|
CaptainPsyko posted:I want detailed breakdowns of the percentage of respondents who thought the Fighter or Rogue were stronger than each of the other 11 classes. 100% of important respondents (those named Mike Mearls) believed this.
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 14:18 |
|
|
On my computer the survey is broken, and wouldn't let me actually select which class is more powerful. So I had to cancel, lest I be forced to submit a survey saying fighters were more powerful than wizards.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 20:44
|
|
|
Yeah I am going to individually rate every feat in the game on your survey. Jesus.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
I am sad I was not given a chance to rate Monk or Warlock, those two are the classes I actually liked a lot. At least I got to express my Very Dissatisfaction at the Fighter and Rogue though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:Yeah I am going to individually rate every feat in the game on your survey. Jesus.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 21:21
|
|
|
moths posted:Are you ready?! They're paying money to run a survey that's not going to get them any useful information. "Is class X more powerful than class Y" ought to be less important to the designers than "is class X more fun to play than class Y". How useful, exactly, is it to ask people to rate every single class feature and every single feat from 1 to 5?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 21:50
|
|
|
gtrmp posted:They're paying money to run a survey that's not going to get them any useful information. "Is class X more powerful than class Y" ought to be less important to the designers than "is class X more fun to play than class Y". How useful, exactly, is it to ask people to rate every single class feature and every single feat from 1 to 5? Nothing loving changes, they've been doing that since playtest day 1. Literally, I remember being really pissed off that the first thing they asked was 'should our intrepid heroes face orcs or skeletons in the first youtube video' or some such poo poo. What the gently caress difference does that make to how good a game they're designing. This is no different. Consciously or not, they don't WANT useful feedback which might improve their design, they want to prove their design is good already. So they're never going to offer the questions that would really tell them if it's not. They're paying money to make their audience feel listened to, as much as anything else. Plus, designing a good survey (like designing a good game, funny that) is HARD. I studied a ten week module on it during my last period of university, and barely scratched the surface.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 21:57
|
|
|
You might as well answer BRING BACK LF to the survey for all the good it'll do
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 22:01
|
|
|
quote:If you haven't read through/played all of these classes, or don't want to compare them this way, you can skip this series of questions No you can't.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:This is no different. Consciously or not, they don't WANT useful feedback which might improve their design, they want to prove their design is good already. So they're never going to offer the questions that would really tell them if it's not. They're paying money to make their audience feel listened to, as much as anything else. I think the first line in the pre-survey text blurb where they declare D&D Next to be a resounding success proves that point. They want confirmation that they've, in fact, created the bestest version of dnd ever made. They don't want people pointing out that they pretty much just made edition 3.75 and haven't fixed a ton of problems that have been in the game for over a decade now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 22:19
|
|
|
Rannos22 posted:edition 3.75 As a matter of course, I refrain from referring to anything as "3.75" since this is never used to describe a game that "starts with 3.5 and moves towards 4" as that number might imply. I always called Pathfinder "3.5, Episode II" so I guess that makes Next "3.5, Episode III"
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 22:25
|
|
|
gtrmp posted:They're paying money to run a survey that's not going to get them any useful information. "Is class X more powerful than class Y" ought to be less important to the designers than "is class X more fun to play than class Y". How useful, exactly, is it to ask people to rate every single class feature and every single feat from 1 to 5? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
quote:edition 3.75 Dungeons & Dragons, Asymptote Edition.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 22:55
|
|
|
I got all the way to the end of the survey but it said I was a Chaotic Evil Warlock and went on to describe my personality in three or four sentences. Anybody else getting this?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 22:57
|
|
|
Payndz posted:Dungeons & Dragons, Asymptote Edition. DnD version 3.99 is just 4E Essentials with the word power completely erased.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:I got all the way to the end of the survey but it said I was a Chaotic Evil Warlock and went on to describe my personality in three or four sentences. Anybody else getting this? Mine said I was an intellect devourer inhabiting the body of a kender. I don't think their survey is statistically valid.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
Okay I mostly just filled out the survey so I could remind them that they still don't have a Warlord class and that they should get on it immediately. It's my lance I'll tilt it at windmills if I want to.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
I've got a +3 STR mod, what's my bonus to damage when holding a weapon two handed?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 23:58
|
|
|
+3 In theory, the selling point of two-handers is that they have a bigger damage die. There are some versatile weapons that get a bigger damage die when you wield them with one hand, but that's a property that's listed on the weapon.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 00:07
|
|
|
Two-handed is either a requirement, or for versatile bumps the damage dice up a step, it doesn't change the bonus.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 00:13
|
|
|
Thought so, couldn't find anything that says otherwise but wanted to make sure it wasn't x 1.5. Cheers!
