D&D 5E Volo's 5e vs Tasha's 5e where do you see 5e heading?

[Parmandur]

A 2018 Crawford tweet based on a convenience sample is not very good evidence for a fact.

All WOTC has are convenience samples. By contrast, the majority of online discussion about 5e involves feats. I can make just as strong a claim about the representativeness of that anecdata as WotC can for their convenience samples.


If only a minority used them, why would they keep designing more?

Oh, so you have internal information about WotC market research...? I'll take Crawford's word that is what their data suggests, as he has said it more than the one time.

A large enough minority uses Feats to make it worth their time, unlike some of the modules mentioned in this thread, particularly since they have the balance worked out with ASIs pretty tightly. A large amount of online chatter represents a tiny fraction of the D&D player base, and is less reliable than WotC own info.

 

[Krachek]

I do.

I just want a general one that could be applied to PCs and NPCs alike. I don't want fighting styles or maneuvers.
I prefer a general system that everyone has access to and can infor based on the DM's descriptions. It boost combat strength a bit but it would be the only way to make combat dynamic.

Maneuvers and Fighting styles are too limiting. It pushes players to fight one way and never change. Many DMs agree.. Even WOTC agrees. Thats why they made feats to hand them out.

The most easy way can be to use more vulnerable or resistance to a specific damage type : slashing, bludgeoned or piercing, and not let magic weapon solve everything of course.
Martial would need to change weapon more often, off course that screw some dpr build, unless you bypass all this by adding a polearm that do the three type of damage! We can use also variation on vulnerable and resistance, giving using adv/ disadvantage, extra damage die, penalty to ac, movement, etc. A Dm can easily add those tactical choice without redesigning weapon.
For an extreme example a Monster can have
resistance piercing
vulnerable Bludgeon
slashing damage reduce speed by 10 for 1 minute.

 

[ph0rk]

A large amount of online chatter represents a tiny fraction of the D&D player base, and is less reliable than WotC own info.

Who do you think makes up their convenience sample? Particularly during the last year?

 

[Minigiant]

The most easy way can be to use more vulnerable or resistance to a specific damage type : slashing, bludgeoned or piercing, and not let magic weapon solve everything of course.
Martial would need to change weapon more often, off course that screw some dpr build, unless you bypass all this by adding a polearm that do the three type of damage! We can use also variation on vulnerable and resistance, giving using adv/ disadvantage, extra damage die, penalty to ac, movement, etc. A Dm can easily add those tactical choice without redesigning weapon.

All that stuff isn't as easy as you make it. That's why you have pros design these things.

 

[ph0rk]

All that stuff isn't as easy as you make it. That's why you have pros design these things.

I agree, this was a nice enough idea but generally slows the pace of combat and is more of a martial punishment than anything else.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Oh, so you have internal information about WotC market research...? I'll take Crawford's word that is what their data suggests, as he has said it more than the one time.

I've seem the posts where it was said that the majority of players/games didn't use feats.
Do you have a link to the ones where WotC stated that feats are banned in the majority of games please? I've missed those.

 

[Parmandur]

Who do you think makes up their convenience sample? Particularly during the last year?

Why do you thinkntheir research consists of just convenience samples? You have no idea, but WotC does have an idea about their data. I take them at their word for what they see.

 

[Parmandur]

I've seem the posts where it was said that the majority of players/games didn't use feats.
Do you have a link to the ones where WotC stated that feats are banned in the majority of games please? I've missed those.

Not sure about "banned," but "not used." Feata are a variant rule module, after all, they are opt-in, not opt-out. I have never played or DMed a 5E game that used them, though there was one game where my brother-in-law, the DM, announced that he allowed them: nobody took one.

 

[Krachek]

The most easy way can be to use more vulnerable or resistance to a specific damage type : slashing, bludgeoned or piercing, and not let magic weapon solve everything of course.
Martial would need to change weapon more often, off course that screw some dpr build, unless you bypass all this by adding a polearm that do the three type of damage! We can use also variation on vulnerable and resistance, giving using adv/ disadvantage, extra damage die, penalty to ac, movement, etc. A Dm can easily add those tactical choice without redesigning weapon.

I agree, this was a nice enough idea but generally slows the pace of combat and is more of a martial punishment than anything else.

I like the equation!
home brew ==> punishment and slow down
official ==> tactical

 

[Krachek]

All that stuff isn't as easy as you make it. That's why you have pros design these things.

Honestly, for the next years we can’t hoping more than a few maneuvers, fighting style and some feats. Better start home brew now.