Legends and Lore for 2/13

[RoboCheney]

Yeah, that was such a random collection of stuff to vote on. If that wasn't a useless poll already, the bad formatting makes sure it is.

For all that talk about professional game designers . . . I don't know how one could even entertain the notion of bringing back THAC0, racial level limits, or any other of those capricious mechanics from the olden days, even as options. Let history keep 'em.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

something really stupid to appear to have a vast following. Like, "everyone be sure to vote YES on 'Weapons Versus Armor Table'!!!"

I'm a seat of the pants anti-simulation DM and I'd love this and weapon speed to be options.

What I want back is round by round initative

 

[Astrosicebear]

Actually, the way the poll is structured, there's no way to vote "I am against Vancian magic."

Part of why it's a terribly built poll, following an article that specifically asks "what should we get rid of?"

Not setup to be asking for negative responses. Its simply asking what features you would like to see included.

Don't know why this is such a big deal. At least they are asking for feedback. The only poll so far I didn't like was the previous one with 4 different questions, because once answered, the headers disappeared, so returning to it was pointless.

 

[Dausuul]

Yeah, I don't get what people find confusing about this poll. It lists off a bunch of features of past editions and asks, "Yea or nay?" Seems utterly straightforward to me. Of course, responding to the poll is trickier, because in so many cases my response is, "The idea is good but I don't like any implementation I've yet seen."

Feats are a good example of this. In principle, feats are an excellent way to provide small, non-class-specific packages of character detail. In practice, however, they always seem to devolve into bloated lists of "+1 to this" and "+2 to that" and "+5 to the other thing when you have combat advantage on a Thursday." If that's what 5E feats are going to look like, I'd rather they just ditched them.

Similarly, while I want PCs to be able to create magic items, the pre-3E rules were too vague and the 3E and 4E rules were too reliant on cash as the main limiting factor in item creation. I'd like to see item creation done well, but not if those are my only options.

In the end, I voted only for those things I felt were definite pluses in their existing forms. But I would like to see innovation in some of the others.

 

[Ratskinner]

All of them below 10% support... I can't believe 91% want to get rid of crits. Am I reading it wrong?

I noticed that too, I'm wondering if it isn't counting all the checked-votes, not just the voters to set 100%. I mean, gender ability limits fine, but crits? Vancian and Non-Vancian magic? I assume people would still want some kind of magic in their fantsy rpg.

Also, for those who are so critical of the polls, I'm not worried. I think these recent polls are just to get some directions for the designers to poke around in before the spring playtest. i.e. "If no one is interested in bringing back weapon speed factors, then let's just skip it." On the other hand if there is some great silent mass of secretive THAC0 cultists, they might want a little module for that. Hopefully, the designers are busy banging away with data newly acquired from D&DXP, rather than being too worried about writing the best polls. I thought the polls before the announcement were somewhat better although heavily biased given the articles preceding them.

 

[Ratskinner]

Yeah, I don't get what people find confusing about this poll. It lists off a bunch of features of past editions and asks, "Yea or nay?" Seems utterly straightforward to me. Of course, responding to the poll is trickier, because in so many cases my response is, "The idea is good but I don't like any implementation I've yet seen."

Feats are a good example of this. In principle, feats are an excellent way to provide small, non-class-specific packages of character detail. In practice, however, they always seem to devolve into bloated lists of "+1 to this" and "+2 to that" and "+5 to the other thing when you have combat advantage on a Thursday." If that's what 5E feats are going to look like, I'd rather they just ditched them.

Similarly, while I want PCs to be able to create magic items, the pre-3E rules were too vague and the 3E and 4E rules were too reliant on cash as the main limiting factor in item creation. I'd like to see item creation done well, but not if those are my only options.

In the end, I voted only for those things I felt were definite pluses in their existing forms. But I would like to see innovation in some of the others.

Ditto, I kept looking for the "yes, if..." options. Although I was more liberal in voting yes than it sounds like you were.

 

[Alzrius]

...What? Really?

So in order to explain why elves don't rule the universe, you have to come up with a completely arbitrary limit on how good they can get at their careers? That... really doesn't make much sense. And what about halflings? They aren't all that long-lived compared to humans.

For a great article explaining why demi-human level limits make sense, read this article: Demi-Human Level Limits - What Were Those About?

Here's a good excerpt:

That also means that the answer to “why don’t we see high level demi-human mages” is the same basic answer as to “why don’t we see hollywood screenplays written by antelopes?”. The answers both boil down to “they aren’t very good at it”. Antelopes aren’t very good at writing screenplays and demi-humans aren’t very good at high magic. There isn’t any simple reason for that other than “that’s how they are”, but there really doesn’t need to be. The underlying reasons are presumably a complicated function of evolution, circumstances, and – in the case of the demi-humans – whatever magical forces are at play.

 

[Piratecat]

System shock, or something similar, really needs to return to the game. There is a good reason why AD&D magic users were not polymorphing themselves into powerful monsters constantly and this was it.

Age a year, make a system shock roll. It was possible to insta-kill your foes - and heck, your allies, as we found out the hard way! - by casting haste on them. Video game aside, I'm not a big fan of system shock myself.

And gender-based ability score adjustments are IMO completely unneeded. Thanks, I get enough misogyny in real life. If the female characters want a low strength, they can just allocate their points that way.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I agree system shock was a good idea (if not the best mechanic) and should see a come back.

I always felt the level limit fluff and the multi duil class fluff were at odds... Humans have a short life and cram in alot, elves have long lives and grow board with classes...

Why not human 8/9 fighter/Mage multi and elf 8 fighter duil into 9 Mage? Makes more since to me and my old 2e group

 

[ExploderWizard]

What I want back is round by round initative

Another much needed mechanic to help keep caster power under control.

In any event I hope individual turn based init. goes away. It feels like a boring and predictable batting order with the occasional ability to let you throw in a pinch hitter.