the classes and have been since 2E at least.

If you are counting the pages for the 4e wizard's spells while not counting the pages for the spells of wizards of other editions, that is dishonest math.

 

[Zardnaar]

If you are counting the pages for the 4e wizard's spells while not counting the pages for the spells of wizards of other editions, that is dishonest math.

Do I get to count the per page content by adding the new classes that used those spells then? 2E had over 100 speciality priest from Greyhawk and FR alone. That would bring the page count down to about 2-3 pages per class. Check out the tempest PrC in Sword and fist versus the Tempest in Martial power. One is a lot more elegant than the other.

 

[MechaPilot]

Do I get to count the per page content by adding the new classes that used those spells then? 2E had over 100 speciality priest from Greyhawk and FR alone. That would bring the page count down to about 2-3 pages per class. Check out the tempest PrC in Sword and fist versus the Tempest in Martial power. One is a lot more elegant than the other.

Look, I'm not arguing the merits of a single list of abilities that separate classes can choose from versus describing each available ability in each class it's available in. That's a wholly separate discussion.

However, if you are going to count the pages of spells for the 4e wizard as part of that class, then you had best do the same for wizards of other editions when comparing page counts per class. To do otherwise is to attempt an intellectual sleight of hand that is dishonest on its face.

 

[Ilbranteloth]

I just feel that I should point out that running surveys that way is great if the only people you plan to sell D&D to are the people who already play it. That's not a policy that bodes well for growing one's customer base though, as eventually the existing base will expire over time, and the expired part of the base will need to be replaced for the game to continue to be profitable. If you only find out what the existing players think, that won't help you replace an expiring customer base.

But that was the point. A truism in retail is that you can make more money selling to customers that are already in your store.

It's much harder to get a new customer than to sell something to an existing customer who has already demonstrated they like what you have to sell. As it became obvious that 4e wasn't what a significant part of their (former) customer base wanted to purchase it behooved them to figure out how they could get them back. But digging deeper it was also evident that there were still a lot of people playing OD&D - 3.5e as well. They could tell because they started re-releasing books in both physical and digital format. I'm sure they noticed how many downloads they had when they first started posting earlier products as pdf's for free.

So, job #1 - how do we get people who already like D&D, at least one edition, to buy the new one. You make it specifically for them. While this probably seemed like a monumental task initially, my suspicion is that they quickly realized through the surveys that there was more common ground than differences.

Job #2 - new customers? Well this is one of those things that the best way to get new customers by far is for them to join an existing campaign. The better you do at job #1, the better you do at job #2. You don't want your existing customers playing 2e and telling them if they want to play too, go to eBay. That doesn't put money into WotC pockets, resales aren't new money.

So the priority should have been, and appears to have been, make the existing players happy with the new edition. Find out from them what they expect D&D to be and make that.

Ilbranteloth

 

[Ilbranteloth]

All these are amazing and interesting ideas which will probably never be utilized as long as the Dragonborn are taboo'ed by the very company which created them. How will they (the Dragonborn) create a legacy, a civilization, some fluff which will make players interested enough to invest in them with something other than the 'Hey! I wanna play a guy which looks like a dragon!!' selling point they had in 4th edition? That's my main problem! If they are offered as a playable race, they (WotC) need to work on them, make them interesting enough to gain fans (as in, players who are willing to read/write novels about them and buy fluff books concerning their legacy).

Not all DMs are experienced storytellers. Not all DMs pull out stories out of their heads without help or assistance. Adventures and books having Dragonborn (and other exotic) characters *help* inexperienced DMs with role-playing tips on how to make their own Dragonborn later on. Hoard of the Dragon Queen gave me plenty of ideas of how to utilize Bullywugs and Lizardmen. I'd love to have similar insight to the Dragonborn.



Or maybe the people's problem with 4th wasn't so much the fluff (or the homogony of the races) as it was the gameplay. I'm pretty sure the reason 4th Edition failed wasn't the fact that you could see a Dragonborn reference every six pages (or pictures) in the book.

Well, like I said, I don't think they are taboo. But I also don't think they should just be dumped into the existing campaign settings. Nearly every supplement in 3/3.5e had new playable races. I'm not sure they really expected them all to last very long, and most got no support whatsoever. In addition, they weren't really releasing new settings at that point. So there really isn't a place for them to go.

That line in 4e always makes me laugh. Play this race if: You want to look like a dragon.

I do think you're right, that there really won't be much support for them. They were essentially a throwaway race that became popular. The Dungeon Master's Guild and OGL are probably the best things that could happen to them. Somebody else can pick up and run with them.

Ilbranteloth

 

[Ilbranteloth]

I honestly believe that, had they left out the section on uncommon races and grouped all of the races together in alphabetical order, that absolutely nothing would have changed with 5e's success.

A thousand times this.

I disagree. Again, the design of the whole thing was based on years of surveys and playtesting. The layout is based on that. There was probably a large group that said they didn't want dragonborn at all. A smaller group probably said they wouldn't play it at all if they weren't. So, they are, as an uncommon, optional race.

