log in or register to remove this ad

 

D&D 5E People didn't like the Psionic Talent Die


log in or register to remove this ad

vincegetorix

Jewel of the North
I'd rather flip that. TO me, the point is to throw objects at my enemies, not to push them around. This was exactly my issue with the psychic warrior, and the claim that it was "like darth vader". In the OT, Vader doesn't particularly throw people around, but he does throw objects at Luke. To me, a core part of the idea of a warrior with psychic powers is directly using those powers as a weapon. To hit people.
I udpated the beta version. I'll be working on a better ''throw stuff around'' at lower level.
 



It is new adventures that keep the game fresh, IMO.

Spoilers for Descent into Avernus ahead:

When the climax of the new adventure is handling back a sword and passing a Charisma (Persuasion) DC 25 check, after spending 10 levels walking around uninspired dungeons, facing uninspired encounters, and getting uninspired treasure, I think they are not helping to keep the game fresh either. There's only so much an interesting plot can do.
 


Undrave

Hero
Some people play the same character for five years straight. Some others don't play often enough to run through even that number of types of characters since 5e began, much less since they picked up 5e themselves. Monopoly didn't come out with new versions for many decades and remained highly popular.

I think your analysis might be correct but your time scale off. For the few going at the speed you're implying, there is third party content. But I don't think the game dies if it fails to keep up with the speed you're implying - I think that speed is a rarity.

Maybe, but I played a Druid like 1 or 2 level tops in a very irregular campaign for less than 2 years and I got tired of it. I tried to play a Trickery Cleric and I gave up on that in like a handful of session because it felt like I had no support to offer my party when that what I wanted to bring to the table (despite the concept sounding cool). I didn't try ALL the subclasses in the PHB and honestly I don't feel like trying a good chunk of them. I'm never gonna play a Wild Sorcerer for exemple, or an Illusionist (I am GODAWFUL at using Illusions).

I might not be in the majority, but I'm not in any way exception. The entirty of the PHB doesn't appeal to me, the entirety of Xanathar doesn't appeal to me (even less so considering all the stuff in there...), I'm gonna run out of things I'm interested in.

I think it would work well with a wilder-type class or perhaps an emotionally-driven psychic barbarian subclass?

Like my idea for a Psionic Barbarian with a contageous rage!!

That's what I thought. The PTD will likely be unique to one subclass. My guess is soulknife.

Or under a different name entirely, but the shrinking and growing dice will return!
 




Parmandur

Legend
It seems VERY unlikely I'm the only DnD player who digs having new crunch for the sake of having new crunch, and WotC would be fools to leave all that money to third party.

It's not foolish to leave $100 on one table if the other table has $10,000.

Not every dollar that can be made is worth the ROI. And WotC is putting out options several times a year. It seems that they have found the pace that works for the marketplace. And with the DMsGuild, they get a hefty cut of much of the 3rd party output.
 

Undrave

Hero
It's not foolish to leave $100 on one table if the other table has $10,000.

Not every dollar that can be made is worth the ROI. And WotC is putting out options several times a year. It seems that they have found the pace that works for the marketplace. And with the DMsGuild, they get a hefty cut of much of the 3rd party output.

Sure, hey got a working pace, but I meant in the hypothetical scenario I discussed with Mistwell where the game didn't evolve and was just the core three and adventures, not as it is now.
 

Sabathius42

Bree-Yark
It seems VERY unlikely I'm the only DnD player who digs having new crunch for the sake of having new crunch, and WotC would be fools to leave all that money to third party.
You aren't, but you are arguing into to the wind here. To many posters, the fact that 5e is the "most popular ever" edition means that any criticism you might have of it is wrong....because it sells the most...and thus any change would only be a negative one.

I personally believe that the fact that Xanathars is the most popular non-big-3 title actually shows people DO want more crunch and players like yourself and everyone at my table frustrated at the lack of options aren't some strange minority.

This goes back to my comparison of 5e to Pop Music. Sales and popularity aren't the be-all-end-all metric of an artists best effort.
 

See... I had more time to think about the question 'SHOULD the game evolve'...

People often mistakenly consider evolution as being a thing a species does to get 'better', or that evolution is a constant progression. Truth of the matter is that evolution is about adapting to your environment. It's not the 'strong' who survive, it's those that are the best suited for their current condition, and if those conditions change they either adapt or die.

In the case of D&D, or any product of its kind, if it doesn't adapt to changes in its environment then it will 'die' by losing too many customers.

And here's the thing... people change ALL the time. I'm not the same person I was 10 years ago, 8 years ago or not even 5 years ago. My tastes change, my opinions can change, and I'm not alone... In other words, this mass of people's opinions, of ever changing people's ever changing opinion, IS D&D's environement.

