Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DinoInDisguise" data-source="post: 9766289" data-attributes="member: 7045806">This topic is always fun. I'm sure this will go over wonderfully.Why must we always frame it as "complexity = good?" Game design isn't so shallow. The community D&D is designed for isn't so shallow. Few things in this world are that shallow. Fighter simplicity is intentional design. It's not a flaw to be “fixed.”Once we accept that the simplicity is intentional, our options are limited. How can we placate the subset of the community hellbent on tactical depth at every turn, while weighing the desires of the subset that wishes for simplicity, and for the new players that often desire or need that same simplicity?We have but a few options. None will make everyone happy. We can bolt on subsystems (like weapon masteries), we can completely reframe what fighter turns look like (like 4e), or we can accept that some players will find fighters boring. On these very forums, we have seen time and time again, that the subsystem WotC tried is polarizing. On these very forums, we have seen time and time again, that reimagining fighter turns, like 4e, is polarizing. Even on forums full of the most enfranchised of the enfranchised, these options are polarizing.And the real issue is; there’s no evidence the broader community actually wants a more complex fighters. It makes sense that Enworld is more in favor of such changes, as we are more enfranchised. In other games, such as Magic the Gathering, designers reference this all the time. Enfranchised players want more complexity than is healthy for the game. A simple trip to Mark Rosewater's blog makes this evident, as he beats this drum relentlessly.And so, there’s real risk that if we push complexity too hard, we burn away the simple classes and raise the barrier of entry for new players. We do exactly what terrifies MTG designers, while pretending it's all upside here. We choke off the very thing that makes the game sustainable, it's new players at the source.So the argument is simple. You need simple classes. You need simplicity. If you don't you cause harm to the game. So chasing a more complex fighter is a fool's errand and WotC is correct to do so very carefully, if at all.</blockquote>

Verification