D&D 5E Guidelines for D&D Next playtest/adventure discussion here at ENW

Umbran · May 25, 2012

shidaku said:
WOTC needs playtesters, not yes-men. If John isn't psyched about DDN, wouldn't the playtest be a great way to give him a taste of what it looks like?

He cannot be *given* a taste. He must reach out and take it when it is offered. There's a minimum level of engagement required of a playtester, and anyone doing broad testing has a need to track feedback. Signing up is a minor action any playtester should be willing to do once.

They don't have to send you a "sorry we didn't accept you" letter, they just won't send you anything at all.

And exactly how many "Hey, I signed up to playtest, and I haven't gotten *anything* from them!!!1!" notes have we seen on these boards that haven't been resolved?

Evidence, or it didn't happen, dude.

Charwoman Gene · May 25, 2012

Umbran said:
Signing up is a minor action any playtester should be willing to do once.

This is in error. D&D Next eliminates minor actions.

Morrus · May 25, 2012

shidaku said:
WOTC needs playtesters, not yes-men. If John isn't psyched about DDN, wouldn't the playtest be a great way to give him a taste of what it looks like? It's not my job to get John psyched about DDN, but I do intend to playtest the product, and I'm not going to tell my best friends to stay home 'cause Wizards didn't approve them as testers.

Because I've beta-tested before, call it experience. They don't have to send you a "sorry we didn't accept you" letter, they just won't send you anything at all.

There is no approval process.

I'm A Banana · May 26, 2012

mudbunny said:
That is not the fault of WotC. That is due to (IIRC) legal precedent saying that kids under 13 cannot legally enter into contracts.

Yeah, but it shouldn't be too hard for WotC's legal ninjae to write a reasonable agreement that also lets you play with your son, or with your luddite gaming group, or with more than 5 characters, or with a modified adventure that includes a different plotline, without violating it. No copies, no derivatives, must be signed up to WotC's site...that seems to be what we're ACTUALLY agreeing to, whether or not we have any intention of upholding that agreement.

I mean, maybe it is too hard for them to write an agreement like that (in reality) but it probably shouldn't be (in the impossible world where everything makes sense).

GX.Sigma · May 26, 2012

Umbran said:
Signing up is a minor action any playtester should be willing to do once.

Well, it certainly isn't a "swift action."

mudbunny · May 26, 2012

Kamikaze Midget said:
Yeah, but it shouldn't be too hard for WotC's legal ninjae to write a reasonable agreement that also lets you play with your son, or with your luddite gaming group, or with more than 5 characters, or with a modified adventure that includes a different plotline, without violating it. No copies, no derivatives, must be signed up to WotC's site...that seems to be what we're ACTUALLY agreeing to, whether or not we have any intention of upholding that agreement.

I mean, maybe it is too hard for them to write an agreement like that (in reality) but it probably shouldn't be (in the impossible world where everything makes sense).

I suspect that what we have here is a conflict between the D&D Next team, who want to get this into as many hands as possible, and a legal team that is uber-paranoid and wanting to (as is their job) protect the IP (and WotC and Hasbro) legally as much as possible.

I *suspect* (with no evidence whatsoever) that in a week or two, some of the restrictions will be lifted.

As for kids, while they cannot enter into legal contracts themselves, I believe (and IANAL) that legal precedent states that the parents can enter into contracts *for* them. (Again, I am not a lawyer, and I am *very* fuzzy on this.)

B.T. · May 27, 2012

WotC's over-corporatization of the entire process is a barrier to playtesting (and rather typical of the company). When Paizo playtested Pathfinder, it was a simple process: sign up and download. WotC's treatment of their IP post-OGL makes me think of a greedy, paranoid troll hunched over a pot of soup, certain that someone is going to dip a spoon in.

When you're treating your game like Kevin Siembieda treats his, you may need to rethink your approach.

GX.Sigma · May 28, 2012

B.T. said:
WotC's over-corporatization of the entire process is a barrier to playtesting (and rather typical of the company). When Paizo playtested Pathfinder, it was a simple process: sign up and download. WotC's treatment of their IP post-OGL makes me think of a greedy, paranoid troll hunched over a pot of soup, certain that someone is going to dip a spoon in.

In what way is the D&DN playtest not "sign up and download?" Just curious.

Mercutio01 · May 28, 2012

GX.Sigma said:
In what way is the D&DN playtest not "sign up and download?" Just curious.

Well, it's:
1) Sign up in indicate interest
2) Wait for email
3) Click link in email and go to website that requires you to sign up for the forums on that site
4) Wait for second email
5) Click second email
6) That doesn't work for hours and hours and hours, sometimes even after the web people say it should work fine
7) Post a trouble call and wait for third email
8) After third email, finally get documents.

With Pathfinder it was literally two steps.
1) Sign up on Paizo's website which redirected immediately after submission
2) Download documents from the redirected page

Stalker0 · May 29, 2012

B.T. said:
WotC's over-corporatization of the entire process is a barrier to playtesting (and rather typical of the company). When Paizo playtested Pathfinder, it was a simple process: sign up and download. WotC's treatment of their IP post-OGL makes me think of a greedy, paranoid troll hunched over a pot of soup, certain that someone is going to dip a spoon in.

Yeah, why would WOTC be paranoid. Its not like another company came along took their product, remade it slightly, and created a new franchise to directly compete with dnd....oh wait