D&D 5E Should martial characters be mundane or supernatural?

[Scribe]

If martials should be mundane why for the last ~5 years have WOTC and allthe major 3pps.... only produced supernatural martials?

Because they already did the Battlemaster, Champion, and various takes on Knights.

Oh, and because I have not released mine.

 

[Minigiant]

Because they already did the Battlemaster, Champion, and various takes on Knights.

There's more that could be made.

 

[Scribe]

There's more that could be made.

Absolutely, that money is out there, I'm quite convinced of it.

 

[Oofta]

We are not saying that 3PP and homebrew doesn't exist.

We are saying WOTC left money on the table. And WOTC agreed with their increased schedule..

The drawback of slow release is that someone else is more likely to release and popularize the content you actually were going to release before you.

Martials should be mundane with a few optional supernatural subclasses.

The rub WOTC ran into is that their release and class paradigm schedule is too slow for this. It's so slow, other 3PPs will out speed you on release.

IE
The Path of the Giant Barbarian could have been mundane. Throw weapons get rage damage. Throw people. Speak Giant.

It's magical because it's year 9 and the community has likely 3PPs and Houseruled that in as a subclass for those who want it. So the thrower barbarian has to be imbued with giant magic. How many books that gonna sell now

Whether or not WOTC "left money on the table" can't be answered. All we can say is that flooding the market with product doesn't guarantee success and D&D is likely the most successful version ever.

Just because you want something doesn't mean it will sell and we know too many options often leave people less satisfied.

 

[Minigiant]

Whether or not WOTC "left money on the table" can't be answered. All we can say is that flooding the market with product doesn't guarantee success and D&D is likely the most successful version ever.

Just because you want something doesn't mean it will sell and we know too many options often leave people less satisfied.

how said anything about flooding the market?

 

[ECMO3]

Including something in the game doesn't harm the DM who just decides to ban it, anyway, excluding from the game does put a burden on the player who had enjoyed it and no longer can, but must ask his DM to do some design work for it (and, then, that's repeated at every table with such a player).

I disagree with this. Excluding it enables the player and DM to decide if they want it, and if the DM doesn't want it, then it should not be in the game.

 

[Tony Vargas]

But since XGTE it's been purely supernatural. Purely.
Why?

D&D has always put a lot of emphasis on magic, magic-users delving dungeons in the hopes of finding spell scrolls, everyone else in the hopes of finding magic items. No edition has ever had more non-casting classes than casting.... 5e has the highest caster/not-caster ratio ever - you can't even compare classes, they all use spells, you have to take it down to sub-classes....

...really, the day should not be so far off when D&D admits that playing D&D just means casting spells. (Jack Chick warned us...)
I might even live to see that.

how said anything about flooding the market?

It's a strategy that worked between the end of the fad years and the start of the come-back. Many lines, realizing they had faithful fans who were collecting all the books, just put out a book a month for years. Heck, it was working for PF1 for a while.

Now, 5e is like, still selling PHs, right? Because the growth is new players trying the game, not established players delving deeper into it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Whether or not WOTC "left money on the table" can't be answered. All we can say is that flooding the market with product doesn't guarantee success and D&D is likely the most successful version ever.

Just because you want something doesn't mean it will sell and we know too many options often leave people less satisfied.

This is the "glacial" or "firehose" argument again. Like those are the only two options. I've yet to meet a staunch supporter of WotC's 5e release schedule who doesn't make this "either/or" claim.

 

[Micah Sweet]

how said anything about flooding the market?

Everyone who supports WotC's release schedule.

 

[Micah Sweet]

D&D has always put a lot of emphasis on magic, magic-users delving dungeons in the hopes of finding spell scrolls, everyone else in the hopes of finding magic items. No edition has ever had more non-casting classes than casting.... 5e has the highest caster/not-caster ratio ever - you can't even compare classes, they all use spells, you have to take it down to sub-classes....

...really, the day should not be so far off when D&D admits that playing D&D just means casting spells. (Jack Chick warned us...)
I might even live to see that.


It's a strategy that worked between the end of the fad years and the start of the come-back. Many lines, realizing they had faithful fans who were collecting all the books, just put out a book a month for years. Heck, it was working for PF1 for a while.

Now, 5e is like, still selling PHs, right? Because the growth is new players trying the game, not established players delving deeper into it.

Can't delve deeper in a planter box.