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."

 

[Yaarel]

And the RAW are putty in the DM's hands.

Yes, maybe precisely.

In 5e, the fluff is Rules As Written. It is material that the DM can shape, but the DM cannot make it go away.

The only way too remove baked in fluff, is too literally rewrite the rules, and use the new rules instead of the official rules. Often this requires more effort than it is worth.

Fluff is sometimes insurmountably problematic when the fluff is less appealing.

I agree with the idea ‘restoration’ of hit points needs to include a variety of flavors. Physical ‘healing’ is one of several ways to restore hit points.

At the same time, half-max hit points is a yellow line for physical damage, and zero hit points is a red line for physical damage.

 

[SkidAce]

I think Captain works really well. It was a general term long before it was an official military ranking.

See Tolkien's use of it, calling Aragorn a great captain of men. It simply means a leader.

From Middle english, Capitain if I recall correctly.

Let's call the warlord a "Leader"!

 

[TarionzCousin]

Heh. If not for ENWord, I would never know what is going on at WotC.[/QUOTE [MENTION=1]Morrus[/MENTION], there's your irregular article title: EN Word, or The EN Word, by Morrus.

--something along those lines.

 

[Hussar]

I suppose if people are really opposed to warlords standing up people who have dropped below 0 HP, attaching the rider, "the target can see and hear you" would probably work.

And then add in a line about how a warlord's powers can always work on an adjacent ally. IOW, he's not shouting you awake from across the room, but actually taking the time to patch you up, which lets you roll whatever HD worth of healing his healing powers can do. Which does keep it nicely in line with a cleric who generally can't heal at range at all. Warlords would be able to heal at range any conscious ally, or adjacent to any fallen ally.

Would that not be a workable compromise?

Then maybe the warlord could spend his own HD as well for group healing during short rests. Just spitballing ideas. In combat, you have stuff like a sort of "second wind" mechanic that lets the warlord grant an ally the ability to spend a HD in combat, and then out of combat, the warlord could give a bit more ooomph to short rest healing, at the cost of his own HD pool.

 

[Yaarel]

I suppose if people are really opposed to warlords standing up people who have dropped below 0 HP, attaching the rider, "the target can see and hear you" would probably work.

And then add in a line about how a warlord's powers can always work on an adjacent ally. IOW, he's not shouting you awake from across the room, but actually taking the time to patch you up, which lets you roll whatever HD worth of healing his healing powers can do. Which does keep it nicely in line with a cleric who generally can't heal at range at all. Warlords would be able to heal at range any conscious ally, or adjacent to any fallen ally.

Would that not be a workable compromise?

Then maybe the warlord could spend his own HD as well for group healing during short rests. Just spitballing ideas. In combat, you have stuff like a sort of "second wind" mechanic that lets the warlord grant an ally the ability to spend a HD in combat, and then out of combat, the warlord could give a bit more ooomph to short rest healing, at the cost of his own HD pool.

That might work as a compromise. As long as zero hit points means real physical injuries that normally require hospitalization in an intensive care unit. Dying cannot be handwaived away.

If the Warlord must resort to medically treating fallen allies who reached zero hp, that would help maintain narrative consistency.

In this case the combat medic is stitching up a grievous wound before it becomes irreversible. There will be scars.

Moreover, the ‘see [or] hear’ requirement seems to cover most of the difficult situations, including both unconscious and dying.

If the Warlord has one set of features to inspire hit points in conscious allies, but a different set of features to medically treat fallen allies - it would help alot to maintain narrative consistency.



Meanwhile, where the Warlord is especially good at restoring hit points is as follows:

The 5e PH defines ‘hit points’ as follows.

"
Hit points represent a combination of physical and mental durability, the will to live, and luck.

"

Hit points include four different factors: bodily wholeness, mental alertness, mental will to live, and magical luck.

Thus there are four different ways to restore hit points: physical healing (by magic or mundane recuperation), assisting combat awareness, inspiring confidence, and bestowing the protection of destiny.

The Warlord can convincingly restore hit points by means of combat awareness and inspiration.

 

[Yaarel]

Because hit points include the ‘will’ to live, it seems reasonable for some options to substitute Wisdom for Constitution when determining max hit points while leveling.

 

[Leif]

Because hit points include the ‘will’ to live, it seems reasonable for some options to substitute Wisdom for Constitution when determining max hit points while leveling.

I can see that. Dwarves are too tough to die, and clerics are too stubborn to die.

 

[Leif]

Going back to a much earlier discussion in this thread, I see the 5E books as renewing the generic DM-created setting. Those DMs who want elements like certain setting-specific varieties of classes are certainly welcome to formulate them. And it really wouldn't be all that difficult to add a few bonuses to attacks and saves, along with corresponding penalties for the inevitable weaknesses.

I really don't miss the ready-to-play settings.

 

[Hussar]

That might work as a compromise. As long as zero hit points means real physical injuries that normally require hospitalization in an intensive care unit. Dying cannot be handwaived away.

I'd point out that this isn't true in 5e at all. No matter how grievous the wound, you can fully recover in a single long rest. You're adding things to 5e that aren't in the books.

 

[Yaarel]

I'd point out that this isn't true in 5e at all. No matter how grievous the wound, you can fully recover in a single long rest. You're adding things to 5e that aren't in the books.

I agree, somethings that relate to nonmagical healing are really more a matter of how the setting decides to define hit points.

That said, the default descriptions of hit points in 5e are pretty good.

The first half of hit points are physically negligible. Second half have real impact and leave marks, but are only temporary in terms of damage. A person at full hit points might still have a black eye for a week or so.

Zero is serious business. Zero means dying.

Even so, if the Healer feat can nonmagically ‘mend wounds quickly and get allies back into a fight’, then so can the Warlord class. Regarding the Healer feat, ‘when you use a healers kit to stabilize a dying creature, that creature also regains 1 hit point.’ As a class feature, the Warlord should be able to be an even better ‘physician’ than the feat can be, similar to how a Wizard is a better caster than the Magic Initiate feat can be.

Nevertheless, treating ‘inspiring’ hit points differently from ‘mending’ hit points, means alot.