Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FitzTheRuke" data-source="post: 8973992" data-attributes="member: 59816">This is them trying to look like they're listening.Exactly. Whether you agree with any particular design direction or not, the designers at WotC understand this. They've said it. They only sound like they don't when they're specifically talking about the decisions that they're making based on feedback. People say a lot of things when they're trying to make a point. Point was more, I think, that the Druid has some design flaws AND is the least played class. Fix the design flaws. Find out if it gets played more.While something will always be least played, it makes sense to take a good hard look at whatever winds up down there and see if it can be improved. It doesn't run a lot deeper than that.It's been discussed a lot in the last few months, sure, but there's no reason to think that no one ever noticed that Wildshape has been a mess since 2014 (frankly, IMO, it's been a mess since it was introduced, but that's another story). And I like wild shape! I've played Druids! I'm not against it at all. It's pretty clunky, though.I think you might be inflating the position of people that you're arguing against. It's easy enough to do. Everything tends to seem less nuanced and more aggressive when speaking in text. The class is simply the least played AND could probably use a bit of work. I don't think that very many people were happy with what they released in the UA. It's going to be scrapped. THERE'S a measure of popularity that you can probably agree with.The only part that I disagree with here is the idea that the "problem" (probably too strong a word) is "entirely contrived" (definitely too strong a word). The druid CAN use some work. The UA missed the mark by a wide margin. Let's see what another pass will bring. We should not hold our breath, but who knows? Maybe they'll come up with something that works!</blockquote>

Verification