I believe that one of the best things about the Level Up project is the fact that every class gets to make multiple choices as the character levels. I just hope that most of the choice are at least close to being equally good.
Hey everyone - just a casual reminder to please keep to the topic of discussion (singling out some side comment and starting multi-threaded replies is heading towards the off topic realm). I can understand there are lots of varying viewpoints, but please remember to remain civil.
I believe that one of the best things about the Level Up project is the fact that every class gets to make multiple choices as the character levels. I just hope that most of the choice are at least close to being equally good.
So for a folk with a relatively "lay" perspective on this draft, Level Up presents options akin to some of the stuff Tasha's teased in Optional Class Features, but on broader (wider range of available options) and deeper (like some options can sort of get amped up in future choices in lieu of depth)?
Like Tasha's sounds like something fun to make available.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I believe that one of the best things about the Level Up project is the fact that every class gets to make multiple choices as the character levels. I just hope that most of the choice are at least close to being equally good.
So for a folk with a relatively "lay" perspective on this draft, Level Up presents options akin to some of the stuff Tasha's teased in Optional Class Features, but on broader (wider range of available options) and deeper (like some options can sort of get amped up in future choices in lieu of depth)?
Like Tasha's sounds like something fun to make available.
For example, the Adept makes a choice at level 1 about the Defense type, then at level 2 they get to pick Combat Maneuvers and so on. I only wish that they had given us more of the class itself to see what other option there are going forward. It shows that they exist, just not what they are. I don't know if what they are offering is worthwhile mechanically speaking, but the concept of having choices to make at every level is cool to me.
I mean, I could point to at least three separate posters in the last two pages who have said "So stop playing D&D and do something else", usually with all sort of highfalutin', nose-in-the-air accompaniment about how the true purity of D&D is more important than anybody's satisfaction with it. I'm not sure how that can be construed as anything but "abandon game and leave me alone"
Suggesting you try another TTRPG system than to change 5e isnt the same as "abandon game and leave me alone" and it certainly isnt "shut up and abandon D&D forever". The comments I assume you are referring to are those by Kotath and Snarloc_Stormcall. Neither have told you to stop playing D&D forever, just to try something new.
Your representing other poster's comments in a purposefully dishonest manner to make it seem like they are more vile and hostile towards you than they are being in reality.
Just curious, but are you here to contribute to the topic or just harass Yurei?
I made my points that I agreed with back on page 21. Since then, the only reason I have called out Yurei's comments is because they appear to be making their arguments and points in bad faith:
1) Suggesting people who like Champion Fighters and Inquisitive Rogues "hate their brains" and "hate D&D" (comment 431)
2) Repeatedly and purposefully using hyperbole to misrepresent the points being made by other commenters (there are a couple examples, but 488 is one of the more recent). Statements like "I have subsequently been informed to shut up, abandond D&D forever, and ideally extinguish myself in a motel room somewhere, so...yeah" are not only false, but do not contribute to the discussion and seem to aim to accomplish nothing more than making other commenters look bad. Suggesting the other people who disagree with you in the comments are trying to get you to end your own life in a motel room is going WAY TOO FAR.
I am not trying to harass Yurei, but it does bother me that they continue to try and frame other commenter's suggestions as vile and personal attacks against them rather than sticking to the topic being discussed. Yes, I recognize the irony in me taking the time to comment this as also not sticking to the topic being discussed. I will try to refrain from doing so from this point forward.
For the topic at hand, while I wouldn't mind seeing martial characters getting better high Tier abilities. I agree that the idea that all fighters could get a battlemaster skeleton would be nice, but there is still alot in place to keep fighters versatile. As I said in my previous comment on page 21 I do think martial classes have things they can play with in combat by using alternative attack options (Grapple, Shove, Disarm) to better control the battlefield. Fighters also get more feats and can use things like Tavern Brawler, Grappler, GWM, SS, Slasher, Piercer, Crusher, etc to do more with their 3-4 attacks they get and keep things interesting. If they want to do more out of combat they can pick up feats like Keen Mind, Dungeon Delver, Skill Expert, Linguist, Actor, to better flesh out their influence on the other pillars.
I do not think that the other martial classes necessarily need the same sort of improvement that the fighter could benefit from, and even the fighter I think is salvageable.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Four-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
For example, the Adept makes a choice at level 1 about the Defense type, then at level 2 they get to pick Combat Maneuvers and so on. I only wish that they had given us more of the class itself to see what other option there are going forward. It shows that they exist, just not what they are. I don't know if what they are offering is worthwhile mechanically speaking, but the concept of having choices to make at every level is cool to me.
