Those without a voice

Surely the people who actually take time to post on these forums are a tiny minority compared to all the people in the world who do play D&D and other RPG's.

How does WOTC plan on gathering the input of those people? Polling from the limited pool of people who post here isn't going to give very accurate results.

People whose thoughts are not gathered here include...

People who jumped ship for Pathfinder, it's still D&D, they still want to play D&D, they were either dissatisfied by 4e or saw no reason to switch from 3e
People who don't speak English, I know WOTC publishes in other languages, but these forums are only available in English.
People who just don't post here and discuss their gaming hobby in other forums, they exist, who know why they don't post here, there's probably a lot more of them than you think.
Several of those people do have a voice.  They are simply opting not to use it.  Choosing not to post here is like choosing not to vote (though posting here probably has less weight than voting in any RL election).  Among all those you listed, only the ones who don't speak English are unable to enage in the conversations here in a meaningful way.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

If WOTC cares about money they should be reaching out to as many people as possible, particularly the Pathfinder players. They're still D&D players at heart.

Just taking the word of the few people who do post here is going to result in a product that appeals to exactly those people and not necessarily anyone else.
If even one suggestion catches the eyes of a developer and gives them a thought on if it might work. Someone may come up with an idea not thought of , or the "minority" may have a voice. If you read their legal statement anything written down can be used by them and is free information no copy write. The reason is they may see an idea and use it or develop upon it
While I think these polls are being used I don't think they are absolute.  I think the designers are also coming to the came from different opinions and hopefully they will exchange ideas between themselves.   I think once we have a beta game the Pathfinder people will try it.   They will then be far more apt to come over and vote.  

I consider myself as someone who didn't like 4e but I still own more 4e than I do Pathfinder.  I don't know where I fit in the pie.   I think if I had to start a campaign tomorrow I'd be tempted to go retro until 5e hits.   The designers are evoking a lot of great memories from the old days in their blogs.   I realize though I'd want a mathematically streamlined retro (d20 rolls big for good.  No Thac0).





 
Also wanted to chime in on the notion that these people don't matter if they don't vote.   The problem is that unlike an election where someone is always happy (even if it's just the winning candidate :-)) the sales of a game are what matter to WOTC.  So they need to attract these voiceless people and even go out and get them if they can regardless if they are exercising their "right" to vote here on these forums.

Among my rpg friends not one is on here besides me.  Most would be far more pro-3e than I am.  None would be pro-4e except maybe one guy who'd be 50/50.   He wouldn't want to play it now but he did like some things.  I'm probably there myself too but maybe not 50/50.   

 
Also wanted to chime in on the notion that these people don't matter if they don't vote.


IDK if I led you to that assumption, but I want to clarify that the bolded part above is not what I meant.  I only meant to point out that some of those labelled as having no voice are simply choosing not to speak.  The actualy worth of their opinion thus has equal potential to be either good or bad.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

Also wanted to chime in on the notion that these people don't matter if they don't vote.


IDK if I led you to that assumption, but I want to clarify that the bolded part above is not what I meant.  I only meant to point out that some of those labelled as having no voice are simply choosing not to speak.  The actualy worth of their opinion thus has equal potential to be either good or bad.



Ok sorry if I misinterpreted.  As a general statement to the world I still stand by it but I withdraw any assumption that you might have been saying or implying that.

I agree that we don't know what they would think or how they would vote. 
For some, voting from a series of pre-arranged options really isn't having a voice.

I feel it has been the attitudes and behaviors of some on these forums that have made some reluctant to join in conversation.  I know I feel like any idea I have posted here has been subject to serial negation by a select few who seem to believe that D&DNext is all about only what they want it to be about.

I really have no interest in having my ideas thrown back in my face and mocked.  My alternative is to have no voice.
If WOTC cares about money they should be reaching out to as many people as possible, particularly the Pathfinder players. They're still D&D players at heart.

Just taking the word of the few people who do post here is going to result in a product that appeals to exactly those people and not necessarily anyone else.


