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!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8774834" data-attributes="member: 18">I don't really buy it. You're projecting far too rational and meta-game-y motivations on to players. Seems very far-fetched to me.My experience is kind of the opposite, even. Players are thoughtless. They don't think about the long-term consequences of things like spell choices at all. Not even slightly. Not even smart players. They think "Oh last time we rested we got rained on a lot, I'll take Tiny Hut as one of my spells!" (assuming a Wizard). They're not thinking "OMG I HATE SURVIVAL GAMEPLAY!!!! I WILL OPT US ALL OUT!!!" (again it's one player's decision too, not the party's). That's just implausible. It's just not how players operate.I would suspect in fact, there's a large crossover with players who LIKE survival gameplay, or at survival themed atmospherics, and those who (thoughtlessly) take Tiny Hut.And you are making the same huge error that the other poster was - all this nonsense about "survival-oriented games" is gibberish. It's not what anyone is claiming. We're talking about games where, occasionally, the atmospherics and roleplaying of survival are thing. Tiny Hut destroys that. We're not talking about games where we're constantly counting rations or making CON saves to deal with the cold. Even then, the rational decision would be to take Tiny Hut if available - not to "opt out" of the gamplay, but because it's one of the few tools available.That's part of the problem. The wildly underdeveloped and overpowered toolset for dealing with exploration issues. Thanks to very different conditions in earlier editions, casters have access to some wildly OP spells which just break the exploration pillar in a lot of ways (many 2nd and 3rd level, almost none higher), which have been retained because "TRADITION!!!" (sung Fiddler-style).This illustrates a fundamental problem with 5E's tradition-based/apology-edition design. By re-inheriting overpowered tools from earlier editions, and not redesigning them for the new conditions, nor replacing them with more nuanced tools, 5E has created a situation where characters who entire deal with "I'm good at the survival game/exploration pillar!" like certain Rangers are just invalidated by two spells. If 5E was more intelligently designed, more designed from first principles rather than for the sake of TRADITION!!! we wouldn't see stuff like this.</blockquote>

Verification