Edit: Sorry for the picture quality.
The idea of giving the Adept (which I assume is like a Monk) a defense ability based on Strength is pretty cool. I do wish Strength based monks were more viable and this appears to be taking steps to fix that. Like you said, it is hard to tell based on what little is shown here how beneficial all the changes could be, but I do like what I see here
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Four-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Unfortunately, without specifics, we can really only discuss the concept or idea for the varies rules they are implementing for their product. A lot of it sounds good to me, but that is the point of marketing. For example I have wanted more comprehensive crafting rules for both mundane and magic items. I am going to be honest, I can't see this well enough to read it from the picture that they provided (only partial vision in one eye) but the fact that they have gone through the trouble is nice. Once the PDF is out in November I can make it large enough to read. But as I was saying, there are number of ideas that I like, but I can't speak to the quality of the actual mechanics.
Unfortunately, without specifics, we can really only discuss the concept or idea for the varies rules they are implementing for their product. A lot of it sounds good to me, but that is the point of marketing. For example I have wanted more comprehensive crafting rules for both mundane and magic items. I am going to be honest, I can't see this well enough to read it from the picture that they provided (only partial vision in one eye) but the fact that they have gone through the trouble is nice. Once the PDF is out in November I can make it large enough to read. But as I was saying, there are number of ideas that I like, but I can't speak to the quality of the actual mechanics.
Can I ask why you need rules for something that really can be defined by a DM? Crafting rules for magic items exist in xanthers, they form a basis upon which DMs can then be creative and tweak and change.
Crafting by its very nature is a unique thing WOTC can’t rule for every idea a player comes up with. For instance I have a player who wanted to craft a crossbow attached to a shield, as a DM I sat down with him out of game and we worked out what it would look like and how it would operate. I then worked out how long it would take to R and D, have him some skill checks roles and decided a research cost and then once built a cost to reproduce.
Magic items are the same, a player comes to me with an idea and I then sit down and work with them to tweak it and then make up the components they need potentially turning it into a mini adventure.
this can’t be defined because however granular wizards get all layers would still ask to make stuff not defined in the rules.
Can I ask why you need rules for something that really can be defined by a DM? Crafting rules for magic items exist in xanthers, they form a basis upon which DMs can then be creative and tweak and change.
Crafting by its very nature is a unique thing WOTC can’t rule for every idea a player comes up with. For instance I have a player who wanted to craft a crossbow attached to a shield, as a DM I sat down with him out of game and we worked out what it would look like and how it would operate. I then worked out how long it would take to R and D, have him some skill checks roles and decided a research cost and then once built a cost to reproduce.
Magic items are the same, a player comes to me with an idea and I then sit down and work with them to tweak it and then make up the components they need potentially turning it into a mini adventure.
this can’t be defined because however granular wizards get all layers would still ask to make stuff not defined in the rules.
Part of the reason for a push towards cooler crafting rules is that the rules in Xanathar's Guide are baby bottom booty buttcheeks. They're actively godawful, and consist of little more than "waste the party's time for a year or more and you may be allowed to get one item once, provided the DM never rolled a "your crafting effort is foiled and ruined and all the components are lost!" roll on the seven hundred Crafting Complications rolls made during your attempt!"
Secondarily, the oft-lauded idea of "you have to go on an adventure to get the crazy monster part you need to make your magic item!" means crafting is, at best, a once-a-campaign thing. It turns crafting from something somebody does on the side to help the party into the entire party's whole entire focus for multiple months, and a strong majority of D&D parties will not tolerate some crafty boi constantly coming up with new ideas and derailing their plot to go find junk to make into cool shit. For a lot of folks, that's only right and proper...but there's also a whole-ass artificer class designed to cater to the class fantasy of "Crafty Boi", and a whole lot of inventive players who play artificers with the hope and intention of Making Cool Stuff on the regular. The Xanathar's Guide crafting rules are horrifyingly antagonistic to regular crafting efforts, and they provide no guidance whatsoever to games and tables where crafting is meant to be a regular part of the adventure rather than a weird one-off the DM did that one time to get Carol to stop talking about the cool thing she wants to make before the party goes back to randomly assigned/rolled grab-bag loot they cannot use, sell, trade, or otherwise gain any benefit from whatsoever.