If the game doesn't evolve and just keeps pumping out Adventures that you can solve with the same ol' skills and same ol' spells on the same ol' classes or the same ol' characters... Well maybe you'll have people who will be content with this, and that's fine... but there's also a large portion of the player base that'll get bored. They'll get bored of the classes they've been playing for 10 years+ and want to try something different... And if D&D no longer has anything different (For exemple, if you're into mundane characters, D&D has a VERY Limited range of options. Out of the PHB alone there is the Berzerker, the Champion, the Battlemaster, the Thief and the Assassin who don't have supernatural powers, wth Berzerker (and Open Hand Monks) being very borderline. You'll run out of those options fast) people are just going to go elsewhere.

Maybe that stable core will attract new players to replace the ones who leave... but will that be enough? Is that a risk WotC is willing to take?

A commercial product is like a living animal, and the more it engages people in complex ways, the way D&D does, the more evolutionary pressure there is to keep evolving because the 'environment' is constantly in flux. Even Monopoly comes out with new versions from time to time, even if the classic is always on shelves.

What a lot of people do when they get bored with D&D is try completely different RPGs. There are literally thousands of them, and at least several dozen really good ones. All of the 5e D&D design team (and most designers in general) are familiar with and play RPGs other than the one they are working for. It's not an either/or thing. You don't have to leave D&D to play other RPGs too.

It feels like you may be assuming D&D should shoulder an unnecessary burden of being the entire RPG market, when it can honestly just be a really good classic Monopoly and let other games do the other "less D&D-ish" things.
 

Undrave

Hero
What a lot of people do when they get bored with D&D is try completely different RPGs. There are literally thousands of them, and at least several dozen really good ones. All of the 5e D&D design team (and most designers in general) are familiar with and play RPGs other than the one they are working for. It's not an either/or thing. You don't have to leave D&D to play other RPGs too.

It feels like you may be assuming D&D should shoulder an unnecessary burden of being the entire RPG market, when it can honestly just be a really good classic Monopoly and let other games do the other "less D&D-ish" things.

Well yeah, they leave for other games by other companies...

And I'd love to have fun with some new games but my game group, in majority, don't particularly like to learn new games all that much. I'm the most crunch focused guy of the group basically and I live with that. I barely get to play, plague not-withstanding, so engaging in crunch away from the table is kind of my way to stay connected to the hobby.
 

Parmandur

Legend
You aren't, but you are arguing into to the wind here. To many posters, the fact that 5e is the "most popular ever" edition means that any criticism you might have of it is wrong....because it sells the most...and thus any change would only be a negative one.

I personally believe that the fact that Xanathars is the most popular non-big-3 title actually shows people DO want more crunch and players like yourself and everyone at my table frustrated at the lack of options aren't some strange minority.

This goes back to my comparison of 5e to Pop Music. Sales and popularity aren't the be-all-end-all metric of an artists best effort.

But what if Xanathar's has succeded in filling the gap...?

Being a slim minority of ~40 million people isn't anything to sneeze at, mind you, but WotC needs to focus on where the money is at, and they have enabled loads of experimentation through the DMsGuild.
 

Parmandur

Legend
Sure, hey got a working pace, but I meant in the hypothetical scenario I discussed with Mistwell where the game didn't evolve and was just the core three and adventures, not as it is now.

That's fair enough: I don't think WotC has quite hit the sweet spot yet, but they are in the right neighborhood (probably one major release a Quarter would be ideal).
 

Undrave

Hero
That's fair enough: I don't think WotC has quite hit the sweet spot yet, but they are in the right neighborhood (probably one major release a Quarter would be ideal).

Yeah that sounds fair. Personally I feel like we're due a big player-facing book (with a little bit of DM stuff as usual, but you know, inverse the proportions)
 

Mistwell

Legend
It seems VERY unlikely I'm the only DnD player who digs having new crunch for the sake of having new crunch, and WotC would be fools to leave all that money to third party.

Right. But I am not saying you're "the only" player, nor was I responding to a claim about "who digs new crunch". Plenty of people like more crunch. I am saying the claim that the "entirety of the Player's Handbook and Xanathar's Guide" doesn't "appeal to you" makes you the exception to the rule that people as a generalization do find appeal in both those books. Some people may want more crunch, but extremely few people (the exception) say those books hold no appeal for them.
 

Sabathius42

Bree-Yark
But what if Xanathar's has succeded in filling the gap...?
But what if the next 3 crunch heavy books all sit at the top of the non-big-3 sales charts?

You can't really discuss the merits until you have the data in front of you. Until then it's just conjecture what is "best" for the game.

The current Golden Age of D&D is riding along with an equivalent Golden Age of boardgames. Maybe the massive success of 5e isn't due to some perfect planning by the 5e team but instead a good RPG base design riding a wave of tabletop gaming in general.

I'm can't say what thousand factors go into the 5e boom, but I am willing to wager it's as much external force as it is shrewd D&D tactical release scheduling.
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top