D&D 5E Now that "damage on a miss" is most likely out of the picture, are you happy?

[pemerton]

if you want to play Dueling Anecdotes, we can be here all night.

<snip>

just that for the default assumptions of the basic newbie-friendly game, they could probably do better.

As far as I can tell your whole argument is anecdote. Coupled with conjecture. Where is the systematic study of new RPGers that shows that they find autodamage at-will boring and off-putting?

 

[Jester David]

It's another toy in the toybox, nothing more and nothing less. Some Fighters deal small amounts of damage on a miss, and some don't; that's variation, not "less diversity."

As for the Weaponmaster from the most recent public packet ... it was pretty awful, sadly. The basic idea wasn't bad - a Fighter with a resource pool - but the implementation was wacky and the special effects were tepid.

It was the beta test of the mechanic thought. They can fiddle with the number of dice and effectiveness while the finish the class. It's the basis for creating a simple or a more complex fighter (without the complexity of the tactical rules module, which should add another layer of complexity.)

 

[Obryn]

It was the beta test of the mechanic thought. They can fiddle with the number of dice and effectiveness while the finish the class. It's the basis for creating a simple or a more complex fighter (without the complexity of the tactical rules module, which should add another layer of complexity.)

I'm hoping the final results are worthwhile. One of my favorite things about 4e is that you can pick between simple and complex Fighters, and that both are very effective.

If they replicate that achievement, that's great. But the Weaponmaster doesn't fill me with hope - because the "complex fighter" in Next has about as many (and as potent) special effects as the *simple* Fighter in 4e.