The Xanathar's rules treat crafting as an exception to the normal flow of game and a huge imposition on the party. People want rules that merge seamlessly into the normal flow of a game instead and allow them to do what people ACTUALLY MAKE CRAFTY BOIS TO DO(!!!), which is to equip themselves and their friends with the items and tools needed to excel in their adventures.
Can I ask why you need rules for something that really can be defined by a DM? Crafting rules for magic items exist in xanthers, they form a basis upon which DMs can then be creative and tweak and change.
Crafting by its very nature is a unique thing WOTC can’t rule for every idea a player comes up with. For instance I have a player who wanted to craft a crossbow attached to a shield, as a DM I sat down with him out of game and we worked out what it would look like and how it would operate. I then worked out how long it would take to R and D, have him some skill checks roles and decided a research cost and then once built a cost to reproduce.
Magic items are the same, a player comes to me with an idea and I then sit down and work with them to tweak it and then make up the components they need potentially turning it into a mini adventure.
this can’t be defined because however granular wizards get all layers would still ask to make stuff not defined in the rules.
I could do all of that. It isn't that it is hard, but I want my players (and myself) to be able to sit down with the book and at least get an idea of how to go about doing something first. I want there to be some consistency that can be relied upon from one crafting project to another without having to write up my own rules. I want Tool Proficiencies to have a better defined purpose in the game, especially now that there is a class that is pretty much dedicated to them.
A lot of the people that I currently play with got their start from MMO's and more than one of them wants to craft things for themselves and the party in general. I want them to be able to do that without having spend a lot of time going back and forth about how to do it and be consistent. A passible set of crafting rules would help.
This is not an advertisement for Level Up. I am posting this so everyone has the same frame of reference for discussion. I found these pictures of more of the Adept and what they get as they level.
It is a lot of content and as I stated previously, my vision is really bad, so it will take some time for me to go through this. However, I wanted to see what others make of it.
Can I ask why you need rules for something that really can be defined by a DM? Crafting rules for magic items exist in xanthers, they form a basis upon which DMs can then be creative and tweak and change.
Crafting by its very nature is a unique thing WOTC can’t rule for every idea a player comes up with. For instance I have a player who wanted to craft a crossbow attached to a shield, as a DM I sat down with him out of game and we worked out what it would look like and how it would operate. I then worked out how long it would take to R and D, have him some skill checks roles and decided a research cost and then once built a cost to reproduce.
Magic items are the same, a player comes to me with an idea and I then sit down and work with them to tweak it and then make up the components they need potentially turning it into a mini adventure.
this can’t be defined because however granular wizards get all layers would still ask to make stuff not defined in the rules.
Part of the reason for a push towards cooler crafting rules is that the rules in Xanathar's Guide are baby bottom booty buttcheeks. They're actively godawful, and consist of little more than "waste the party's time for a year or more and you may be allowed to get one item once, provided the DM never rolled a "your crafting effort is foiled and ruined and all the components are lost!" roll on the seven hundred Crafting Complications rolls made during your attempt!"
Secondarily, the oft-lauded idea of "you have to go on an adventure to get the crazy monster part you need to make your magic item!" means crafting is, at best, a once-a-campaign thing. It turns crafting from something somebody does on the side to help the party into the entire party's whole entire focus for multiple months, and a strong majority of D&D parties will not tolerate some crafty boi constantly coming up with new ideas and derailing their plot to go find junk to make into cool shit. For a lot of folks, that's only right and proper...but there's also a whole-ass artificer class designed to cater to the class fantasy of "Crafty Boi", and a whole lot of inventive players who play artificers with the hope and intention of Making Cool Stuff on the regular. The Xanathar's Guide crafting rules are horrifyingly antagonistic to regular crafting efforts, and they provide no guidance whatsoever to games and tables where crafting is meant to be a regular part of the adventure rather than a weird one-off the DM did that one time to get Carol to stop talking about the cool thing she wants to make before the party goes back to randomly assigned/rolled grab-bag loot they cannot use, sell, trade, or otherwise gain any benefit from whatsoever.
The Xanathar's rules treat crafting as an exception to the normal flow of game and a huge imposition on the party. People want rules that merge seamlessly into the normal flow of a game instead and allow them to do what people ACTUALLY MAKE CRAFTY BOIS TO DO(!!!), which is to equip themselves and their friends with the items and tools needed to excel in their adventures.
And this hence lies the problem, your table wants crafting to work one way, another table will want crafting to work another and a 3rd will not want to do it at all. You say that crafting a magic item takes too long, but there are many many DMs who dislike there players having access to magic items at all easily, let alone having rules that allow them to go off and make there own ones at will quickly and easily.
