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."

 

[spinozajack]

It's such a fatal and deadly wound that you can probably get over it in an hour, or overnight at most. Terrifying! [emoji38]

So D&D combat is a bunch of guys with makeup on whacking each other with nerf baseball bats and pillows, right?

That's adorable.

 

[Obryn]

I have no problem with the protection fighting style, or attacks of opportunity when your foe runs away. What I do have a problem with, is an enemy that is mindless like a zombie thinking tactically because of some abstract game rules due to him having been marked by a player.

Have you ever seen a defender at work? That's.... Not even remotely how marking plays out. The DM is still making all the tactical decisions; the defender is there to capitalize on any opportunities.

So D&D combat is a bunch of guys with makeup on whacking each other with nerf baseball bats and pillows, right?

That's adorable.

I'm just reading the rules and letting them tell me what's happening. [emoji38] In D&D combat, there's no such thing as severe injury, so it looks like it'd only an actual deadly wound if you, you know, die. But seriously, a mod asked that the hp debate not take over this thread, so I'll leave it at that. Feel free to have the last word!

I'd leave out the misogyny and/or transphobia, though. It was a bit uncalled for.

 

[GobiWon]

In 5e Warlords would use the hit die mechanic. They would allow you to expend hit die to heal just like a short rest, but couldn't give you hit points like a cleric.

 

[Minigiant]

Here's another one.

Did anyone write in the craziness that is the Factotum?

 

[Obryn]

Here's another one.

Did anyone write in the craziness that is the Factotum?

Oh yeah. That one was really wacky.

The thing about all these oddball concept classes is, though, they lend the game some real character. Soulknives, Avengers, Runepriests, Dragon Shamans, Seekers, Duskblades, bladesingers... Those really showcase an editions's strengths and add a lot to the world, imo. Since they're designed for their game, there's a lot more freedom to explore a narrow and interesting concept. Inevitably, those are some of my favorites.

I'm hopeful that 5e will have something neat and novel, too.

 

[Eric V]

The official definition of hit points in 5th edition game is that below half full, it's definitely serious wounds and when you reach 0, you're knocked out, bleeding on the ground, about to die from a fatal injury.

I would advise you to actually read the rules before lecturing others, guy.

Even in 4th edition, being below 50% was explicitly called "bloodied", and you could tell when a monster or another PC was in that state at a glance. That's not at all abstract, that's very clear and straightforward. Except, then comes along the warlord, and his soothing words make your wounds (you know, those holes through which the blood came out from), close up and there, you're all better. Without magic. Without bandages. Without even touching the player. And the player might not even be able to hear the warlord using his inspirational talk! You could be unconscious, at death's door, and still be inspired to stand up to fight by mere words alone.

Which is total BS, obviously.

I did the read the rules, "guy." And I didn't see this part: "below half full, it's definitely serious wounds and when you reach 0, you're knocked out, bleeding on the ground, about to die from a fatal injury." Could you point me to the page number for that?

I did find this: "When you drop below half your hit point maximum, you show signs of wear, such as cuts and bruises." Cuts and bruises, I should point out, that are really of such little importance that 8 hours of rest make them a non-issue as Obryn points out.

You read the part about below half...what about above it? Does your imagination allow for, in the game, inspiration-based restoration of hp when the target is above half its hp?

I am going to go ahead and guess "no."

Point is, in 5e, Hit points "represent a combination of physical and mental durability, the will to live, and luck." Warlord-type healing makes perfect sense under that definition, even if it isn't in everyone's imagination.

 

[Halloween_Jack]

Couldn't care less about what happens during a soccer game. If I'm expected to see D&D combat versus 8 headed hydras, swordsmen and archers and oozes as similar to the world cup, the game has already failed in its purpose, which is to engage the player.

Marking your man is a key feature of rugby, too. Rugby is a big fight that happens to involve a football. And where do you think football players got the idea of marking your man? It's a nonlethal melee.

When I mark my man, he either has to engage me, or turn toward my teammate and leave himself open to a beating. I can do this with a human, a dog, or a zombie, it doesn't matter.

Yet again you reveal that your precious "immersion" and "associated mechanics" are ridiculous. You think you understand how a magic lightning bolt works and you're at peace with it, but you can't grasp rules tracking how real people in the real world actually behave in a real struggle.

 

[Umbran]

What we're seeing are people who are asking them to revisit those mistakes, and make them again.

What I see are people - or at least person - who seems driven to revisit the mistake of fighting with fellow gamers over it, all over again.

Enough with the edition warring. We get it - you don't like the mechanics. You have repeated this, and most of your points, several times over, and are adding nothing new or constructive to the conversation. You are now simply aggressively butting heads.

If you are not interested in working *with* people to discuss solutions other than "zero tolerance", it is time for you to consider your work here complete, because the continued browbeating is uncivil.

That goes for everyone else - no more lining up to shout at each other, folks. Keep it civil and constructive, or go find something else to do with your weekend.

 

[Fralex]

Not really. They were introduced as 'Batman with a holy symbol.' In 4e, they were dexterous, stealthy, Wis-based toons who wielded big weapons in the name of their god. You are right, that OoV paladins cover some of the concept, but people who played them in 4e couldn't really convert them over well.

That said, it probably would just require some ability exchanges, as described in the DMG. I would want them to be WIS based as opposed to CHA-based, however.

Oh, maybe something like what they did to make a spell-less ranger would work? I wonder if the battlemaster could also be warlordified in this way. As I understand it, the main problem was just that there wasn't enough focus on combat maneuvers, and running out of shouting felt weird. Maybe if you could make a couple maneuvers at-will abilities that don't add superiority dice to their attacks and things. Commander's Strike, for instance, doesn't sound too strong if the attack doesn't do extra damage.

 

[grizzo]

I want bugbears to back the way there were meant to be . Bring back the pumpkin heads.