D&D 5E Additive versus subtractive modularity

[Remathilis]

Which "we" should they be thinking? Your "we" way, or someone else "we"? "We" the player base have multiple ways "we" are thinking of the modularity, and of many of the rules as well.

Exactly.

"We" is a nameless, faceless entity that speaks in one voice and claims to speak for all. "We", at various points during the playtest, wanted:

* Four classes, with everything else a background and/or theme.
* Barbarians not tied to rage.
* Rogues without sneak attack.
* Rangers without spells
* Warlords as a separate class.
* Five alignments
* No alignments
* No skills or feats
* Pure Vancian magic.
* Spell points

The list goes on. "We" have wanted it all. Guess what? All those "we"s are just as disappointed. In the end, compromise had to happen or this thing would never get done. They decided that the greatest amount of "we" wanted easier healing. They are attempting to help with the DMG module, but in the end something had to give. I'm sorry you didn't get what you wanted (I wanted an assassin class), but the tyranny of the majority won out. So just as we did when we began "fixing" 3.0s ranger or got rid of druidic trial by combat, we tinker to made it perfect.

Why people are enraged that the PHB wasn't their personal vision of D&D is beyond me.

 

[thalmin]

Ever notice when anybody says
"I know I speak for a lot of people" they want us to think they are saying
"I speak for a majority of people" but all they are really saying is
"I speak for myself."

 

[thalmin]

At least that is my impression.

 

[TarionzCousin]

Ever notice when anybody says
"I know I speak for a lot of people" they want us to think they are saying
"I speak for a majority of people" but all they are really saying is
"I speak for myself."

I know I speak for everyone when I say you're spot on.

 

[Agamon]

I know I speak for everyone when I say you're spot on.

Hallelujah!

 

[Emerikol]

I really don't believe martial healing is a minor issue. Every criticism of 4e in every review I've ever read include a harsh assessment of healing surges. It's a hot topic in my gaming circles and none of them play D&D anymore and none of them did the survey.

I ran the only playtest in a club of a hundred anyway. And I told them about the playtest from the first one.

So if the playtests really supported martial healing despite mike mearls saying healing had divided the playtest and they never achieved a consensus, then my guess is a lot of people who bought D&D products in the past are gone forever.

That may mean wotc is right to hold onto who they do have. That also means I should seek out these other players and play there game because I'll be more comfortable there than fighting constantly with wotc just to get a back page option.

 

[thalmin]

I really don't believe martial healing is a minor issue. Every criticism of 4e in every review I've ever read include a harsh assessment of healing surges. It's a hot topic in my gaming circles and none of them play D&D anymore and none of them did the survey.

I ran the only playtest in a club of a hundred anyway. And I told them about the playtest from the first one.

So if the playtests really supported martial healing despite mike mearls saying healing had divided the playtest and they never achieved a consensus, then my guess is a lot of people who bought D&D products in the past are gone forever.

That may mean wotc is right to hold onto who they do have. That also means I should seek out these other players and play there game because I'll be more comfortable there than fighting constantly with wotc just to get a back page option.

Do you know your desired option isn't available, either in the DMG or possibly even in the PHB? I can't imagine WotC has totally ignored this decisive issue. Just because the default isn't set your way doesn't mean they don't have a switch you can flip.

 

[MechaPilot]

That may mean wotc is right to hold onto who they do have. That also means I should seek out these other players and play there game because I'll be more comfortable there than fighting constantly with wotc just to get a back page option.

As someone who supports options for everyone, I have to comment that whether martial healing is or is not an issue for a large number of players, WotC is right to hang onto who they have. Casting away a preexisting customer base is bad for business.

Also, you know that I feel that failing to include options to support slow healing and to replace second wind in the pdf was a mistake by WotC, but I have to ask you this: You have said before that you would be happy if there were options to fix or replace the things that you have an issue with; is it mandatory on your part that this option come from WotC? As someone who has been narrating HPs as luck and skill at avoidance while running AD&D 2e, I would have been quite happy to find a second wind or inspirational healing option even if it didn't come from TSR.

 

[MechaPilot]

Do you know your desired option isn't available, either in the DMG or possibly even in the PHB? I can't imagine WotC has totally ignored this decisive issue. Just because the default isn't set your way doesn't mean they don't have a switch you can flip.

It has been expressly said that a slow-healing module will be in the DMG. So, unless Mearls actually told a bald-faced lie we know that part of Emerikol's want options will be addressed. As for alternate options for second wind and survivor, we can't know until we see the DMG or until someone in the know directly comments on it.

 

[Hussar]

I really don't believe martial healing is a minor issue. Every criticism of 4e in every review I've ever read include a harsh assessment of healing surges. It's a hot topic in my gaming circles and none of them play D&D anymore and none of them did the survey.

I ran the only playtest in a club of a hundred anyway. And I told them about the playtest from the first one.

So if the playtests really supported martial healing despite mike mearls saying healing had divided the playtest and they never achieved a consensus, then my guess is a lot of people who bought D&D products in the past are gone forever.

That may mean wotc is right to hold onto who they do have. That also means I should seek out these other players and play there game because I'll be more comfortable there than fighting constantly with wotc just to get a back page option.

Really? Every review? Every criticism? You don't thing that maybe, just maybe, there might be a bit of confirmation bias there?

Because AFAIK, healing surges, while an issue, were never really a big one. It was used as an example of the problem - namely the whole "dissociated mechanics" schtick, and Heisenburg HP - but it was pretty much always as an example rather than the problem itself.

Since HD so far haven't been decried as dissociated, since it's pretty easy to link them to the narrative, and since they got rid of martial healing, pretty much all the major criticisms have disappeared. So, what's left? Healing rate (extremely easily changed) and Second Wind, which hasn't actually been all that criticised. Most people seen to have no major issues with Second Wind, barring what appears to be a pretty small subset of gamers.

I mean, even on the poll about HP, those that were fine with fighters healing outnumbered those that didn't by two to one. Seems like it's a pretty niche issue.