I doubt any crafting rules WOTC created would please even 50% of players and the moment a rule is defined for a thing you take away DM agency in determining how that thing should be done. Crafting in a TTRPG in my opinion should never be like crafting in a computer game, making a healing potion takes a week, not seconds. If it took seconds they would cost 5gp and everyone would have many.
Crafting is such a personal table based thing that any rules for it would need to be an entire supplement on their own covering every variation of table and this is the problem, DND 5th edition is a rules light game, the rules in the players handbook and DMG probably amount to about 20 pages of text, add in the optional rules in xanathars and Tasha’s and maybe you push to a 30 page rule book at absolute maximum. These are rules not how to run traps, or make a character, or spell lists. Compared to other systems this is so light weight. Add in crafting you double that amount just for one niche thing that many many tables don’t care about.
"We received thousands of votes on our first survey, which addressed the broader outlines of Level Up. Thank you to everybody who participated! From the start this has been planned as a data-driven process. These results — amongst other things — help guide us as we design the game. Some folks have asked why we’ve announced this project so long before its release; it’s so that we can get data at each stage in the process, and recruit great talent for our design team (more on that later!)
Anyhow, on to the survey results! Note that these questions were intentionally broad; each of these topics can be drilled into in more detail at a later stage.
These things were very important to you
100% compatibility with existing 5E material
Meaningful character choices at each advancement level
A fully fleshed out Exploration Pillar
A range of martial maneuvers to give non-spellcasters more options in combat
More ways to spend gold at higher levels
You were positive about
A crafting system for magic items
Mechanically distinctive weapons and armor
Culture and species being separated during character creation
Both a warlord class and a revised spell-less ranger
A more detailed skill system"
If this information is accurate, and I have no reason to believe that it isn't considering the activity on the En World Forums, you are wrong about what people want. It is very common for people on these forums to assume that what they think or want is the most common (including myself), but WotC uses survey just like En World has done to come up with what the majority of their target audience wants instead of just making assumptions.
Can I ask why you need rules for something that really can be defined by a DM? Crafting rules for magic items exist in xanthers, they form a basis upon which DMs can then be creative and tweak and change.
Crafting by its very nature is a unique thing WOTC can’t rule for every idea a player comes up with. For instance I have a player who wanted to craft a crossbow attached to a shield, as a DM I sat down with him out of game and we worked out what it would look like and how it would operate. I then worked out how long it would take to R and D, have him some skill checks roles and decided a research cost and then once built a cost to reproduce.
Magic items are the same, a player comes to me with an idea and I then sit down and work with them to tweak it and then make up the components they need potentially turning it into a mini adventure.
this can’t be defined because however granular wizards get all layers would still ask to make stuff not defined in the rules.
I could do all of that. It isn't that it is hard, but I want my players (and myself) to be able to sit down with the book and at least get an idea of how to go about doing something first. I want there to be some consistency that can be relied upon from one crafting project to another without having to write up my own rules. I want Tool Proficiencies to have a better defined purpose in the game, especially now that there is a class that is pretty much dedicated to them.
A lot of the people that I currently play with got their start from MMO's and more than one of them wants to craft things for themselves and the party in general. I want them to be able to do that without having spend a lot of time going back and forth about how to do it and be consistent. A passible set of crafting rules would help.
Edit: And what Yurei said
Ok while I can see how to newbies the idea of having to think this stuff through is daunting but what I think people need are not more rules, what WOTC needs to be much better at doing is presenting online resources to help teach DMs how to do this at their own tables. You may think crafting and using tools is a one size fits all thing that can have rules applied to make it work, but crafting by its very nature is different table to table player to player and DM to DM. So a set of rules that say X takes Y to make at Z cost and require ABC skill checks might be ideal for table 1 but tables 2-120 may well look at that and say, nope those crafting rules are rubbish.
Far better would be a series of articles by different DMs walking through how they manage crafting at their table, otherwise the very nature of the subject means you are looking at 50 pages plus of rules, tables, options and ideas for just one niche thing
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I believe that one of the best things about the Level Up project is the fact that every class gets to make multiple choices as the character levels. I just hope that most of the choice are at least close to being equally good.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Hey everyone - just a casual reminder to please keep to the topic of discussion (singling out some side comment and starting multi-threaded replies is heading towards the off topic realm). I can understand there are lots of varying viewpoints, but please remember to remain civil.
Site Rules & Guidelines || How to Tooltip || Contact Support || Changelog || Pricing FAQ || Homebrew FAQ
If you have questions/concerns, please Private Message me or another moderator.
