Artificer UA to be released in February

I don't think there is a bunker strong enough to endure the fanbase exploding over this.

 

[CrimsonCarcharodon]

Let me offer the alternative viewpoint: Thinking it is okay that WotC sits on its thumbs crunchwise for year after year sounds an awful lot like mindless fanboyism.

To me, the shifts in how many fans react depending on their corporate masters is ridiculous.

During 3E what WotC did or said was the One True Way and every dissenting voice was whining. During 4E what WotC did or said was the One True Way and every dissenting voice was whining (although, thank god, this voice died down pretty quick).

And now with 5E what WotC does (or doesn't) or says is the One True Way and every dissenting voice was whining.

In reality, of course, not releasing a single new class in five years is a huge disappointment. There is nothing unreasonable about this sentiment.

Man, I feel like the boy calling out the Emperor as naked. There are too many people content to discuss which exact week the second iteration of the Artificer comes out, and not enough people questioning the overall dearth of new classes and the obvious fact that WotCs so called "strategy" for new content... is to release next to nothing at all!

Sitting on its thumbs crunchwise? So, Xanathar's Guide doesn't count? The piles of monsters in Volo's and Mordenkainen's don't count? New spells, races, and class options in Guildmaster's Guide to Ravnica don't count? WotC has put out plenty of mechanical content.

It's not a One True Way. WotC has done plenty that I'd have done differently. But slowing down the progression of books is one thing about WotC's direction of 5E that is exactly what I wanted, so I could actually keep up with the release schedule instead of being six months behind and trying to catch up, as was the case for 3.5 and 4E.

And WotC opening the DM's Guild was pure brilliance and really brings home the fact that D&D today, like D&D of the 70s, has a massive place for homebrewed content.

The difference here is expectations. You expect WotC to do what you want them to: release new classes and a ton of new mechanical widgets, like they did in 3.5 and 4E. I expect WotC to release whatever they feel like. If it's interesting, I'll buy it. If it isn't, I won't. And if I need something mechanical for a game that WotC hasn't put out yet, I'll either find a third-party that does it or I'll write it myself instead of complaining that WotC doesn't have it.

 

[Seramus]

Let me offer the alternative viewpoint: Thinking it is okay that WotC sits on its thumbs crunchwise for year after year sounds an awful lot like mindless fanboyism.

To me, the shifts in how many fans react depending on their corporate masters is ridiculous.

There is nothing wrong with having a sad about the release schedule of complete classes. It is a preference you are absolutely entitled to, and one I share to a lesser degree. But the implication that there is anything wrong with being a fanboy, or having corporate masters? That's not cool, man.

You seem very unhappy with D&D in general.
Can we recommend other game systems you might enjoy more?

 

[NaturalZero]

Why is the desire for a single, solitary new class being met with constant strawman attacks against the apocalyptic deluge of classes in the past two editions?

Forget the Emperor's New Clothes, the issue is a Three Bears scenario. Some want dangerous hot porridge, with 50 new classes, some want ice-cold porridge, with no new classes ever, but I imagine that most people want something in between. The folks looking for an official artificer are asking the the ice-cold porridge to be heated up a measly 3 degrees.

 

[TwoSix]

Why is the desire for a single, solitary new class being met with constant strawman attacks against the apocalyptic deluge of classes in the past two editions?

Forget the Emperor's New Clothes, the issue is a Three Bears scenario. Some want dangerous hot porridge, with 50 new classes, some want ice-cold porridge, with no new classes ever, but I imagine that most people want something in between. The folks looking for an official artificer are asking the the ice-cold porridge to be heated up a measly 3 degrees.

What makes this issue get contentious isn't the fact that some people (myself included) would like more crunch, and some would like less. It's the assertion that WotC has somehow committed a moral failure in not delivering more crunch.

 

[Gradine]

What makes this issue get contentious isn't the fact that some people (myself included) would like more crunch, and some would like less. It's the assertion that WotC has somehow committed a moral failure in not delivering more crunch.

Even more so, it’s the assertion that those of us who are happy with current are foolish sheeple.

 

[CapnZapp]

Again, you can see that as either a feature or a bug; there are valid arguments for both, even if I don't necessarily agree personally with all of them. But these "the emperor has no clothes" allusions really need to stop.

What really does need to stop is asking us all between only two choices: either fifty classes, one more ridiculously specific than the other. Or nothing at all.

 

[CapnZapp]

There's nothing wrong with [MENTION=12731]CapnZapp[/MENTION] or [MENTION=6781549]DQDesign[/MENTION] believing a snail's pace release schedule sucks for getting new "official" game mechanics (if that matters to you). But I also think we can't deny that their pace has not made their business suffer.

What I especially oppose is the notion that as a fan of a game, I'm only allowed to have wants and needs that align perfectly with maximizing company profits.

 

[CapnZapp]

why, because you don't like my thoughts?
I'm free to think, and above all, write here, anything I want within the forum rules.
and I think wotc has no clear publishing strategy nor decent approach to release schedule. and that hiding that behind 'four years of playtesting are needed for a basic class' is ridiculous and disrespectful of customers' intelligence.

Just to clarify, the HC Andersen allegory came from me, and I am neither DQDesign nor Gradine.

 

[CapnZapp]

The logical extreme that anyone who thinks there should be a few more classes and subclasses wants broken 3.5 back is what actually needs to go.

Thank you.

 

[CapnZapp]

And lo and behold, they have: there have been a number of Subclasses introduced, and Subclass design is the Thing for 5E, like Kits in 2E or Classes in 3.x. Actual Classes, which are expected to support 12+ Subclasses conceptually, are a long term proposition.

And look and behold, that's not what I'm asking for.

Most new subclasses are lazy rehashes of where exactly you gain Advantage.

I'm talking about new classes. This thread is about a new class.

Your post is irrelevant and likely meant only to dismiss my credibility.