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 00:17
|
|
|
This also seems to be why TWF only adds a mod to 1 of the attacks; light weapons cap out at 1d6, so you're looking at 2d6+Mod compared with 1d12+Mod or 2d6+Mod for two-handers. Although multiple attacks messes up that math, but whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 01:02
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:Although multiple attacks messes up that math, but whatever. A formula? Who gives a gently caress about a formula?
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 03:08
|
|
|
I got asked whether I thought Fighter or Rogue was more powerful. That was a sad thing to consider.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 04:20
|
|
|
Omnicrom posted:I got asked whether I thought Fighter or Rogue was more powerful. That was a sad thing to consider. The majority of the players at our Adventurers League nights are either Rangers or Rogues. More power to them, I guess. Every now and then, out of two tables of 5 to 7 players, someone will sit down with a druid or something.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 05:47
|
|
|
Omnicrom posted:I got asked whether I thought Fighter or Rogue was more powerful. That was a sad thing to consider. Rogues at least get skills to play with and get some utility out of that iirc.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 06:50
|
|
|
Xelkelvos posted:Rogues at least get skills to play with and get some utility out of that iirc. That's why I chose Rogue as "stronger". I also was asked to choose which was stronger between Wizard and Sorcerer. My choice will not surprise you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 07:22
|
|
|
I called out the fact Paizo is eating their lunch and that instead of doing something good and making their own dinner, WotC would sooner make a poor retroclone in tyool 2014 and call the crumbs they are chasing good enough  I also laid out a laundry list of stupid poo poo or broken things or pure garbage lazy "ask your DM" drivel that they expect to be paid for. But yes, druid or fighter? How about I rate every feat but the godly resist piercing one casters get, as it wasn't listed. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 13:06
|
|
|
I suppose one bright spot in the survey is that Gender is an open text field.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 13:36
|
|
|
It had a star though, was it mandatory?
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 13:48
|
|
|
It was. It would have been pretty awkward to include an M/F radio button or something, after they went all extra-inclusivity with the art and
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 13:56
|
|
|
Did anyone else put "Porpoise" in the gender field?
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 14:24
|
|
|
Everyone should have just put "goon" as their gender. It's what the G in LGBT stands for right?
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 15:37
|
|
|
I vaguely recall a discussion in here about hitpoints and how warhammer (i think?) RPGs dealt with critical effects differently than D&D , does anyone have the links to that? Couldn't find it with search.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 15:55
|
|
|
Omnicrom posted:I got asked whether I thought Fighter or Rogue was more powerful. That was a sad thing to consider.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 16:59
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:I vaguely recall a discussion in here about hitpoints and how warhammer (i think?) RPGs dealt with critical effects differently than D&D , does anyone have the links to that? Couldn't find it with search. Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay 3e has cards you draw face-down when you take damage. If you take a critical, you flip one or more of the cards over and take the effect written on it. It was one of the mechanics I quite liked about that game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 18:51
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:I vaguely recall a discussion in here about hitpoints and how warhammer (i think?) RPGs dealt with critical effects differently than D&D , does anyone have the links to that? Couldn't find it with search. Not sure which edition of WFRP this pertains to, but since Gort covered 3e I'll explain 2e. In WFRP 2e all characters have Wounds which is just a funny word for Hit Points. They generally have more of them than a first-level character in D&D, but you also gain much fewer of them throughout your career. Armor reduces damage, as does your character's Toughness Above 0 Wounds you're okay. Once you drop to 0 Wounds each hit you take becomes a Critical Hit. You can never fall below zero Wounds, but any damage that goes beyond that threshold is used to determine the severity of the critical hit. Once you've determined the severity of the critical you cross reference it on a chart with the hit location. A severity 1 crit on your head would be something like "You're dazed for a while," 10 or above would be instant decapitation. I've seen WFRP style crit rules for D&D floating around the internet, but just can't remember the exact blogs I found them on.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 19:55
|
|
|
They're also pretty explicit about the fact that 'a couple bandages and a decent night's sleep' will start healing normal Wounds pretty quick even back in the Shitfarmer Fantasy Vietnam of WHFRP 2e, as they're intended to represent superficial damage, fatigue, etc. The threshold of injury you can take without any real negative effect. At 3 or fewer wounds, you'll be in bed a little while or need a good doctor to recover quick, but before then mundane healing will give you back like 1-10 Wounds (with starting PCs having an average of like 11 total) and you heal a Wound a day, more with rest and a doctor.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
WHFRP 3e also has extra critical effect cards from various supplement that can be shuffled into the main wound deck, with effects ranging from an infected wound to instantly losing a limb. But that's the kind of thing you don't just sneak up and drop on your players because they're way worse effects than normal. But that game also has, effectively, 4 different types of damage you can take: physical damage, mental stress, physical strain, and corruption from chaos.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 20:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 14:18 |
|
|
Omnicrom posted:I got asked whether I thought Fighter or Rogue was more powerful. That was a sad thing to consider. Wow. It really is completely random. I got asked to compare Fighter with Wizard. Huh.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 21:14
|
|