Presumably the fans of pathfinder speak english and have internet access.  Connection formed.  Let them come and have their say, if they can be civil enough not to edition bash.  If they can't be civil, then let them stay in their own yard (as an apartment dweller, I've had my fill of screaming children for one lifetime).




Well I've got news for you. As an active player of 5 editions of D&D {BECMI, AD&D, AD&D2e, 3x, & PF) who's also played some 4e, this is as at least as much my yard as it is yours. Especially these forums concerning an as-yet non-existant future edition.
For some, voting from a series of pre-arranged options really isn't having a voice.

I feel it has been the attitudes and behaviors of some on these forums that have made some reluctant to join in conversation.  I know I feel like any idea I have posted here has been subject to serial negation by a select few who seem to believe that D&DNext is all about only what they want it to be about.

I really have no interest in having my ideas thrown back in my face and mocked.  My alternative is to have no voice.



1) Grow a thicker skin, it'll serve you well. 
Especially if you're going to swim about in the muck that is any OL comunity. 

2) You're a D&D player, this is a D&D forum.  So by all means, if you've got something to say?  Then speak up. 
And if someone here doesn't like it?  Well, so what?   
I don't think the poll results are going to be treated like divine commandments. They're probably somewhat informative to the designers, but they know the culture of the boards. And they're free to read things at ENWorld, /tg, and elsewhere. They can check out Pathfinder and see if any innovations there make sense and have excited the players.

Also, and I apologize if this offends anyone, I doubt the polls in the blogs are very well thought out. After reading Monte's latest blog (on treasure and encounter guidelines) I had the impression that whoever is blogging just writes whatever questions and posts them. Some of the polls in articles seem more carefully structured, but I doubt even those are going to be allowed to overide experience and common sense. 

truth/humor
Ed_Warlord, on what it takes to make a thread work: I think for it to be really constructive, everyone would have to be honest with each other, and with themselves.

 

iserith: The game doesn't profess to be "just like our world." What it is just like is the world of Dungeons & Dragons. Any semblance to reality is purely coincidental.

 

Areleth: How does this help the problems we have with Fighters? Do you think that every time I thought I was playing D&D what I was actually doing was slamming my head in a car door and that if you just explain how to play without doing that then I'll finally enjoy the game?

 

TD: That's why they put me on the front of every book. This is the dungeon, and I am the dragon. A word of warning though: I'm totally not a level appropriate encounter.

I don't know WotC's internal procedures for playtesting and feedback but I would be really, REALLY surprised if this forum is the major way they get feedback. My guess is that they do a lot of direct playtesting and focus fairly heavily on surveying the playtesters for practical feedback based on their actual experience. 

I'm not saying this forum is being totally ignored or anything, I'm just saying that they probably simply use it like a suggestion box and have the community manager filter the posts for suggestions that sound like good ideas or comments that seem particularly insightful.

Look, the simply fact is that only a tiny minority of all players will ever even visit these (or any other) forum. What the original poster is trying to say, is that just because Point of View A is predominant within these forums, doesn't mean that it is a good idea to assume that Point of View A is the way it should be.

The people posting here (myself included I suppose) may be vocal, but that doesn't make us right. If the game is to survive and thrive, it needs to reach out to everyone (not necessarily please everyone, but at least reach out to everyone).

Re-uniting Pathfinder folks, with 3e and 4e would be great for the game (and yearly sales of WoTC). Polls and forums only reach out to a specific audience, and that needs to be taken into account whenever drawing conclusions from those polls and forums.

Most people posting here (from the what I've read) play 4e, yet statistically most people playing D&D don't play 4e (there are more people playing other versions of the game and pathfinder than 4e).
Most people posting here are likely between the age of 14 and 25, and tend to be male. (I'm 41 btw).

That doesn't mean that the opinions posted here are worthless, they DO have value, but only when keeping in mind where they are coming from.

Players in their 60's (yes, there are some) aren't likely to ever visit a gaming forum to voice their opinions, yet their opinions are just as valid as everyone else's. 

I'd also like to know what the game designer's are doing to hear from those who would not normally visit these forums. Personally, I would have liked to have seen TSR (and later WoTC) put a registration card in every book they sold. "Fill this out and snail or e-mail it in if you'd like to participate in polling regarding new products". 
If WOTC cares about money they should be reaching out to as many people as possible, particularly the Pathfinder players. They're still D&D players at heart.

Just taking the word of the few people who do post here is going to result in a product that appeals to exactly those people and not necessarily anyone else.


Presumably the fans of pathfinder speak english and have internet access.  Connection formed.  Let them come and have their say, if they can be civil enough not to edition bash.  If they can't be civil, then let them stay in their own yard (as an apartment dweller, I've had my fill of screaming children for one lifetime).


Well I've got news for you. As an active player of 5 editions of D&D {BECMI, AD&D, AD&D2e, 3x, & PF) who's also played some 4e, this is as at least as much my yard as it is yours. Especially these forums concerning an as-yet non-existant future edition.


I never said you weren't welcome.  I only asked that you be civil; I think the CoC requires that as well.  If someone has a constructive opinion on how to improve the game then I'm willing to listen.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

I believe the OP is right in that we are a small sample of D&D players. Our collective opinions may or may not represent the larger player base.  I think it is to our advantage to grow this community at wizards.com. Here is another thread where we may discuss what we can do to bring more players to wizards.com.

-GiantDwarf 
I've always said the extremes set the positions and those in the middle choose.  It's why our political system is so schizophrenic at times.  

I believe these boards are useful as they present arguments that over time reveal the various positions well.  I admit you have to sift a lot of gravel to find the gold but it is there.   Since D&DN is a modular system by choice I think they will try and address all major concerns.  If something is a deal breaker for even 30% of the people it is important.  If it can be a module then by all means include it.   This is the inclusive edition.  The others have generally been exclusive.

 
I believe the OP is right in that we are a small sample of D&D players. Our collective opinions may or may not represent the larger player base.  I think it is to our advantage to grow this community at wizards.com. Here is another thread where we may discuss what we can do to bring more players to wizards.com.

-GiantDwarf 

Our advantage, yes.  Our responsibility, no.

If Wizards does not recognize that D&D is a social game that warrants the proper resources to be devoted to strengthening and nurturing a community, then it's an uphill battle, one that hasn't been won since these forums have been live.

Reflavoring: the change of flavor without changing any mechanical part of the game, no matter how small, in order to fit the mechanics to an otherwise unsupported concept. Retexturing: the change of flavor (with at most minor mechanical adaptations) in order to effortlessly create support for a concept without inventing anything new. Houseruling: the change, either minor or major, of the mechanics in order to better reflect a certain aspect of the game, including adapting the rules to fit an otherwise unsupported concept. Homebrewing: the complete invention of something new that fits within the system in order to reflect an unsupported concept. Default module =/= Core mechanic.

I’ve removed content from this thread because edition warring is deemed to be forum disruption and is a violation of the Code of Conduct.

You can review the Code here: www.wizards.com/Company/About.aspx?x=wz_...

You can read how to prevent edition wars here: community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...

Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks. You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.

If you wish to report a post for Code of Conduct violation, click on the “Report Post” button above the post and this will submit your report to the moderators on duty.
...statistically most people playing D&D don't play 4e (there are more people playing other versions of the game and pathfinder than 4e). 



Just curious where you're getting your information. I'm not saying you're wrong or right but have there been any actual published surveys (not forum polls) that say how many groups play 4e vs 3e vs Pathfinder? (I say not forum polls because those are never true random surveys, they're just responses from people who happen to be passionate about following that particular forum which can lead to very skewed results. For example it's quite possible that people who play Pathfinder are also more interested in general RPG forums and therefore polls of those groups could skew toward that game. Similarly a poll here could skew in favor of 4e.)

