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."

 

[Tony Vargas]

I'll be honest, I don't really know; when 4E was being designed and developed, I was running the Star Wars RPG line, so I didn't have a lot of insight into who was responsible for what. Sorry.

Well, you certainly can't be held responsible for Warlord design, then, I guess. I've lived with that bit of curiosity for 7 years, I think I'll survive. Thanks for participating in the thread, though.

And they love to toss about the phrase "lazy game design" as if it has any meaning...

Could mean 'rules lite' design, or 'efficient use of design resource,' or even 'elegant design.'

 

[Obryn]

Restricting DM preoccupation with such things, like easy access to healing resources is very important, as you say.

But for consistency, let me ask, why did you (or the other designers) not put a similar daily limit on the number of Second Winds a fighter can use per day? That has caused a huge amount of discussion, with the usual solution of "let the DM throw a random encounter after the first hour" to prevent that kind of (ab)use. I don't find that fair, when I play a fighter who wants to second wind twice because I can, being told that after each hour an orc will show up to prevent me from healing without spending HD.

Second Wind, contrary to Poulstices, doesn't have a "con mod" limit per daily use, so it does do exactly what you just said is bad, it places the burden on DMs to threaten players resting more often to bring the fighter back to full, with arbitrary / punitive / coercive random encounters to make up for that lack of game rule limit.

As a DM, I find it very easy to say "your ranger has scoured the area for three hours and found enough herbs for 10 poulstices total, but you think you will have to venture much further to find any more", than to say "you can't ever rest for more than one hour at a time" to prevent Second Wind abuse. If the PCs find a safe cave to rest in, why not let the fighter heal to full without spending HD? Because of balance! Like you said. Right. So why not add a daily limit.

The maintenance requirement of the herbs definitely feels gamist and rather odd, no matter how it's justified with fluffy ribbons.

It's just simpler to add "the poulstices lose their potency after 24 hours, and any character can't benefit from more than your wis mod per day". 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? That's why halflings can't trip dragons or oozes in 5th ed, right? Many of us bought into your game because the rules were grounded in plausible explanations and made sense in the story.

Why limit bardic songs per day? Let the DM decide when the character is getting hoarse.

Why limit rages per day? Let the DM decide how angry the Barbarian is.

Why limit superiority dice per combat? Let the DM decide how many is appropriate.

 

[spinozajack]

Why limit bardic songs per day? Let the DM decide when the character is getting hoarse.

Why limit rages per day? Let the DM decide how angry the Barbarian is.

Why limit superiority dice per combat? Let the DM decide how many is appropriate.

Good point.

Why NOT limit Second Wind uses per day, given all these other things have daily limits.

 

[Patrick McGill]

Writing in Warlord and Al Qadim.

Maybe they'll release a book called Warlords of Al Qadim!

 

[spinozajack]

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

Simply shocking.

It was inevitable. Warlords were excluded from the PHB and their parts were divided between magical (bard) abilities, and non-magical ones (battlemaster), who took over those roles.

Now people want to undo that decision. Which to many, is re-hashing old battles that were already won.

This survey is asking what classes should be added to the game, presumably because they are considering what to add in the future, duh. If they add "martial healing" back to the game, I'm done with D&D for good. And probably many others as well.

 

[spinozajack]

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.

First, a warlord could literally take a PC from the brink of death back to being unbloodied, or from bloodied to full health, from across the room, by using words alone, and not using magic, to negate the narrative effect of enemies trying, and succeeding, to cause damage to them. That is not a matter of opinion, but fact. You are entitled to your own opinions but not your own facts. The fact is, warlords forced you to reinterpret past narrative events in order to rationalize their abilities. That is anti-immersion by definition. It's also ridiculous.

Rodney has plenty of good products to his credit, but that is irrelevant. You have no idea who everyone is on this website, and even if Gary Gygax were to come here and post anonymously, his words and pedigree do not automatically make him right on every topic, or even any topic. What you are saying is that you believe the logical fallacy of an argument by authority. Rodney is an authority on the topic of D&D, therefore his opinions are inherently right.

Wrong.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Can we not turn this into another warlords-meat-hit-morale-inspiration-guts-blood-damage-death a-thon? Because we've got PUHLENTY of other threads for that, my friends.

 

[Obryn]

Rodney has plenty of good products to his credit, but that is irrelevant. You have no idea who everyone is on this website, and even if Gary Gygax were to come here and post anonymously, his words and pedigree do not automatically make him right on every topic, or even any topic. What you are saying is that you believe the logical fallacy of an argument by authority. Rodney is an authority on the topic of D&D, therefore his opinions are inherently right.

Wrong.

No, but it does lend his opinions more weight than yours. I trust a doctor's medical opinion a whole lot more than some dude who read stuff on WebMD.

Game design is a field of study. A craft, if you will. He's a celebrated and respected designer with a host of big successes. You're an angry dude with regressive ideas about game design, posting on the Internet. Yes, his words have more weight.

 

[Obryn]

Can we not turn this into another warlords-meat-hit-morale-inspiration-guts-blood-damage-death a-thon? Because we've got PUHLENTY of other threads for that, my friends.

I demand the immediate re-opening of the Damage on a Miss subforum.

 

[spinozajack]

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?

The first part of your sentence has nothing to do with the latter. It is a rhetorical slight called "begging the question". You assume the game containing fantasy elements means that non-magical fantasy elements can be illogical or even impossible and get a pass.

This is forum meme that is pure nonsense.