D&D 5th Edition I'm just not that "Psyched" about Next. - Page 6





+ Log in or register to post
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6
Results 51 to 60 of 60
  1. #51
    Registered User
    Enchanter (Lvl 12)

    Bluenose's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    England
    Posts
    1,491

    ø Ignore Bluenose
    Quote Originally Posted by tlantl View Post
    I agree, and with each playtest packet the characters get more convoluted. There was a thread some where that had players refusing to playtest because the characters, the sorcerer in particular, were too complicated to figure out.

    Now there's talk of adding yet another layer of complexity to the wizard and a whole flock of people wanting a return of the absurdly long skills lists.

    You'd wonder what it's going to look like in two years.
    It'll look like the latest game to have D&D on the cover. And it'll look a lot more like D&D than it does other systems. It's not going to be like Runequest, or Legends of Anglerre, or WFRP, or The One Ring, or anything else but D&D and it's derivatives. It may turn out to be a superficial resemblance, but looking like D&D isn't going to be the problem. Playing like D&D, when there are so many different ways to play and different versions have such different consequences for playing in particular ways; it's beyond any game to manage that.

 

  • #52
    Registered User
    Waghalter (Lvl 7)

    tlantl's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    A small room in a big country
    Posts
    412

    ø Ignore tlantl
    Quote Originally Posted by Bluenose View Post
    It'll look like the latest game to have D&D on the cover. And it'll look a lot more like D&D than it does other systems. It's not going to be like Runequest, or Legends of Anglerre, or WFRP, or The One Ring, or anything else but D&D and it's derivatives. It may turn out to be a superficial resemblance, but looking like D&D isn't going to be the problem. Playing like D&D, when there are so many different ways to play and different versions have such different consequences for playing in particular ways; it's beyond any game to manage that.
    Yes well there's that I guess.

    The problem for me is that the last four iterations of the game went from bad to worse. With few if any redeeming features. I used to look forward to writing the next chapter of my adventures and getting the gang together to play, 3e came along and made DMing a chore. 4e came along and I no longer want to play D&D.

    Next is their chance to earn back my trust but it seems that they are already heading in a direction that I'm not a big fan of, so unless Next looks a lot different than the other garbage they've tried to foist on me then I'll keep my money and find a group that doesn't have a hard on against AD&D.
    Last edited by tlantl; Wednesday, 3rd October, 2012 at 03:09 PM.

  • #53
    Quote Originally Posted by Ahnehnois View Post
    You seem to be assuming that the reaction is a product of intellectual conservativism; hanging on to the past. I think that the conservative element does exist and is substantial, but that the negative reaction was caused by poor marketing and business decisions, as well as by the style and substance of the product itself. I also think that 4e maintains most of D&D's worst conventions, and even exacerbates some of its existing problems; I would not describe it as innovative and I would not shoot down the notion of innovation on that basis. I would describe its mechanics as largely a subset of late 3.5 rules that excludes most of the game, not a reinvention.

    A game that is OGL and still allowed you to build the characters and campaigns that previously existed while simultaneously opening new frontiers is a different ballgame (and incidentally, is exactly what 3e was when it was released).
    To me 4e is definitely different from 3.5 and much better than anything before . It has new mechanics and by far the best combat rules and character building tools . And with every iteration of Next I see more 4e creeping in.

  • #54
    Quote Originally Posted by erleni View Post
    And with every iteration of Next I see more 4e creeping in.
    Hence my trepidation with the latest playtest packet, hopefully they stick more with the 1st packet in the next one.

  • #55
    Quote Originally Posted by Steely_Dan View Post
    Hence my trepidation with the latest playtest packet, hopefully they stick more with the 1st packet in the next one.
    The problem with that though is that you're basically saying that they're done. They got it right in the first package and nothing else is needed. Which is great for you, but, if they truly want to develop a new game, they're going to have to keep piling stuff on to see what works and what doesn't.

    Going "back" to an earlier iteration isn't what playtesting is about.
    The rules don't give the DM their authority. The consent of the players does. - Mallus

  • #56
    Registered User
    Cutpurse (Lvl 5)

    Shadeydm's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    1,369

    ø Ignore Shadeydm
    Quote Originally Posted by tlantl View Post
    Yes well there's that I guess.