Of forum polls, though, the best one I can find off-hand scanning around is at gamers-rule.com/SurveyResults.aspx from internet forums that indicated the people who replied roughly 40% played Pathfinder, 25% played 4e, 18% 3e and the remaining 17% played older editions of D&D. As I said above I imagine internet forum poll responders probably skew in favor of Pathfinder, so my guess is the actual percentages of Pathfinder relative to 4e are closer to each other, but that's just a guess. It'd be interesting to see a more rigidly done market survey.
...statistically most people playing D&D don't play 4e (there are more people playing other versions of the game and pathfinder than 4e)



Just curious where you're getting your information.


I have no doubt that he's right.  Of course, this has been brough up before so I will say this again: you can say that same thing about any edition; which makes it a meaningless comment.

There are more people playing other editions of D&D than 1e
There are more people playing other editions of D&D than 2e
There are more people playing other editions of D&D than 3e
There are more people playing other editions of D&D than 4e
There are more people playing editions of D&D than Pathfinder

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

Also wanted to chime in on the notion that these people don't matter if they don't vote.


IDK if I led you to that assumption, but I want to clarify that the bolded part above is not what I meant.  I only meant to point out that some of those labelled as having no voice are simply choosing not to speak.  The actualy worth of their opinion thus has equal potential to be either good or bad.



You're saying that it's just like voting. Don't complain about the results if you didn't participate in the voting process. You have a chance to speak your mind right now. When it is all said and done, that is it. Don't come in after the fact bashing it and complaining.
@Bodyknock

I find that survey more neutral than most here I'd think.  But statistically perfect of course not. 

I'm surprised at the number playing 3.5 as opposed to Pathfinder.  I know of two such groups in my area right now.  (That I personally am not involved with other than knowing some of the players.)

The key would be to figure out WHY people like a particular edition.  If those reasons are not mutually exclusive (and of course some will be but not all) then make a game that hits the right spot for both sides.  If the reasons are mutually exclusive then create modules.   Oh wait... that is what they are shooting for!  Let's root for them to succeed.
You're saying that it's just like voting. Don't complain about the results if you didn't participate in the voting process. You have a chance to speak your mind right now. When it is all said and done, that is it. Don't come in after the fact bashing it and complaining.


An opinion poll is similar to, but different from, voting. 
Also wanted to chime in on the notion that these people don't matter if they don't vote.


IDK if I led you to that assumption, but I want to clarify that the bolded part above is not what I meant.  I only meant to point out that some of those labelled as having no voice are simply choosing not to speak.  The actualy worth of their opinion thus has equal potential to be either good or bad.



You're saying that it's just like voting. Don't complain about the results if you didn't participate in the voting process. You have a chance to speak your mind right now. When it is all said and done, that is it. Don't come in after the fact bashing it and complaining.


Basically, though I was attempting to be diplomatic about it.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

You're saying that it's just like voting. Don't complain about the results if you didn't participate in the voting process. You have a chance to speak your mind right now. When it is all said and done, that is it. Don't come in after the fact bashing it and complaining.


An opinion poll is similar to, but different from, voting. 



Of course. The point remains that the people who choose not to participate have no room to complain after the fact. This is the time to let your voice be heard.
You're saying that it's just like voting. Don't complain about the results if you didn't participate in the voting process. You have a chance to speak your mind right now. When it is all said and done, that is it. Don't come in after the fact bashing it and complaining.


An opinion poll is similar to, but different from, voting. 



Of course. The point remains that the people who choose not to participate have no room to complain after the fact. This is the time to let your voice be heard.


No room to complain about not being heard.  They're welcome to comment on things that could be improved.  However, I agree that the bashing is just silliness.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

You're saying that it's just like voting. Don't complain about the results if you didn't participate in the voting process. You have a chance to speak your mind right now. When it is all said and done, that is it. Don't come in after the fact bashing it and complaining.


An opinion poll is similar to, but different from, voting. 



Of course. The point remains that the people who choose not to participate have no room to complain after the fact. This is the time to let your voice be heard.


