Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
New Wild Shape
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8954550" data-attributes="member: 6801228"><p>I can easily see how this made it to live testing. </p><p></p><p>1) They were told to plan this for the Moon Druid. This obscures how bad an action wildshape is for combat, as even many of the discussions we have had on this thread have slipped easily into just assuming moon druid</p><p></p><p>2) They were told to test Wildshape, so they did not consider the non-wildshape options. This is an obvious problem, but not one that defies understanding. They were given a focus of "druids are all about wildshape" and that is what they created. It is only through us, who were not given that mandate, that this is so glaringly a problem. </p><p></p><p>3) They were told that the Druid had too much hp, and that they had to not only keep the druid simple, but reduce their effective hp from wildshape. They did both of those things. </p><p></p><p>Is any of this good execution? Nope. This is terrible, but I can see how something this terrible made it to us, because I can see where you could get blinders on if you were working towards specific goals. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I hear and agree with your frustrations, I'm just seeing a different tact. I'm seeing a lot of people saying that templates are a good idea. The idea of having two or three generic statblocks for wildshape makes a lot of sense to me. The numbers on those statblocks and the levels you get those statblocks, that needs to be changed. But the core idea makes a lot of sense. </p><p></p><p>To give a counter-theory of warlock, we all kind of agree that we want Eldritch Blast to just be a class feature instead of a cantrip. That just makes sense for Warlocks. But, if they release it and it is a class feature that has half the range, only does 1d6 + mod damage, and requires spell slots for special effects... well, we are all going to agree that that specific version sucks, but many people are still going to say "we want Eldritch Blast to be a class feature, not a cantrip" because the specific implementation of the idea doesn't have to mean the idea gets canned entirely.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Chaosmancer, post: 8954550, member: 6801228"] I can easily see how this made it to live testing. 1) They were told to plan this for the Moon Druid. This obscures how bad an action wildshape is for combat, as even many of the discussions we have had on this thread have slipped easily into just assuming moon druid 2) They were told to test Wildshape, so they did not consider the non-wildshape options. This is an obvious problem, but not one that defies understanding. They were given a focus of "druids are all about wildshape" and that is what they created. It is only through us, who were not given that mandate, that this is so glaringly a problem. 3) They were told that the Druid had too much hp, and that they had to not only keep the druid simple, but reduce their effective hp from wildshape. They did both of those things. Is any of this good execution? Nope. This is terrible, but I can see how something this terrible made it to us, because I can see where you could get blinders on if you were working towards specific goals. I hear and agree with your frustrations, I'm just seeing a different tact. I'm seeing a lot of people saying that templates are a good idea. The idea of having two or three generic statblocks for wildshape makes a lot of sense to me. The numbers on those statblocks and the levels you get those statblocks, that needs to be changed. But the core idea makes a lot of sense. To give a counter-theory of warlock, we all kind of agree that we want Eldritch Blast to just be a class feature instead of a cantrip. That just makes sense for Warlocks. But, if they release it and it is a class feature that has half the range, only does 1d6 + mod damage, and requires spell slots for special effects... well, we are all going to agree that that specific version sucks, but many people are still going to say "we want Eldritch Blast to be a class feature, not a cantrip" because the specific implementation of the idea doesn't have to mean the idea gets canned entirely. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
New Wild Shape
Top