    The problem for me is that the last four iterations of the game went from bad to worse. With few if any redeeming features. I used to look forward to writing the next chapter of my adventures and getting the gang together to play, 3e came along and made DMing a chore. 4e came along and I no longer want to play D&D.

    Next is their chance to earn back my trust but it seems that they are already heading in a direction that I'm not a big fan of, so unless Next looks a lot different than the other garbage they've tried to foist on me then I'll keep my money and find a group that doesn't have a hard on against AD&D.
    I have to agree when i step back and look at my overall enjoyment of D&D from the early 80s to today it has been a slight but steady angle of decline from AD&D to 4E. I still hold out hope that 5E can reverse that trend. The good news is by the time the two remaining years of playtesting are completed I should know one way or the other without spending a dime.
    I hope with strange eons even the edition war may die.

  • #57
    Quote Originally Posted by Hussar View Post
    Going "back" to an earlier iteration isn't what playtesting is about.
    It's about finding the best rules, regardless of which iteration they come from. If a new addition to the playtest is poorly received, it should be either changed or removed. Otherwise, why bother playtesting at all?
    "Clear Eyes, Full Hearts, Can't Lose"

  • #58
    Registered User
    Waghalter (Lvl 7)

    CasvalRemDeikun's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Sioux Falls, SD
    Posts
    293

    ø Ignore CasvalRemDeikun
    Quote Originally Posted by Ahnehnois View Post
    It's about finding the best rules, regardless of which iteration they come from. If a new addition to the playtest is poorly received, it should be either changed or removed. Otherwise, why bother playtesting at all?
    While true, we really don't know the answer to which one was liked more until we see the next playtest. If it backtracks to something more like the first playtest, then it is safe to assume that more people liked the first playtest better, if it continues the trend set forth by the second playtest, it is safe to assume that the second playtest was liked more.

    To be honest, I would rather they didn't even bother with the third playtest. They have already said that one of the things that a great deal of people are clamoring for WON'T be in it, so why not take the energy they would be putting into reviewing the results of the third playtest and put them into creating the fourth one (though, in this case, it would end up being the third one).

  • #59
    Quote Originally Posted by Ahnehnois View Post
    It's about finding the best rules, regardless of which iteration they come from. If a new addition to the playtest is poorly received, it should be either changed or removed. Otherwise, why bother playtesting at all?
    Agreed. I don't know why you'd think I'd not agree with that. But, just because an addition is well received doesn't mean that you stop either. Something that is well received can still be changed and modified in an attempt to make it better. If the changes are not approved of, then step back to the earlier iteration.

    But you can't simply say, "Well, 80% of playtesters liked X, so, I guess X is in" and move on. Well, you can do that, but, then you're going to annoy the crap out of a lot of people. Because that 20% that don't like X will rarely be the same 20% that don't like Y and you wind up with no one actually liking your game.
    The rules don't give the DM their authority. The consent of the players does. - Mallus

  • #60
    Innovation rarely comes from customer surveys and test feedbacks, but they can help you build a pretty complex trade off model about how those innovations are perceived.

    As play testers we are seeing the elements as linear elements, because thats how they are being presented. The analysis shows how's the elements interconnect , and if the surveys are properly designed, where the trade off points are ( if not ...they should call me )

    I expect to see many disparate and novel elements in the playtests over the next 9-12 months ... And, i am really looking forward to the next playtest...

  • + Log in or register to post
    Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6

    Similar Threads

    1. PS3: "Final Fantasy XIII", "The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion" or "Dragon Age: Origins"?
      By Goodsport in forum Miscellaneous Geek Talk & Media Lounge
      Replies: 16
      Last Post: Thursday, 5th August, 2010, 11:24 AM
    2. Combining "d20 Past" with "Urban Arcana" to make "d20 Fantasy"
      By Jack Daniel in forum D&D and Pathfinder
      Replies: 5
      Last Post: Tuesday, 3rd May, 2005, 06:22 AM
    3. "The learning game" "El juego de aprender" "Lære leken" IC
      By Tor L'Tha in forum Playing the Game
      Replies: 2
      Last Post: Tuesday, 14th December, 2004, 07:26 PM
    4. Replies: 0
      Last Post: Monday, 29th November, 2004, 07:19 PM
    5. "The learning game" "El juego de aprender" "Lære leken"
      By Tor L'Tha in forum RPGs & Tabletop Gaming Discussion
      Replies: 1
      Last Post: Monday, 29th November, 2004, 07:01 PM

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •