Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Eric V" data-source="post: 8663066" data-attributes="member: 6779717">I won't say I can understand why people don't like the change (seems all positive to me), but the more interesting question to me is the (rhetorical?) &quot;Why would WotC upset so many people by doing this?&nbsp; What's the motive?&quot;Well, I can't say for sure what the motive is...but I am sure that it's not baseless, and there's data behind it.We're talking about 5e, the most fan-servicey version of the game ever.&nbsp; Designed to be popular.&nbsp; Constant checking for feedback, and going with what players say they want, even if it means sacrificing some brilliantly creative piece of design.So...I am confident that if they're doing this, it's because the feedback they received indicates it's being asked for by a majority.It's also consistent with the philosophy of &quot;putting the power back in the hands of the DM&quot; (which I personally think is malarky, but...): the DM doesn't need the statblock to know that Vecna can use mage hand; Vecna can use mage hand because the DM said so.&nbsp; Can the high priest animate the dead to terrorize the town, even if that particular spell is missing from his statblock?&nbsp; Of course he can.&nbsp; Why does a vampire need a special ability in-text to summon wolves...can't the DM just budget them in as part of the encounter?WotC is being consistent with its marketing strategy, as well as its game philosophy.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Eric V, post: 8663066, member: 6779717"] I won't say I can understand why people don't like the change (seems all positive to me), but the more interesting question to me is the (rhetorical?) "Why would WotC upset so many people by doing this? What's the motive?" Well, I can't say for sure what the motive is...but I [I]am [/I]sure that it's not baseless, and there's data behind it. We're talking about 5e, the most fan-servicey version of the game ever. [I]Designed [/I]to be popular. Constant checking for feedback, and going with what players say they want, even if it means sacrificing some brilliantly creative piece of design. So...I am confident that if they're doing this, it's because the feedback they received indicates it's being asked for by a majority. It's also consistent with the philosophy of "putting the power back in the hands of the DM" (which I personally think is malarky, but...): the DM doesn't need the statblock to know that Vecna can use mage hand; Vecna can use mage hand because the DM said so. Can the high priest animate the dead to terrorize the town, even if that particular spell is missing from his statblock? Of course he can. Why does a vampire need a special ability in-text to summon wolves...can't the DM just budget them in as part of the encounter? WotC is being consistent with its marketing strategy, as well as its game philosophy. [/QUOTE]

Verification