• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D General The Crab Bucket Fallacy

The rap game says different.

Anyways that's besides the point. The point is that the designers were willing to add all kinds of different fantasies to 5th edition just not any of the fantasies developed in 4th edition.

But the Purple Dragon Knight?
Not the 4e fantasies unless they could pretend they were from earlier editions.
  • Warlock pacts are pure unfiltered 4e (the 3.5 warlock explicitly did not make pacts)
  • Paladin Oaths are Essentials - and Paladins not losing their power is 4e
  • Subclasses for sorcerers is pure 4e as is them having more fluff than "I guess they might have been descended from dragons? Maybe" and instead being casters that get their power from weirdness
  • Barbarians being more than a fighter subclass is pure 4e as is their being primal at all.
  • Vicious Mockery's pure 4e for the bard. (So are at will cantrips in general)
The problem with the Warlord wasn't that it was 4e, it was that it was obviously 4e and couldn't be covered by a coat of paint.

Edit: And come to think of it the rogue getting to exploit bonus actions and behaving the way it does owes a lot to 4e. (Remember Swift Actions weren't even in the 3.5 PHB). And the parts of the monk that work (like Flurry coming off the bonus action) feel more 4e than 3.X or 1e.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Anyways that's besides the point. The point is that the designers were willing to add all kinds of different fantasies to 5th edition just not any of the fantasies developed in 4th edition.
And why you think that is? Do you think they had a loads of data to support the idea that those would be super popular and people would pay a lot to get that, but decided not to do it because they hate money? Or could it just be that those are things that not that many people actually wanted?

But the Purple Dragon Knight?
Which arguably is the 5e version of the warlord. Granted, it is rather bad version, but they did it.
 



Oofta

Legend
So if people don't want edition wars about 4E ... how about not bringing 4E into the conversation constantly? Maybe not telling people that it was replaced because it was "sabotaged" or other unprovable accusations? Because based on my experience if I state my opinion it will just be slammed as edition wars no matter what I say if it's not 100% positive.
 

Sacrosanct

Legend
Which arguably is the 5e version of the warlord. Granted, it is rather bad version, but they did it.
For the record, I've been of the mind that the warlord could be replicated by using feats, backgrounds and the battlemaster fighter. But when I saw the Purple Dragon Knight, even I saw that it was awful. I couldn't believe they'd put that out and expect people to play it. WoTC should have an official warlord class just to make up for that abysmal subclass
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Does not follow. As pointed out in this thread (or one of the other very similar threads), fighters have a high representation on D&D Beyond, that’s where the “most chosen” comes from. It’s worth pointing out D&D Beyond is not the whole community. Further, making a character on D&D Beyond does not equate to actually playing it in a game nor liking the class. Fighters have a high dissatisfaction according to the survey reports from Crawford.
I apologize if someone else pointed this out and I missed it, but in fact the class and subclass ranking stayed the same when looking only at users with the phb and supplements unlocked.

So it definitely isn’t just characters made.

And the idea that we can’t extrapolate “characters desired to be played” from “characters built”, with large datasets, at least on a general ranking level, seems strange. We can’t use it to say “X% of players want to play Y class”, but when there’s a huge gap between two classes, that is worth looking at as a sign of a trend of what players want to play.
 

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
Not the 4e fantasies unless they could pretend they were from earlier editions.
  • Warlock pacts are pure unfiltered 4e (the 3.5 warlock explicitly did not make pacts)
  • Paladin Oaths are Essentials - and Paladins not losing their power is 4e
  • Subclasses for sorcerers is pure 4e as is them having more fluff than "I guess they might have been descended from dragons? Maybe" and instead being casters that get their power from weirdness
  • Barbarians being more than a fighter subclass is pure 4e as is their being primal at all.
  • Vicious Mockery's pure 4e for the bard. (So are at will cantrips in general)
The problem with the Warlord wasn't that it was 4e, it was that it was obviously 4e and couldn't be covered by a coat of paint.

Edit: And come to think of it the rogue getting to exploit bonus actions and behaving the way it does owes a lot to 4e. (Remember Swift Actions weren't even in the 3.5 PHB). And the parts of the monk that work (like Flurry coming off the bonus action) feel more 4e than 3.X or 1e.
Weapon Masteries are At Will Martial Exploits painted over. Except not will the variety.

The Warlord, the Warden, the Avenger.. can't be painted over. They need new classes.
 


Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
So if people don't want edition wars about 4E ... how about not bringing 4E into the conversation constantly? Maybe not telling people that it was replaced because it was "sabotaged" or other unprovable accusations? Because based on my experience if I state my opinion it will just be slammed as edition wars no matter what I say if it's not 100% positive.
It's more than 4e.

Where is the mystic swordsman... the pro wrestler.. plant race.. the aberrant race... the giant swords... the pet class... the magic mutant... the chaos knight...tiny race in the magic mecha suit... playable werewolves.

Where's urban fantasy... spaceship science fantasy...

5e is tame.

Can't even be a werewolf.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top