No room to complain about not being heard.  They're welcome to comment on things that could be improved.  However, I agree that the bashing is just silliness.



More like no room to complain about the outcome. Something you like or don't like making it in or not. Your notion of how it "should be" not being present.
i think it's funny when 4e people claim they have no voice. From an AD&D perspective, the 4th edition material sticks out like Vegas in the Desert at night - you can't miss it. Dragonborn? Warlord? Warlock? wtf? And there's all sorts of little mechanical ideas that are a nod to 4e.

The people who are really not being addressed are the BECMI/Arduin/AD&D types. Some of them have already passed away, many have kids or grandkids. But that doesn't mean they don't have purchasing power, and that doesn't mean those old school people don't have solutions to many of the problems faced by later editions.

The Voices of 3.5 and 4.0 are yelling at each other about what D&D should be, but from an old school perspective, we already know. A friend suggested the original writers read the classics, like Greek mythology, the story of Roland, european mythology, and oriental legends. Today, they argued, D&D classes aren't based on anything but warring opinions of what's cool and this indefatigable argument over Balance.

D&D isn't supposed to be balanced. It's supposed to be about how people can use their wits and imagination to overcome seemingly insurmountable challenges, and grow from that experience.
Options are Liberating

More like no room to complain about the outcome. Something you like or don't like making it in or not. Your notion of how it "should be" not being present.



Well if you are active on the internet and care about D&D then I think you should be here.  Lots of people are not #1 and those people might complain.  The later I'd say should not.

The thing is... you always vote with your dollars.  If they don't like the game and don't complain and don't buy - are we happy?  I'd rather try to make the polls as robust as we can.  Not sure how but I want more votes.
D&D isn't supposed to be balanced.


That's a personal preference, not a statement of fact.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

WotC is doing actual market research and don't forget the play test. This will give them a wide variety of input.
The mistakes of 4e non-playtest shall not be repeated
D&D isn't supposed to be balanced. It's supposed to be about how people can use their wits and imagination to overcome seemingly insurmountable challenges, and grow from that experience.



This needs to be repeated.
D&D isn't supposed to be balanced. It's supposed to be about how people can use their wits and imagination to overcome seemingly insurmountable challenges, and grow from that experience.



This needs to be repeated.


Leave out the "not supposed to be balanced" part and I agree.

Leave out the "not supposed to be balanced" part and I agree.



Seconded.

(How insurmountable is a challenge when you can just say 'I have a spell for that'?  Not a lot of wit or imagination there, either.)
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
D&D isn't supposed to be balanced.



This is the core of everything. Balance or not? Once a decision is made, everything is easeier, much easier.

And i say dnd isn't supposed to be balanced.

D&D isn't supposed to be balanced.



This is the core of everything. Balance or not? Once a decision is made, everything is easeier, much easier.

And i say dnd isn't supposed to be balanced.


Then make it balanced, because it's so much easier to add imbalance in after the fact.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

I have a feeling wotc is deffinintly looking beyond these forums for further input. I would think they are aware that the growth of successful retro clones and path finder means many gamers are no longer here for several reasons. It could be they are not interested in arguing and /or don't think their views willbe heard anyway. I know gamers who said they wI'll not bother with any new edition of dnd untill wotc is no longer making the game. That is how upset they are over 4th edition. I give wotc a lot,of credit for trying to create a new game that will appeal to older gamers while not leavinging behind what 4th Ed fans love about fourth Ed. It is a tall order to try to make every one happy and I pro glad they are going to try to do this because 4th Ed fans matter as much as all the othefaded tion fans out there.

But if the new edition is not going to be a new fourth Ed, or a rehashed 3rd Ed (both of which I think would do quite poorly), but a new and exciting SYSTEM that offers a new experience that is appealing to all of us, they have to look outside these forums. The idea that it's "their" loss for not coming in here and slinging mud with the rest of us is a sure fire way to lose alot of potential buyers and fans. Remember, this is capitalist competition, and rightnow the burden is on wotc's sholdurs to bring back the fans they lost, not the other way around. After all, why should fans of retro clones and 3.x. wast their time arguing and fighting in these forums when they have their pathfinder or other game they like already? No, I am afraid the work is for wotc to do to get it right, not those who left.

