D&D (2024) Do players really want balance?

[Zardnaar]

So you're saying that it's a problem if people enjoy the game they're playing? Because that's not as simple as giving players an "I win" button, at least for most players that would be boring.

It means players will vote for stuff that makes a DMs life harder.

3.0 was kinda like that, 2024 to a lesser extent cf 2014.

4E design was influenced by early 2000s version of online Twitter mob.

 

[Vaalingrade]

4E design was influenced by early 2000s version of online Twitter mob.

killed by, not influenced by.

 

[Zardnaar]

killed by, not influenced by.

Well a lot of the complaining was about fixing things few people gad actual problems with.
If they used the 4E engine to make a 3.75 (more SWSE) and use it to fix number porn I bet it woukd gave been better recieved.

If they did that fixed or removed certain spells abd feats most of the big problems of 3.5 are fixed.

My foots sore lets amputate it isn't the best fix.

4E engine could also power B/X type game with simple skill section. A hypothetical 4.5 I woukd prefer the numbers toned down in skills eg+5 trained, +5 skill focus is a bit much.

 

[tetrasodium]

It means players will vote for stuff that makes a DMs life harder.

Especially true when dm's represent 20% of the audience and it only takes 31% of the poll results to axe anything that they feel disfavors them personally by providing too much support to DM's

 

[payn]

I hate how 5e has corrupted discussion of risk & lethality in TTRPGs to the point where anything shy of

Spoiler: this

D&D 5E - Does “Whack-A-Mole” Healing really happen in games?

I’ve experienced a lot of 5e D&D over the years with players of varied play-styles, and at every level. I have never once seen players purposefully wait to heal someone until they drop to 0 hp, nor has dropping to 0 hp ever felt like a trivial matter. It makes me wonder if the whole phenomenon...

www.enworld.org

D&D 5E Does “Whack-A-Mole” Healing really happen in games?​

• Thread starterRune
• Start dateDec 26, 2020

Does “whack-a-mole” healing really happen?​

• Yes.​

  Votes: 8074.1%

• No.​

  Votes: 2825.9%

is deemed to be "high lethality" as if it instantly crosses past the meatgrinder territory of DCC's most lethal funnel sessions possible

Everytime somebody says 5E needs to be more challenging I ask them how so. The answer is always, "I cant kill the PCs!"

 

[Micah Sweet]

I hate how 5e has corrupted discussion of risk & lethality in TTRPGs to the point where anything shy of

Spoiler: this

D&D 5E - Does “Whack-A-Mole” Healing really happen in games?

I’ve experienced a lot of 5e D&D over the years with players of varied play-styles, and at every level. I have never once seen players purposefully wait to heal someone until they drop to 0 hp, nor has dropping to 0 hp ever felt like a trivial matter. It makes me wonder if the whole phenomenon...

www.enworld.org

D&D 5E Does “Whack-A-Mole” Healing really happen in games?​

• Thread starterRune
• Start dateDec 26, 2020

Does “whack-a-mole” healing really happen?​

• Yes.​

  Votes: 8074.1%

• No.​

  Votes: 2825.9%

is deemed to be "high lethality" as if it instantly crosses past the meatgrinder territory of DCC's most lethal funnel sessions possible

True. Talk about an excluded middle.

 

[Oofta]

Like I said before, adding lethality isn't actually all that challenging. Heck, remove death saves. Poof, instantly lethal game. Or reduce death saves. Use nastier baddies. Use baddies that bypass HP to kill PC's - I watched a 4th level ranger go from full to instant dead from a crit from a wraith.

I just don't get the notion that 5e can't be made higher lethality. If your game isn't featuring events that are dangerous enough in your mind, then that's on you. There are just far too many tools at hand to increase the lethality and danger in the game.

There's also just simple double tap - an attack on an unconscious character is a crit, crits cause 2 failed death saves. For fun, have the unintelligent monsters knock someone unconscious and then drag them off to be eaten.

 

[Oofta]

It means players will vote for stuff that makes a DMs life harder.

3.0 was kinda like that, 2024 to a lesser extent cf 2014.

4E design was influenced by early 2000s version of online Twitter mob.

I never said vote, I said discuss. If your group doesn't want the same kind of game you do, changing the rules of the game won't change that they just won't like those rules.

 

[Zardnaar]

Especially true when dm's represent 20% of the audience and it only takes 31% of the poll results to axe anything that they feel disfavors them personally by providing too much support to DM's

Still means you get out voted on DM vs Player stuff.

I don't think players and DMs are monolithic. They might not think of the consequences or even be aware of them.

Eg they voted for 6-8 encounters sounds reasonable. But very few people seem to actually do that.

They also voted for that before they saw 5E in its final form and hit point bloat and encounter rules.

 

[Maxperson]

Ah, yes. When he cast those spells on the Witch King of Angmar I was enthralled.

Even in a setting where the biggest spell we see Gandalf cast is "Break Bridge" the most magical thing Aragorn does is make a poultice with some weeds to keep Frodo alive 'til they can get him to Elrond. Nothing about him says:

1) Extra HP compared to Boromir, Gimli, or Legolas
2) Druid Spells
3) Giant-Hatred (I'll give you orcs, maybe goblins... but Kobolds? Gnolls?)
4) MAGIC USER SPELLS AT 9th LEVEL

And poultice as Druid Spells would suggest he was either 8th level at Hilltop, or hit 8th level there. By 10th level he'd be -great- at using the Palantir, though, since it allows for clairaudience/clarivoyance/ESP/Telepathy stuff which Aragorn apparently gets proficiency in...

And who can forget the scene where Aragorn cast Magic Missile at the darkness?

Aragorn has some magical abilities from his blood and natural healing powers through his knowledge. This was represented by those druid and magic user spells. The giant and other enemies are from him as well. That Gygax modified him a bit by adding kobolds and gnolls doesn't make the 1e ranger not Aragorn.

What you are leaving out is the nonsensical(if it isn't Aragorn) ability of 1e rangers to use esp/clairvoyant magic items. It only makes sense if you know that Aragorn has the ability as a Ranger(Dunedain) of the North to use the Palantiri(crystal balls).

And then of course we have the words of Gygax himself.

"The Ranger class was originally devised by Joe Fischer, then a regular in my D&D game group. I published his initial treatment of the class in The Strategic Review, thereafter revised it and included it in the core game rules. Of course it is apparent that Joe based the class on JRRT's work and Aragorn. Likely a forester of some sort would have been created at some point, but it would have been quite different from the Ranger as it appeared. certainly."