D&D 5E D&D and who it's aimed at

[Vaalingrade]

Wait, who are the bolded ones? If you say "Mermen" or "Centaurs" or "Satyrs", none of those are animal-people and you know it.

I mean they're still animal people, just not anthro.

Also, we forgot snake people and whatever furbolgs are this week.

 

[Maxperson]

Looking at the Battle Master/Knight of Solomnia thing. By taking all 4 Solomnia feats and 2 Martial Adept Feats, you end up with every single maneuver known, 8 Superiority Dice usable on any of the maneuvers and that refresh with a short rest, and 12 Superiority Dice usable on only 4 maneuvers(so make them good choices) and that refresh on long rest. You still have three ASIs for other feats or stat increases. This is at 18th level of course.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Looking at the Battle Master/Knight of Solomnia thing. By taking all 4 Solomnia feats and 2 Martial Adept Feats, you end up with every single maneuver known, 8 Superiority Dice usable on any of the maneuvers and that refresh with a short rest, and 12 Superiority Dice usable on only 4 maneuvers(so make them good choices) and that refresh on long rest. You still have three ASIs for other feats or stat increases. This is at 18th level of course.

that almost sounds like an awesome fighter

 

[Willie the Duck]

I’m not sure that it’s aimed at me. This isn’t something which I can articulate well, but it seems that 5e doesn’t leave enough imaginative space for me. I’m not speaking of weird classes or monsters or settings here, but in my ability for my creativity to be expressed with in game results. I’ve mentioned before, but I’m a chandelier swinging type of player, one who is always looking at the environment described by the DM to get my advantage, and not at my character sheet to see what skills, abilities, or feats I have that will allow me to do things. While 5e is better at “rulings, not rules”, it still pales when compared to TSR-era D&D games. I do have fun with 5e, but it’s not my preference.

Is sword and sorcery more trouble than it's worth? It's the original basis (the lion's share of it) of the game's inspiration. It's literary legacy is still strongly felt today, with franchises like the Witcher. I can't believe there's any good reason to drop it.

Out of curiosity -- what did the TSR-era include that 5e does not that you think was better able to facilitate these specific game aspects? I ask because (to my knowledge) there aren't many specific rules in TSR that do more to facilitate open inventive play than 5e (BX X51 roughly approximating the 5e advice on ability checks and improv combat options). And Swords and Sorcery -- boy, other than some shirtless barbarian art (which actually is easier to approximate in 5e, what with barbarians having an unarmored defense), I don't really know what TSR-era D&D did that facilitated this either.

 

[deganawida]

Out of curiosity -- what did the TSR-era include that 5e does not that you think was better able to facilitate these specific game aspects? I ask because (to my knowledge) there aren't many specific rules in TSR that do more to facilitate open inventive play than 5e (BX X51 roughly approximating the 5e advice on ability checks and improv combat options). And Swords and Sorcery -- boy, other than some shirtless barbarian art (which actually is easier to approximate in 5e, what with barbarians having an unarmored defense), I don't really know what TSR-era D&D did that facilitated this either.

It's what it didn't include, rather than what it did. There weren't rules for every situation in 2nd edition (before Skills & Powers and so forth). Going through OSR stuff, B/X left even more blank spaces. That blank space allowed me to try stuff, describe it well, and maybe the DM would give me a bonus for attempting it if successful. While recognizing that WotC editions also allow for this, too often the response that I've received is, "You need X feat/Y ability to do that", because the imaginative space was filled with rules/concepts that came close to what I wanted to do.

 

[Greg Benage]

It's what it didn't include, rather than what it did.

I like that aspect of Classic D&D, despite a spellcasting system that completely violated the philosophy, but I don't see what any of it has to do with Sword & Sorcery.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Big tent is big tent. You can't just include the most popular options if you want to be inclusive.

So, popular radio stations that don't play big band music are being uninclusive?!

But you can exclude unpopular options if they're more trouble than they're worth. Even big tents have bouncers/security.

Conan isn't left out for being "trouble". Have you played The Witcher computer games? They have far more bonking, nudity and general sexism than Conan ever had.

Conan is left out for a much simpler reason. People aren't interested in it. It's out of fashion.

 

[Scribe]

So, popular radio stations that don't play big band music are being uninclusive?!

As long as the station doesnt claim to be for 'everyone' and its fan's attack anyone that wants something other than pop once in awhile? Nah.

If they claim to be for everyone, and the fans proudly declare that its for everyone and inclusive of all tastes, but you never hear punk rock? Yeah, thats misleading.

 

[Minigiant]

Quite frankly, which morally grey murderhobos pushing for vengeance against personal enemies still being a huge meme in 5e, I just don't see how 5e doesn't promote Sword and Sorcery.


I think like a lot of D&D, too much of many genres are seen "too completely" in one or two sources by many fans. There is more to S&S than Conan.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

As long as the station doesnt claim to be for 'everyone' and its fan's attack anyone that wants something other than pop once in awhile? Nah.

If they claim to be for everyone, and the fans proudly declare that its for everyone and inclusive of all tastes, but you never hear punk rock? Yeah, thats misleading.

I'm pretty sure WotC do not claim to be "for everyone". They aren't for people who want torture-porn for example.

WotC are a business, so they put in what is popular.

If what you like isn't popular, then there is no reason anyone should make it for you. That's capitalism.