D&D 5E DooM!

[Kobold Stew]

I don't remember a single question about DoaM in general.

That's because they weren't any. It only became an issue (with respect to Next) after the last opportunity for feedback, when it was raised in a Q&A. If it hadn't been there, I believe it would still not be an issue.

However, unrestrained rhetoric continues to be used, on both sides, with needlessly extremist positions being adopted.

Sure, everyone has their line in the sand. As a self-identified gaming traditionalist who likes what he sees in Next, I am made uncomfortable by some people's need to associate attitudes to a single mechanic with a particular game style, or (much worse) to essentialize "playstyle" along a single vector.

 

[Tovec]

That's because they weren't any. It only became an issue (with respect to Next) after the last opportunity for feedback, when it was raised in a Q&A. If it hadn't been there, I believe it would still not be an issue.

Oh really? Only became and issue after the last chance for feedback? The final playtest packet was dated Sept 20th 2013, the last opportunity for feedback via survey would have been after that some time. I don't have an exact date, so I'm going to use the 20th of September for my purposes.

The earliest thread on this temporary sub-forum is dated June 2012 (Started by Empath Negative, Friday, 1st June, 2012 03:26 PM) Which is over a full year earlier. I'm sure I could dig up more examples, but I don't see that I have to. The point I'm making is that DOAM has been an issue since WAY before the final survey. It even existed before 5e was even hinted at people talked how they disliked it - though in different terms and talking about different mechanics/abilities.

So, I suppose that if the surveys lacked a solid question and answer for people to give feedback on DOAM then it must have been a purposeful miss on their part, since this issue has been around a while. So, all we can gather is that if there is no question there can be no answers given and if no perspective given then there can be no problem according to the survey readers. That is my problem with both the polls on their site and the survey they gave.

Heck, I'm still waiting for them to go back and look at HP, something I noted on every survey since the first one, after every packet. This issue stems from that, all the big ones do in one way or another IMHO. They haven't and probably won't, looked at HP in a satisfying enough way. It leads to sloppy design and unsatisfying answers like this one - messing around in the grey area leading to angering results. At best they might include alternate versions of HP somewhere as a module, but it'll probably be badly tested and worse in implementation (always seems to shake out that way). *Shrugs* But whatcha you gunna do.

 

[Kobold Stew]

Yeah, really.

Convenently collected by our moderators are the DoaM posts, here.

As you'll see, three of them predate your date of September 20th, and they were started on 1 June 2012, 3 June 2012, and 3 June 2012. (All others start after 19 October 2013, two days after the Q&A.)

Now, of those three:

* one saw its last activity on 7 June 2012.

* one saw no activity between 8 June 2012 and 30 October 2013 (i.e. it was necro'd after more than 16 months of inactivity).

*one saw no activity between 4 June 2012 and 3 November 2013 (it too was necro'd after more than 16 months inactivity.

so, on these boards at least, after minor discussion between 1 June and 8 June 2012 -- a week -- there was no discussion on the subject for more than 16 months of a play test until the Q&A. Not a question, not a complaint, and not a thread.

I stand by my claim: DoaM only became an issue after the last opportunity for feedback. I'll add (based on memory, but I'd be happy to be proved wrong) that no one on these boards mentioned it vis-a-vis the GWF ability before the Q&A, let alone objected to it.

 

[GMMichael]

DooM, huh?

Man. You got my hopes up. I thought this thread would be discussing how to recreate this in D&D Next:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45jgCxucL0k

And how come nobody is discussing DoaT?

Damage on a Tie: when the attacker ties the defender's AC, it results in damage. Shouldn't the attacker need to EXCEED the defender's AC?

 

[Ichneumon]

Man. You got my hopes up. I thought this thread would be discussing how to recreate this in D&D Next:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45jgCxucL0k

And how come nobody is discussing DoaT?

Damage on a Tie: when the attacker ties the defender's AC, it results in damage. Shouldn't the attacker need to EXCEED the defender's AC?

I might consider Grazing on a Tie: when the attacker ties the defender's AC, it results in scuff marks and some stinging, but no real damage.

 

[Emerikol]

I stand by my claim: DoaM only became an issue after the last opportunity for feedback. I'll add (based on memory, but I'd be happy to be proved wrong) that no one on these boards mentioned it vis-a-vis the GWF ability before the Q&A, let alone objected to it.

What is your point though? That we were happy with DoaM and suddenly became unhappy out of the blue? I admit I am a busy person and didn't go through every playtest with a fine tooth comb. I also admit that I was preoccupied with second wind for a bit too. I addressed DoaM when I became aware of it. I don't like it. I didn't change my mind. If asked to address it I would have always said I don't like it.

I'll be the first to admit that it seems we deal with the issue of the month and it runs hot for a while and then something else arises. That does not invalidate the issue though.

If your point is that only a very tiny minority of people care about it then I think you are wrong. I believe DoaM fits into a category of effects that are wholesale disliked by many people. Who knows? It's not 2% of the playerbase though. You ever ask yourself why half the playerbase went to Pathfinder? My guess is healing and dissociative mechanics (though the term DS wouldn't have been used the rejection of the feel would be there).

 

[Kobold Stew]

What is your point though?

My points were in post 11:

1. There was no feedback because it wasn't an issue when they were taking feedback.
2. Needlessly extreme positions are adopted on both sides.
3. Essentializing playstyles ("those who like X are Yth edition fanboyz") helps no one.

 

[EnglishLanguage]

\You ever ask yourself why half the playerbase went to Pathfinder? My guess is healing and dissociative mechanics (though the term DS wouldn't have been used the rejection of the feel would be there).

[citation needed]

 

[Emerikol]

My points were in post 11:

1. There was no feedback because it wasn't an issue when they were taking feedback.
2. Needlessly extreme positions are adopted on both sides.
3. Essentializing playstyles ("those who like X are Yth edition fanboyz") helps no one.

I'll answer in reverse order....

#3
I think a lot of people that played 1e through 3e went on to 4e. People who didn't go on or quickly came back from 4e are a group with similar overall interests. Obviously that is a generalization but most of the criticisms I see about 4e can be traced to one or two root causes. Healing system, DS mechanics, simulation.

#2
If you mean needlessly extreme in that we can all just houserule away issues then I don't disagree so long as the job is not too big. If you mean we needlessly reject certain mechanics then I disagree. I'd quit D&D before I'd play with DoaM. Obviously there is no way I could be forced to play with it so it is a hypothetical.

#1
I do not believe that suddenly people started disliking DoaM. People may have been distracted or busy or whatever. I also think that the surveys are very generalized and hardly account for a specific mechanic. There is no question -- do you like DoaM? If there was such a straightforward question I believe the results would match up with our polls we've been having. 1/3 hate it, 1/3 don't care, and 1/3 like it give or take a few percentage points.

I've got ten fingers. When I see the 11th insufferable mechanic appear in the game (not in a splat book but in the core game) then I'm sure that will be one too many. I hope I don't see that. It probably depends on whether the devs really understand the playerbase or not. If I do move on though I'm probably broken as far as WOTC is concerned. As long as D&D is sold by them, I'll ignore it.

 

[Emerikol]

[citation needed]

Mike Mearls stated that they lost half their playerbase in an interview. You can go find it on google.

If you mean the part where I said - "my guess" then you should realize that putting "my guess" in front of sentence implies it is a guess.