D&D 5E How many fans want a 5E Warlord?

[Imaro]

As I, and El Mahdi, have said elsewhere: you are assuming that the poll is about determining whether MORE of the community wants it than doesn't. It's not, and he was pretty clear about that in the OP. This is not a survey. It's a petition. It just happens to be in poll form because forums don't have a "petition" format that can collect together all the "signatures" in a convenient numerical fashion. Or, at least, no forum I've been on can do that.

What signatures? The poll wasn't even designed to show the names of those who voted...

Edit: This is what I meant when I said this poll is pretty much useless... you can derive no real data from it... it doesn't even serve the purpose it was created for.

 

[MechaPilot]

I think you're also missing my point or delving deeper than my statement goes... do you ever take hit point damage in any of these games and the fiction not show a physical hit? I can't think of any... so hit point loss equates to taking physical damage... the kind of wounds you seem to be talking about here are different from the point I am making... now you're trying to quantify levels or verisimilitude from the physical damage in the games. This is going to vary wildly depending on the particular game and really isn't center to my broader point about physical damage. My Point was simply that hit point loss is equated to physical damage in most gamer's minds.

I also disagree with your contention that most view hit points as a game construct as just hit points since most use "life" interchangeably with (and arguably more than) the term hit points... so there is definitely a common viewpoint around what they represent.

A lot of video games show HP loss as taking a physical hit. However, they also often show food giving you back your "life." The most rational evaluation is that video games simply eschew the internal consistency that table-top RPGs strive for, and that the audience for those games usually doesn't mind the lack of consistency.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

A lot of video games show HP loss as taking a physical hit. However, they also often show food giving you back your "life." The most rational evaluation is that video games simply eschew the internal consistency that table-top RPGs strive for, and that the audience for those games usually doesn't mind the lack of consistency.

Thank you. This is exactly what I was trying to say. Skyrim lets you eat a dozen goat cheese wheels to go from "barely clinging to life" to "full health." Or beef stew, or whatever--and almost all of these are explicitly non-magical, as you make them by cooking rather than through alchemy (and most, though not all, of the ingredients cannot be used in alchemy). The vast majority of players don't have any problem accepting that eating a very large meal in a fraction of a second can un-do all of the physical hits and blood loss of being attacked--as fast as, if not faster than, many forms of magical healing. If they valued specifically viewing HP as a measurement of (un)wounded-ness, allowing food to make injuries heal instantly doesn't make sense. Thus, it is more likely that they really don't think of HP as anything but HP, regardless of how they were lost or how they were regained.

 

[BryonD]

wait, video-gamey is a positive feature now?

 

[MechaPilot]

wait, video-gamey is a positive feature now?

I've loved video games since I was a little girl, so I'd say video gamey isn't a negative term unless you're specifically making comparisons to bad games (such as E.T. for Atari, or Dr. Jekyl & Mr. Hyde).

 

[steeldragons]

"Because <video game>..." is neither a justified basis nor useful defense for a design decision in the TTRPG.*

*SD's universal post disclaimer: In case it's not obvious and/or for the thick of skull or thin of skin, as with all posts on the interwebs, all of the above should be read/taken as "IMNSHO" and is not intended as insult or attack to anyone involved with this thread.

 

[tuxgeo]

Did anyone else notice that the poll percentages don't add up to 100%?

I see 62.40% and 76.80% as the results right now -- which add up to 139.20% -- which means this poll has other problems, too.

 

[Sacrosanct]

A lot of video games show HP loss as taking a physical hit. However, they also often show food giving you back your "life." The most rational evaluation is that video games simply eschew the internal consistency that table-top RPGs strive for, and that the audience for those games usually doesn't mind the lack of consistency.

If that's the case, it's not a new thing. Video games have been around as long as D&D. So I don't think it's a generational thing where new gamers equate hp with physical damage only because that's how it's handled in video games. If that were the case, we would have seen it just as frequent in the early 80s as we do now.

Warrior needs food!

 

[Staccat0]

The HP argument and video game comparisons are weird. D&D 5e defines HP as being more than just physical wounds. There isn't really a reason to speculate. Hit Die are thing in this edition - so there is room for martial healing.

Whether narrow or not, it's a legitimate desire. One that can only be fixed with an Official version.

I think this is arguable, but I won't die on that hill. I'll just say that doing something as specific as D&D Adventurer's League really requires someone adjust their expectations in the first place. I dunno what D&D's making the most money off of, but something tells me that the DDA peeps who refuse to play until they get an official Warlord aren't gonna make them rich.

Everyone else doesn't need an official version to have fun and play D&D. I would be happy if they had one, but until then they should be able to get by the way people have gotten by for decades...

My Magic 8-Ball said: "Better not tell you now."

Maybe. I'm happy for people to have a Warlord.
In my campaign I had a player who wanted a Warforged. So I let him. I let another player play a weird made up race that is basically a reskinned tifling. Also have a Lizardman who is a reskinned Dragonborn.
I don't wanna say no to anyone.
I just don't understand people pouting that they might have to do a little leg work to have EXACTLY what they want.

Do people want ME to design a Warlord for them to use? Will that make everyone happy? I feel like anyone with a legitimate complaint here really just has a grumpy DM.

 

[Sacrosanct]

What signatures? The poll wasn't even designed to show the names of those who voted...

Edit: This is what I meant when I said this poll is pretty much useless... you can derive no real data from it... it doesn't even serve the purpose it was created for.

The petition explanation really makes me do a double take.

"Hey Mike! We've sold hundreds of thousands of PHBs to hundreds of thousands of gamers, but we got this petition from 75 people saying they want a Warlord."


I.e., if it's meant to be a petition, then it's an even worse tool than if you had included an option for "don't want', because at least then you'd get a ratio and could glean some data from it. A petition with 75 people wanting something is an awfully small petition. That's the kind of question that needs to go to all gamers to have any value behind it.