Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ECMO3" data-source="post: 9247044" data-attributes="member: 7030563">I don't think this is true.&nbsp; I think it is true for Monk, and was true for Ranger serveral years ago before the Tasha's changes.&nbsp; But I don't think players are generally disatisfied at all with current Ranger, Barbarian and Fighter classes in 5E.As a matter of fact I think they love Fighters and Rangers.In terms of player sartisfaction I think these are two of the three classes players are most satisfied with.&nbsp; I think more players are dissatisfied with 5E Wizards, Sorcerers and Warlocks than they are with Fighters and Rangers right now.This bring up another point though, there are A LOT of players who want Wizard to be objectively more powerful than other classes.&nbsp; So if satisfaction is important should we consider that position valid?&nbsp; In another words is player satisfaction more important than balance if a majority of players want more imbalance and want stronger classes to remain stronger or even more imbalanced than they are now?If we are basing this on player satisfaction I see no evidence at all of this and you have provided none to suggest it is true.Yes WOTC said this, and the early Warlock UA (playtest 5?) was buffed and changed to a long rest mechanic.&nbsp; WOTC changed it back in playtest 7 making it much more like the current Warlock with a short rest mechanic and few buffs at all.&nbsp; Presumably they did this because people were not satisfied with the buffed Warlock and wanted a weaker version.&nbsp; Meanwhile, Wizards got a huge boost in the playtest 5 and the playtest 7 version is still significantly more powerful than the PHB Wizard.Your position is Warlock should be boosted and Wizard shouldn't, but WOTC, who are actually reading the surveys are as of now doing the exact opposite.I think your experience is not reflective of the larger community or what the playtest results so far would indicate.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ECMO3, post: 9247044, member: 7030563"] I don't think this is true. I think it is true for Monk, and was true for Ranger serveral years ago before the Tasha's changes. But I don't think players are generally disatisfied at all with current Ranger, Barbarian and Fighter classes in 5E. As a matter of fact I think they love Fighters and Rangers. In terms of player sartisfaction I think these are two of the three classes players are most satisfied with. I think more players are dissatisfied with 5E Wizards, Sorcerers and Warlocks than they are with Fighters and Rangers right now. This bring up another point though, there are A LOT of players who want Wizard to be objectively more powerful than other classes. So if satisfaction is important should we consider that position valid? In another words is player satisfaction more important than balance if a majority of players want more imbalance and want stronger classes to remain stronger or even more imbalanced than they are now? If we are basing this on player satisfaction I see no evidence at all of this and you have provided none to suggest it is true. Yes WOTC said this, and the early Warlock UA (playtest 5?) was buffed and changed to a long rest mechanic. WOTC changed it back in playtest 7 making it much more like the current Warlock with a short rest mechanic and few buffs at all. Presumably they did this because people were not satisfied with the buffed Warlock and wanted a weaker version. Meanwhile, Wizards got a huge boost in the playtest 5 and the playtest 7 version is still significantly more powerful than the PHB Wizard. Your position is Warlock should be boosted and Wizard shouldn't, but WOTC, who are actually reading the surveys are as of now doing the exact opposite. I think your experience is not reflective of the larger community or what the playtest results so far would indicate. [/QUOTE]

Verification