4e made it very clear that doing what they thought was best didn't work. They were very particular about listening to the existing players this time. In the feedback that was given along the way they were also very open about reporting what people liked and didn't like, what they were changing and why.

Ilbranteloth

 

[Ilbranteloth]

I isolated that part because it's very important to remember that people do not see the identity of D&D the same way.

Some people think it's not D&D without some kind of Vancian casting. I hate Vancian casting and replace it with spell points every chance I get because that feels to me more like the way magic should work. The people who have invested part of their personal opinion of what D&D is into Vancian casting might say that I was no longer playing D&D at that point, while I would disagree.

Who is right?

Both of us would be, because each of us holds the identity of D&D to different standards.

Also, the very game itself encourages us to make our own worlds and alter the rules as we see fit for the sake of fun. It does this in 5e and has done this in at least the two editions prior to 5e; I actually feel pretty safe in saying the game has done that in every edition, but I'm only going back to 3e because I no longer have me pre-3e D&D books for reference. If the game itself tells us this is your world, make of it what you will, what grounds does anyone have for criticizing the "D&D-ness" of another's game world?

Now one could certainly say "that's not very FR" (or whatever setting they want to choose to compare it to) because each of those settings are their own defined places that have been pretty well fleshed out over the years, but who cares? Unless you're actually trying to run a game that's very true to the history and lore of FR (or insert setting here), that comparison is utterly meaningless.

Well, both. But we're not talking about what D&D can be, but what the publishers of D&D consider to be the core experience. They tried the non-Vancian magic in 4e (and even made an announcement about it beforehand). Now the lack of Vancian magic wasn't what was "wrong" with 4e, but it's one of the many things that made it feel like not-D&D. And one of the decisions they made that didn't go over as well as they thought.

WotC is very clear that you can (and should) do whatever you want with the game. On the other hand, they also have the right to define what the basic core concepts are for the game. Part of that has been to define the Forgotten Realms as the core setting. Which brings with it the "that's not very FR" part of the discussion. The mix of races are presented in a manner more suited to the pre-4e Realms. As is the rest of the Realms. Since the dragonborn were dumped into the Realms, they are still there. They could have made them all disappear along with returned Abeir, but that would have abandoned all of the people that were playing dragonborn in the Realms.

In regards to what they presented in the PHB, I think they did a great job.

Ilbranteloth

 

[MechaPilot]

Well, both. But we're not talking about what D&D can be, but what the publishers of D&D consider to be the core experience. They tried the non-Vancian magic in 4e (and even made an announcement about it beforehand). Now the lack of Vancian magic wasn't what was "wrong" with 4e, but it's one of the many things that made it feel like not-D&D. And one of the decisions they made that didn't go over as well as they thought.

Now hold on there. I'm not saying they should abandon vancian magic. I mean, if it were my choice, then yes, I would say that (but not really. Since I'm the "options for everyone" girl I would have presented at least two models for people to use: vancian and most likely spell points would be the other one). But all I ever wanted was some kind of alternative presented for people that don't like vancian casting at all. We actually got that in 5e. So, yay for progress. And it didn't even make anyone rage quit the hobby (so far as I know).

WotC is very clear that you can (and should) do whatever you want with the game. On the other hand, they also have the right to define what the basic core concepts are for the game. Part of that has been to define the Forgotten Realms as the core setting. Which brings with it the "that's not very FR" part of the discussion. The mix of races are presented in a manner more suited to the pre-4e Realms. As is the rest of the Realms. Since the dragonborn were dumped into the Realms, they are still there. They could have made them all disappear along with returned Abeir, but that would have abandoned all of the people that were playing dragonborn in the Realms.

In regards to what they presented in the PHB, I think they did a great job.


Ilbranteloth

Yeah, no offense intended to anyone but the default setting concept is just awful (and I'm not just saying that because I don't like FR). D&D has such a wealth of settings, pretending that any one of them is "more D&D" than the others does those settings a disservice and promotes an unnecessary divide among the fanbase.

 

[Zardnaar]

Now hold on there. I'm not saying they should abandon vancian magic. I mean, if it were my choice, then yes, I would say that (but not really. Since I'm the "options for everyone" girl I would have presented at least two models for people to use: vancian and most likely spell points would be the other one). But all I ever wanted was some kind of alternative presented for people that don't like vancian casting at all. We actually got that in 5e. So, yay for progress. And it didn't even make anyone rage quit the hobby (so far as I know).



Yeah, no offense intended to anyone but the default setting concept is just awful (and I'm not just saying that because I don't like FR). D&D has such a wealth of settings, pretending that any one of them is "more D&D" than the others does those settings a disservice and promotes an unnecessary divide among the fanbase.

That was part of the problem of 4E. Vancian to me is a core part of the D&D experience. I do not find it any more silly than other forms of magic systems I have tried in other RPGs all of which have their own problems or are less powerful than D&D magic in the 1st place.

I do not even mind AEDU or variants of it like the 5E champion. I just did not like AEDU being on every class (martials with dailies wtf huh?) and the loss of ye olde vanacian casting. I don't mind tweaking vancian (Warlocks), spellpoints (2E Spells and Magic), and things like adding cantrips or getting some spells back on a short rest (wizards and land druids).