New D&D Survey: What Do you Want From Older Editions?

WotC has just posted this month's D&D feedback survey. This survey asks about content from older editions of D&D, including settings, classes and races. The results will help determine what appears in future Unearthed Arcana columns.

The new survey is here. The results for the last survey have not yet been compiled. However, WotC is reporting that the Waterborne Adventures article scored well, and that feedback on Dragon+ has been "quite positive".

"We also asked about the new options presented in the Waterborne Adventures installment of Unearthed Arcana. Overall, that material scored very well—on a par with material from the Player’s Handbook. Areas where players experienced trouble were confined to specific mechanics. The minotaur race’s horns created a bit of confusion, for example, and its ability score bonuses caused some unhappiness. On a positive note, people really liked the sample bonds and how they helped bring out the minotaur’s unique culture.

The mariner, the swashbuckler, and the storm sorcerer also scored very well. A few of the specific mechanics for those options needed some attention, but overall, players and DMs liked using them.

Finally, we asked a few questions about the Dragon+ app. We really appreciate the feedback as we tailor the app’s content and chart the course for future issues. The overall feedback has been quite positive, and we’re looking at making sure we continue to build on our initial success."

 

[Umbran]

So there are other ways to limit it without saying "no", you have to play a game of herb juggler, which to me destroys immersion.

Maintaining immersion is important, right?

Maintaining immersion is one of several important goals.

Maintaining *your personal* immersion probably shouldn't be the highest thing on a designer's list of priorities, since you are only one person. Your personal preferences are applicable as one very small portion of an aggregate, the details of which we do not have.

So, to you, it destroys immersion. Therefore, you shouldn't use it. That is not a solid argument for it not appearing at all - merely that if it appears, it should be in a way that is easily excluded from games. By, say, putting it in an entirely optional class or class feature.

 

[SigmaOne]

Man after reading so much about machinations that people seem to go through to "prevent abuse", I feel bad that so many groups can't just figure out how to sit down and have fun together.

 

[Sacrosanct]

HP in D&D have always been part morale. Or at least since AD&D.

Pedantic, but not true. In AD&D, it was "physical damage, luck, skill, and other magical factors." Morale was it's own rule.

 

[Lidgar]

And here I thought this thread was about the survey. Shocking to see it devolve into an arguement over play style.

Simply shocking.

 

[Klaus]

The problem with inspirational, non-magical healing is that it forces those of us who believe the orc critical that landed on the fighter caused real damage, can no longer do so, when that damage is reversed by a warlord saying "there, there".

It effectively makes combat a cartoonish joke with no real threat. When you can erase any and all physical damage with words alone, you can no longer interpret any damage as physical. And that is just stupid. Nobody imagines that PCs never get wounded in mortal combat with deadly weapons. If you can get knocked out and come this close to bleeding to death, it shouldn't be possible to just talk such a person back to their feet or even back to full health. No way. That's exactly what the 4e warlord could do, and it was incredibly immersion-breaking.

That is certainly YOUR opinion, and you're welcome to it. Other games (including mine) had warlords that were nowhere near cartoonish in their healing capabilities -- or rather, their ability to make other *ignore the pain for a while* (plenty of real-world instances for that).

As for game design, Rodney has authored some of the finest games EVER, from Star Wars Saga Edition to Lords of Waterdeep, not to mention D&D 5e. I'll take his opinions on game design anytime (in fact, I already have). And I'd certainly appreciate if you showed some respect to an accomplished, award-winning game designer who is just coming back to EN World after a hiatus.

 

[SigmaOne]

I think I'm just gonna say this:

"Let s(he) who disparages game design or designers create their own game and be judged by the masses first."

Armchair game designers bug the heck out of me, because they don't have a clue as to how much work actually goes into it, and they fail to understand the concept that not everyone will be happy but that doesn't make it a bad game.

And they love to toss about the phrase "lazy game design" as if it has any meaning... maybe occasionally the complaint is valid, when justified with precise arguments, but it almost always means "it's not my style, and I want to be really arrogant in expressing that"

 

[SigmaOne]

And here I thought this thread was about the survey. Shocking to see it devolve into an arguement over play style.

Simply shocking.

There must be something like a "5 Page Rule" that states every thread on an rpg forum with 5 pages or more has hopelessly devolved into tangential arguments. Never open a thread of 10 pages or more unless you want to wade into an ongoing battle where the weapons are opinions wielded as if they were facts.

I'm sure there are exceptions to this rule.

 

[angrylinuxgeek]

How are magic, dragons, dwarves and elves logical and believable but someone who gets his cohorts back into fighting order, which actually happens in real life, totally unbelievable and immersion breaking?

 

[Ristamar]

Since this thread seems to have turned into a survey within a survey, I'll add my two cents...

Aside from Second Wind, I'm glad they removed motivational/inspirational/martial healing from the game. I never cared for it, unless it came in the form of temporary hit points.

That being said, I won't throw a fit if they release a single class in an Unearthed Arcana article that features said mechanics, though I would be concerned that similar mechanics could continue to creep into future content.

 

[Lidgar]

There must be something like a "5 Page Rule" that states every thread on an rpg forum with 5 pages or more has hopelessly devolved into tangential arguments. Never open a thread of 10 pages or more unless you want to wade into an ongoing battle where the weapons are opinions wielded as if they were facts.

I'm sure there are exceptions to this rule.

I can think of one exception. The wonderful Forest Oracle thread.