Wary the wizard who focuses on homebrew, for he can create nightmares that you wouldn't even dream of
So for a folk with a relatively "lay" perspective on this draft, Level Up presents options akin to some of the stuff Tasha's teased in Optional Class Features, but on broader (wider range of available options) and deeper (like some options can sort of get amped up in future choices in lieu of depth)?
Like Tasha's sounds like something fun to make available.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I think that is about right.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
For example, the Adept makes a choice at level 1 about the Defense type, then at level 2 they get to pick Combat Maneuvers and so on. I only wish that they had given us more of the class itself to see what other option there are going forward. It shows that they exist, just not what they are. I don't know if what they are offering is worthwhile mechanically speaking, but the concept of having choices to make at every level is cool to me.
Edit: Sorry for the picture quality.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I made my points that I agreed with back on page 21. Since then, the only reason I have called out Yurei's comments is because they appear to be making their arguments and points in bad faith:
1) Suggesting people who like Champion Fighters and Inquisitive Rogues "hate their brains" and "hate D&D" (comment 431)
2) Repeatedly and purposefully using hyperbole to misrepresent the points being made by other commenters (there are a couple examples, but 488 is one of the more recent). Statements like "I have subsequently been informed to shut up, abandond D&D forever, and ideally extinguish myself in a motel room somewhere, so...yeah" are not only false, but do not contribute to the discussion and seem to aim to accomplish nothing more than making other commenters look bad. Suggesting the other people who disagree with you in the comments are trying to get you to end your own life in a motel room is going WAY TOO FAR.
I am not trying to harass Yurei, but it does bother me that they continue to try and frame other commenter's suggestions as vile and personal attacks against them rather than sticking to the topic being discussed. Yes, I recognize the irony in me taking the time to comment this as also not sticking to the topic being discussed. I will try to refrain from doing so from this point forward.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the topic at hand, while I wouldn't mind seeing martial characters getting better high Tier abilities. I agree that the idea that all fighters could get a battlemaster skeleton would be nice, but there is still alot in place to keep fighters versatile. As I said in my previous comment on page 21 I do think martial classes have things they can play with in combat by using alternative attack options (Grapple, Shove, Disarm) to better control the battlefield. Fighters also get more feats and can use things like Tavern Brawler, Grappler, GWM, SS, Slasher, Piercer, Crusher, etc to do more with their 3-4 attacks they get and keep things interesting. If they want to do more out of combat they can pick up feats like Keen Mind, Dungeon Delver, Skill Expert, Linguist, Actor, to better flesh out their influence on the other pillars.
I do not think that the other martial classes necessarily need the same sort of improvement that the fighter could benefit from, and even the fighter I think is salvageable.
Four-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
The idea of giving the Adept (which I assume is like a Monk) a defense ability based on Strength is pretty cool. I do wish Strength based monks were more viable and this appears to be taking steps to fix that. Like you said, it is hard to tell based on what little is shown here how beneficial all the changes could be, but I do like what I see here
Four-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Unfortunately, without specifics, we can really only discuss the concept or idea for the varies rules they are implementing for their product. A lot of it sounds good to me, but that is the point of marketing. For example I have wanted more comprehensive crafting rules for both mundane and magic items. I am going to be honest, I can't see this well enough to read it from the picture that they provided (only partial vision in one eye) but the fact that they have gone through the trouble is nice. Once the PDF is out in November I can make it large enough to read. But as I was saying, there are number of ideas that I like, but I can't speak to the quality of the actual mechanics.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Can I ask why you need rules for something that really can be defined by a DM? Crafting rules for magic items exist in xanthers, they form a basis upon which DMs can then be creative and tweak and change.
Crafting by its very nature is a unique thing WOTC can’t rule for every idea a player comes up with. For instance I have a player who wanted to craft a crossbow attached to a shield, as a DM I sat down with him out of game and we worked out what it would look like and how it would operate. I then worked out how long it would take to R and D, have him some skill checks roles and decided a research cost and then once built a cost to reproduce.
Magic items are the same, a player comes to me with an idea and I then sit down and work with them to tweak it and then make up the components they need potentially turning it into a mini adventure.
this can’t be defined because however granular wizards get all layers would still ask to make stuff not defined in the rules.
Part of the reason for a push towards cooler crafting rules is that the rules in Xanathar's Guide are baby bottom booty buttcheeks. They're actively godawful, and consist of little more than "waste the party's time for a year or more and you may be allowed to get one item once, provided the DM never rolled a "your crafting effort is foiled and ruined and all the components are lost!" roll on the seven hundred Crafting Complications rolls made during your attempt!"
