Wolfspider
Explorer
Wormwood said:
Wormwood, you never fail to not shock me.
What should WOTC do about Golden Wyvern Adept?
- Thread starter Najo
- Start date
- Status
Wormwood, you never fail to not shock me.
ZombieRoboNinja
First Post
Najo said:
Yeah, but half those reasons are kind of nonsensical. "It gives players a way to mess with DMs' campaigns?" I don't think I've heard that argument at all. Quantity does not indicate quality.
Anyway, you're missing an option for "We don't know enough about how they're implemented to tell WotC what they should do." The assumption to this poll seems to be that wizard traditions will be wholly limited to the names of a few feats. What if they're actually woven into the class's description and mechanics in more ways than that? The vast majority of the poll options would then either be nonsensical or require a lot more work than just tossing in a sidebar.
ZombieRoboNinja said:
They do mess with a DMs campaign, Dr. Akward has been giving plenty of good examples. To borrow from his style:
Example 1:
Dm: ok, so tell me a little bit about your characters
Player 1: well, my character is part of an ancient tradition of wizards who has learned to control the area of their spells. The tradition is known as the Order of the Golden Wyvern.
Player 2: I thought magic orders were all wiped out in the great war between men and demons?
Dm: they were, there is no Order of the Golden Wyvern.
Player 1: Well, that is what my character's feat says. I am a Golden Wyvern Adept.
Dm: We aren't using those feat names, the Golden Wyvern Adept is called Spellshaper now.
Player 2: I like the name of the feat and I want to be part of the Golden Wyverns.
Player 1: But there are no wizard orders. Wizards study in secret and have to hide their powers now after the war.
Dm: I understand, but it doesn't fit the campaign setting we have been playing for years. All of us have put alot of hard work into it and we are not going to change it because of the name of a feat. Everyone just note that down that the named feats have other names, you can refer to the hand out I made you last week.
Example 2:
Player 1: Ok, so I am looking over my feats and they ones for this order of wizards called the Golden Wyverns, did you see that?
Player 2: Isn't the Golden Wyvern an idol worshiped by a cult in our setting?
Dm: <gumbles> yes...
Player 1: <laughes> thats ironic, what are the chances of that..
Dm: I don't want to talk about it.
Example 3:
Player 1: Ok, what does Golden Wyvern Adept do again?
Dm: its that one that shapes spell area effects.
Player 1: Why is it called Golden Wyvern Adept?
Dm: Because Wizards of the Coast thought it would be a good idea to give feats colorful names with backstory in them.
Player 1: Its kind of confusing, how can I tell the difference between Golden Wyvern Adept, Expert and Master? They all do different things.
Dm: I know, its a little confusing. Just get playing and it will make sense once we use them enough.
Player 2: The feat says your a member of the Golden Wyvern order, do we have a golden wyvern order in our campaign?
Dm: <grumbles> no...
Player 3: What does Lightning Panther Strike do again?
Dm: I am not sure, I think it lets you bite someone in the face when you hit..let me look it up.
Player 1: What does a Lightning Panther look like?
Players 2 & 3: Are you serious?
Dm: <grumbles>
In all three examples, Golden Wyvern Adept leads to confusion that infringes on the DM and players campaign setting. It allows players to do this because they choose feats. When a player chooses a feat named like this, the Dm has to decide if the feat's name is modified or not.
I would like to address a point the pro Golden Wyvern camp keeps bringing up:
They say, I like how it makes back ground and flavor easier.
Then they say, I don't see how it messes with established campaigns.
These two statements contridict each other. Either Golden Wyvern adept is "just a name" and doesn't have a big impact, or it gives you prebuilt background and a wizard order, in that case it does have a big enough impact.
For those of you who haven't put much work into a campaign setting. Or who haven't played in a world much different from Greyhawk or the Realms, this may seem minor to you that feats like this are being made.
For those of us with years of hard work on our campaigns, or playing in alternative fantasy settings with non-traditional fantasy elements, these feats are world shattering. They spit into our hard work.
These feats are Wizards of the Coast coming along, and throwing into our worlds spices and flavoring they feel is necessary. Part of what makes D&D what it is is its ability to support any fantasy world you create. D&D doesn't have an established setting like World of Warcraft, Star Wars, etc..Those worlds exist in D&D campaign settings, like Dragonlance, Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, Dark Sun, Planescape...that is where they should choose in which setting Golden Wyvern Adepts exist and then put the damn feat there.