Our voices here are,when presented constructively, are valuable, but not fully representItive.  I know there are players here who love fourth edition, but it should be obvious by now that fourth Ed lost what the game meant for most of the old guard. If fourth Ed was popular enough on its own, I doubt a new edition would be in the works so fast, and certainly not one that is doing things like bringing back vancian, and ability to play a simple version of the game. I know it sucks to have an edition you really like get shelved, but it has happened to the rest of us, form 1 to 2nd, 2nd to 3rd, and 3rd to fourth. I know it hurts. But, we also, for the first time for a lot of us, have the opportunity to contribute to a new system and that is very cool. But, as we comment in here, we have to keep in mind that the game nweds not only to make us happy, but win back the dnd players who have left. It needs to do both and that means only some, not all, of the answers can be found in these forums.
Hey guys,

It's been mentioned several times that these forums and the polls on our website are *not* the only sources of feedback that R&D are being exposed to. You don't really need to worry about people not having voices. You don't have to be posting here or taking our polls.

Everyone who wants to have a voice is going to be heard. It doesn't mean everyone gets his or her way, but we are paying attention to a lot of different people.

Hope that clarifies things ,

Monica
D&D isn't supposed to be balanced.



This is the core of everything. Balance or not? Once a decision is made, everything is easeier, much easier.

And i say dnd isn't supposed to be balanced.


Then make it balanced, because it's so much easier to add imbalance in after the fact.



The question for me is, what does balance mean? I mean, the. Leakiest example of balance would be every one forced to play the same class with same feats, ability scores etc. but obviously we don't want that. So the question is, how different do we make each class or, more percisley, do we make them different enough so that insome situations, one class has an advantage, then in another situation, a different class has an advantage? 

Some say the want imbalance but I think the real issues is diversity. It used to be that fighters were best at fighting, they delt most damage, had most HPs, and best defense and attack. Thives were not combat guys and most people did not play a thief with the expectation of being great in combat or even equal to a fighter. Instead, they got to hid in shadows, scale sheere surfaces, disarm traps, figure out how to use magic wands, and decipher languages. These were all things different from what a fighter could do. This gave the games diversity. Do you want to smash kill withi it sword? Or do you want to sneak, trick, and role play your way thoughchallenges? Now of course, you usually needed both in the game, Sneak if you can, or let the fighter use his less subtle methods if necessary. so as a player, I could play a combat oriented character, or a skills oriented character. But in fourth Ed, everything is combat oriented. Fourth Ed is built around the idea that 80 percent of the game is combat, and 20 per Ent is a mix of skill challenge and role play. Because of this , all classes are built with the idea of, and centering on, a combat role such as striker, blocker, etc. this has become thoug of as balance to me it's more homogeneity, which equals less interesting options. After all, what is so great about having dozens of options if the is not much substantive difference between them?

It sounds like dnd next is going to allow for people to customise how they want with the idea of exploration, interaction, and combat. A character can build around only combat skills and abilities if that's what they want, or the can foregoe a combat ability to pick up a Theme for role playing advantage.  So, maybe we can set up, so that if I go to build a thief, or rouge, I can chose to optimize my combat skills and be a striker, on par with the fighter. Or, I can focus on skills and bemore of an explorers, because maybe I don't care if others are better than me in combat. Does this sound like a nice compromise? 
Hey guys,

It's been mentioned several times that these forums and the polls on our website are *not* the only sources of feedback that R&D are being exposed to. You don't really need to worry about people not having voices. You don't have to be posting here or taking our polls.

Everyone who wants to have a voice is going to be heard. It doesn't mean everyone gets his or her way, but we are paying attention to a lot of different people.

Hope that clarifies things ,

Monica



Thanks for letting us know. I suspected as much but it is encouraging to hear it officially!