Secondarily, the oft-lauded idea of "you have to go on an adventure to get the crazy monster part you need to make your magic item!" means crafting is, at best, a once-a-campaign thing. It turns crafting from something somebody does on the side to help the party into the entire party's whole entire focus for multiple months, and a strong majority of D&D parties will not tolerate some crafty boi constantly coming up with new ideas and derailing their plot to go find junk to make into cool shit. For a lot of folks, that's only right and proper...but there's also a whole-ass artificer class designed to cater to the class fantasy of "Crafty Boi", and a whole lot of inventive players who play artificers with the hope and intention of Making Cool Stuff on the regular. The Xanathar's Guide crafting rules are horrifyingly antagonistic to regular crafting efforts, and they provide no guidance whatsoever to games and tables where crafting is meant to be a regular part of the adventure rather than a weird one-off the DM did that one time to get Carol to stop talking about the cool thing she wants to make before the party goes back to randomly assigned/rolled grab-bag loot they cannot use, sell, trade, or otherwise gain any benefit from whatsoever.
The Xanathar's rules treat crafting as an exception to the normal flow of game and a huge imposition on the party. People want rules that merge seamlessly into the normal flow of a game instead and allow them to do what people ACTUALLY MAKE CRAFTY BOIS TO DO(!!!), which is to equip themselves and their friends with the items and tools needed to excel in their adventures.
Please do not contact or message me.
I could do all of that. It isn't that it is hard, but I want my players (and myself) to be able to sit down with the book and at least get an idea of how to go about doing something first. I want there to be some consistency that can be relied upon from one crafting project to another without having to write up my own rules. I want Tool Proficiencies to have a better defined purpose in the game, especially now that there is a class that is pretty much dedicated to them.
A lot of the people that I currently play with got their start from MMO's and more than one of them wants to craft things for themselves and the party in general. I want them to be able to do that without having spend a lot of time going back and forth about how to do it and be consistent. A passible set of crafting rules would help.
Edit: And what Yurei said
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
This is not an advertisement for Level Up. I am posting this so everyone has the same frame of reference for discussion. I found these pictures of more of the Adept and what they get as they level.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
It is a lot of content and as I stated previously, my vision is really bad, so it will take some time for me to go through this. However, I wanted to see what others make of it.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
And this hence lies the problem, your table wants crafting to work one way, another table will want crafting to work another and a 3rd will not want to do it at all. You say that crafting a magic item takes too long, but there are many many DMs who dislike there players having access to magic items at all easily, let alone having rules that allow them to go off and make there own ones at will quickly and easily.
I doubt any crafting rules WOTC created would please even 50% of players and the moment a rule is defined for a thing you take away DM agency in determining how that thing should be done. Crafting in a TTRPG in my opinion should never be like crafting in a computer game, making a healing potion takes a week, not seconds. If it took seconds they would cost 5gp and everyone would have many.
Crafting is such a personal table based thing that any rules for it would need to be an entire supplement on their own covering every variation of table and this is the problem, DND 5th edition is a rules light game, the rules in the players handbook and DMG probably amount to about 20 pages of text, add in the optional rules in xanathars and Tasha’s and maybe you push to a 30 page rule book at absolute maximum. These are rules not how to run traps, or make a character, or spell lists. Compared to other systems this is so light weight. Add in crafting you double that amount just for one niche thing that many many tables don’t care about.
If this information is accurate, and I have no reason to believe that it isn't considering the activity on the En World Forums, you are wrong about what people want. It is very common for people on these forums to assume that what they think or want is the most common (including myself), but WotC uses survey just like En World has done to come up with what the majority of their target audience wants instead of just making assumptions.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Ok while I can see how to newbies the idea of having to think this stuff through is daunting but what I think people need are not more rules, what WOTC needs to be much better at doing is presenting online resources to help teach DMs how to do this at their own tables. You may think crafting and using tools is a one size fits all thing that can have rules applied to make it work, but crafting by its very nature is different table to table player to player and DM to DM. So a set of rules that say X takes Y to make at Z cost and require ABC skill checks might be ideal for table 1 but tables 2-120 may well look at that and say, nope those crafting rules are rubbish.
Far better would be a series of articles by different DMs walking through how they manage crafting at their table, otherwise the very nature of the subject means you are looking at 50 pages plus of rules, tables, options and ideas for just one niche thing