Keep this stuff out of the core materials. By the poll, over 50% of the players and DMs want WOTC keeping this stuff out of their game worlds we have worked hard on, and a little over 20% do not care either way. That is 70% of the market made happy by removing these feat names. Compared to the little over 40% made happy (those that like the feats plus those who do not care) by keeping them.
Considering the large number of artistic work done by their customers, this hurts D&D's established customer base and limits the future of D&D's creativity. That creativity is part of the game.
They say, I like how it makes back ground and flavor easier.
Then they say, I don't see how it messes with established campaigns.
These two statements contridict each other. Either Golden Wyvern adept is "just a name" and doesn't have a big impact, or it gives you prebuilt background and a wizard order, in that case it does have a big enough impact.
For those of you who haven't put much work into a campaign setting. Or who haven't played in a world much different from Greyhawk or the Realms, this may seem minor to you that feats like this are being made.
For those of us with years of hard work on our campaigns, or playing in alternative fantasy settings with non-traditional fantasy elements, these feats are world shattering. They spit into our hard work.
These feats are Wizards of the Coast coming along, and throwing into our worlds spices and flavoring they feel is necessary. Part of what makes D&D what it is is its ability to support any fantasy world you create. D&D doesn't have an established setting like World of Warcraft, Star Wars, etc..Those worlds exist in D&D campaign settings, like Dragonlance, Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, Dark Sun, Planescape...that is where they should choose in which setting Golden Wyvern Adepts exist and then put the damn feat there.
Keep this stuff out of the core materials. By the poll, over 50% of the players and DMs want WOTC keeping this stuff out of their game worlds we have worked hard on, and a little over 20% do not care either way. That is 70% of the market made happy by removing these feat names. Compared to the little over 40% made happy (those that like the feats plus those who do not care) by keeping them.
Considering the large number of artistic work done by their customers, this hurts D&D's established customer base and limits the future of D&D's creativity. That creativity is part of the game.
the Jester
Legend
Najo said:
Seriously, is this a realistic example? Because if it is, it seems like the problem isn't with the name of a feat, it's with the attitude and expectations of the group. What the players and dm want don't seem to match up here. I think there are deeper problems than "Golden Wyvern Adept". Maybe the group needs to evaluate their social contract, setting choice, etc.
Uh, again, is this realistic? It doesn't seem like it to me, and even if it is, rename the feats and the problem is solved. In fact, that strategy will work in all these cases! Sheesh, when the MM3 came out with a monster called glaistig in it, I had already established a major devil imc as Glaisig, the Hidden Councilor. Did I find the fey in MM3 upsetting? Nope! I just knew that I'd have to be clear when and if I used it.
Novice Player: Hey, what does Power Attack do again? What about Combat Expertise? Does that help me hit more often? What about Lightning Reflexes, does that make me go first in combat? Oh wait, it won't stack with Improved Initiative, right?...
What's in a name? Honestly, I don't think GWA is a crisis point for the game.
Fifth Element
Legend
I think more people would find your arguments convincing if you didn't use ridiculous hyperbole.Najo said:
World-shattering? Having to change a feat name is world-shattering? Really?
Spit on your hard work? Give us a break. One could just as easily argue you are spitting on the designer's hard work by using your own setting and house rules. Yes, that would be a ridiculous assertion. So is yours.
Fifth Element
Legend
No, it's not 70% of the market. You have no support for that.Najo said:
It's 70% of the self-selected poll respondents, from among the self-selected members of a particular website. Don't make the mistake of thinking this actually reflects the market.
Edit: To emphasize this, I count 84 respondents currently who want the name changed. Do you really think 84 people on this website accurately reflect the market? Should WotC be making changes based on the desires of 84 people?
Fifth Element said:
It is a market sampling. As accruate as any other. There are gathered D&D fans here voting. Just as if they went to Gen Con or D&D Experience or walked the halls of WOTC and did a survey. Each of course has some influencing factor (i.e. en world posters, those who could afford to go to gen con, those who work at wotc), but it is going to give you an idea of what the general consensus is.
Fifth Element
Legend
I dispute this. I will bet cash money that WotC has a more accurate marketing sample than a self-selected sample of 135 people.Najo said:
- Status
Similar Threads
