Latest D&D Survey Says "More Feats, Please!"; Plus New Survey About DMs Guild, Monster Hunter, Inqui

WotC's Mike Mearls has reported on the latest D&D survey results. "In our last survey, we asked you which areas of D&D you thought needed expansion, and solicited feedback for the latest revision of the mystic character class and new rules for psionics." Additionally, there's a new survey up asking about DMs Guld as well as the last Unearthed Arcana (which featured the Monster Hunter, Inquisitive, and Revenant).

Find the survey results here. The most requested extra content is more feats, followed by classes, spells and races, in that order.

 

[RotGrub]

Six of one, ln(403.4287935) of the other.

In Essentials+, you could play a DPR-focused (ie 'striker') Fighter(Slayer), a slightly more tactically involved, less-DPR-focused (ie 'Defender') Fighter(Knight) or a much more tactically deep choice/resource-rich Fighter(Weapon Master) with 6 or 8 builds of, in turn, varying in-play complexity, and over 300 maneuvers.
The Knight was about as complex as the 5e BM (and had an EK option in a Dragon issue), the Slayer comparable to the Champion and the 5e Fighter is every bit as DPR-focused as the Slayer.

Fair 'nuff.

Well, at least Bounded Accuracy is soft-core numbers porn, then. ;P

To get that sense of progression, just drop challenges in front of the party that were tough in the past, and let them see how much they've grown. Just because you can tailor a challenge to the party's current abilities doesn't mean you always have to.

"Hey DM we want to feel powerful, can you drop in a few monsters so we can feel that progression?" Yeah that doesn't happen. The DM shouldn't have to avoid the encounter system.


If BA is soft core then perhaps SoD makes it hard core?

 

[Tony Vargas]

5e's design is such that "keeping pace" isn't really a going concern

It's built into proficiency, for the most part. If you have proficiency, you keep pace, if you don't, you fall behind. With offense, it's a non-issue, you rarely use an attack you're not proficient in nor force a save that doesn't add your proficiency to the DC. With skills it's a mixed bag. With saves, roughly 2/3rds of the time, you don't get the benefit of 'keeping pace.'

With attacks, if you take every opportunity to improve (but don't have the opportunity to take expertise), you might net a +3 to +6 or so bonus over the next guy who started out 'OK' and didn't try as hard. Compared to 3.x BAB or classic D&D attack matrixes that's fairly muted. OTOH, with saves, you simply aren't proficient in most of them, and can't boost all of them, you very likely end up with your worst save 10 or even 12 points behind the best possible bonus. That is comparable to good vs bad saves in 3.x, but both of those are more extreme than save matrixes in classic D&D.

FWIW.

 

[I'm A Banana]

It's built into proficiency, for the most part. If you have proficiency, you keep pace, if you don't, you fall behind.

No more so than you "fall behind" if you don't max out your AC to 24.

The game presumes you will be hit / fail saves / etc. It's fine. Proficiency in a save shows what you're strong at according to your class - something you probably "should" succeed at (though you can tank your good saves, too). Nonproficiency in a save just means you'll have to play the game of dealing with the effects of a failed save instead of ignoring them (which leads to more dynamic play in practice - bigger moments of "OH NO!", that, with 5e's nonbinary fail states, don't degenerate into "I give up!" very easily).

 

[RotGrub]

To what "playstyle" are you referring, exactly?

Not sure if there is a name for it, but it's a playstyle that is very heavy on the miniature wargaming side of things coupled with MMO concepts.

 

[backwoodsmutant]

DDO (Dungeons and Dragons Online) solved this problem by having all half elves look like Odo from Deep Space Nine.

*Hmmm, I have shamed my family - this was supposed to be a reply to some half elf bashing earlier in the thread.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

Not sure if there is a name for it, but it's a playstyle that is very heavy on the miniature wargaming side of things coupled with MMO concepts.

Thanks for clarifying. I just wasn't sure if maybe using the term differently than I'm accustomed. All good. And, yeah, I totally get how 4e is right up your alley. It scratches that same itch when I play it.

I'm a huge proponent that people should play whatever system/edition works best for their proclivities.

And there's nothing wrong with that.

 

[Magil]

No, I'm serious. The 5e fighter is not the only game element that doesn't support that playstyle. You can't just insert that playstyle back into the game without changing other areas of the system.

I disagree. You could give the fighter a spell list, call them maneuvers/"blade magic", sell it as "optional", and there. The structure is already there within the system.

 

[Tony Vargas]

"Hey DM we want to feel powerful, can you drop in a few monsters so we can feel that progression?" Yeah that doesn't happen. The DM shouldn't have to avoid the encounter system.

The encounter guidelines leave plenty of room for over- and under- level monsters.

No more so than you "fall behind" if you don't max out your AC to 24.

Even with a 24, that afore-mentioned Red Dragon is hitting you on a 7, while early in your career, monsters probably needed an 11 or so. There probably should have been a way of working proficiency into AC, at least for certain classes - those 'best at fighting,' for instance.

 

[hejtmane]

Mmm. Some feats are great... lots are overpowered. My experience is that 4 times out of 5 a player will take a feat over the +2 ability points, which to me indicates they're too powerful.

The ones that are no brainers on certain builds
Polearm Master
GWM
SharpShooter
War caster

Ones That are worth it over asi on some builds
Dual Wielder (if you are twf a must imo)
Lucky
Medium Armor Master
Sentinel
Tavern Brawler
Tough
Crossbow expert
Spell Sniper
Shield Master
Resilience


These seem like more fluff
Athlete
Charger
Defensive Duelist
Dungeon Delver
Durable

Anyways not seeing the over powered but on a few that are up there
There are a few crazy high dps build from combing two feats. Like for pure dps crossbow expert + sharpshooter + hand crossbow in the hands of a fighter archer or polearm + GWM on some builds

 

[Imaro]

My guess is that there are those who play one style of fighter who are satisfied, and others who play another kind that are not.

Exactly what type of fighter do those who are satisfied play? And what is the other kind that are not?