Losing interest....

[chriton227]

I don't think it's a lot like software design, though. Software design is much more specific, focused, and done to spec. At the moment, they're playtesting and pitching ideas and concepts as much as they're bug-hunting. It's very early in the process (we're, what, only five weeks in?)

Not all software development is code to spec, a lot of what I've been involved in is more of a case of a group of users having a problem they need help solving or an idea they need help implementing, and it is a very iterative approach with lots of proof of concept work and testing out different ideas until the end goal is accomplished.

They are a lot more than 5 weeks in. They hired Monte Cook back in September 2011 to work on 5e (by his own admission in a Fear the Boot podcast interview), the Friends and Family playtest was going on back in January 2012, and the first big public preview took place at D&D Experience at the end of January 2012. By my count, they are between 6 and 9 months into development, maybe more if they were already working on 5e before they rehired Monte (the 5e Info page here indicates they started thinking about it in 2010).

I would have bought that they were still in the phase of pitching ideas and concepts back during DDXP, but that was 5 months ago and they should be well past that point in development now, at least as far as the core rules go. If they are thinking about trying for a GenCon 2013 release (and I don't know that they are), I would hope that the rules would be getting a final polish within the next few months to give time for the development of any supporting products, particularly any software or online tools; having the game rules still in flux while trying to develop those tools could easily lead to a repeat of the 4e online tools SNAFU (we're still waiting on the final release of some of the tools promised in the core 4e books 4 years ago).

 

[Agamon]

Okay, so those that think they have been working on the game for such a very long time (and months isn't really that long, imo, compared to other RPGs), I'm curious: are they then holding back just for spite? I don't understand, some people on the interwebs seem to think they know better than the designers when info is ready to be released and that just seems odd to me.

 

[B.T.]

Okay, so those that think they have been working on the game for such a very long time (and months isn't really that long, imo, compared to other RPGs), I'm curious: are they then holding back just for spite?

No, just incompetence.

I don't understand, some people on the interwebs seem to think they know better than the designers when info is ready to be released and that just seems odd to me.

Why would I expect the designers to know well? Just because you put something on paper and have the backing to get it published doesn't make it good. (Twilight, after all, was a hit, and so is Fifty Shades of Grey.)

For the third or fourth time: these people had months of playtesting, and they couldn't even get Armor Class right from the get-go. Random people on the Internet took one look at the math and knew it was wrong, but the developers who are in charge of writing the mechanics didn't see that heavy armor was way worse than medium armor.

This is basic math stuff we're talking. It's not like polymorph in 3e where the rules, albeit messy, weren't immediately broken upon perusal. It's basic addition and subtraction.

 

[Steely_Dan]

I already have lots to work with, I am doing monster conversions (so much fun).

And you can fill in gaps with stuff from other editions; I'm already looking at how easy it would be to drop in a 1st Ed Monk.

So, I'm really in no rush/need for more material, but of course, like many, am most looking forward to character (and monster, for me, as a DM) creation rules.

 

[Agamon]

No, just incompetence.

Why would I expect the designers to know well? Just because you put something on paper and have the backing to get it published doesn't make it good. (Twilight, after all, was a hit, and so is Fifty Shades of Grey.)

So, the designers are awful and incompetent. I get where you're coming from now and probably shouldn't even be responding. Silly me.

For the third or fourth time: these people had months of playtesting, and they couldn't even get Armor Class right from the get-go. Random people on the Internet took one look at the math and knew it was wrong, but the developers who are in charge of writing the mechanics didn't see that heavy armor was way worse than medium armor.

This is basic math stuff we're talking. It's not like polymorph in 3e where the rules, albeit messy, weren't immediately broken upon perusal. It's basic addition and subtraction.

I see, so 3rd graders can do this stuff. I know for fact that both DCC and Hackmaster took more than a few months to create (more months than I have fingers and toes to count them, for sure), and I'll assume most RPGs do the same. And while I can't speak for all MB posters, I know Joe and Dave made it well past grade 3.

 

[B.T.]

So, the designers are awful and incompetent. I get where you're coming from now and probably shouldn't even be responding. Silly me.

Cut the snark, bro.

All I'm saying is that I don't trust WotC. To reiterate:

I'm not inclined to trust a large corporation that

(a) published the poorly-playtested 3.0,
(b) published the slipshod errata document that was 3.5,
(c) churned out splatbook after splatbook of awful material in a worse moneygrab than the publication of 3.5 was,
(d) lied to the customer base, telling them that 4e was not in the works when it was,
(e) ignored legitimate criticisms of the 4e system and the general dissatisfaction of the fanbase,
(f) continued the splatbook treadmill present in 3e,
(g) created the unworkable mess of skill challenge mechanics,
(h) wrote out hundreds of pages of errata for 4e, which included redoing the entire math of the early Monster Manuals,
(i) did yet more moneygrabbing with D&D Essentials,
(j) didn't understand that classes routinely adding +8 to +10 on an attack roll would completely destroy any semblance of mathematical balance,
(k) failed to deliver with lofty promises about the character visualizer and online tools (not to mention the entire Gleemax fiasco),
(l) failed to realize their own design goals for 4e (no Christmas tree magical items, math that "just works," and so forth),
(l) have worked on 5e secretly for months and yet have only been to produce a mediocre set of incomplete rules.

 

[Rhenny]

I totally understand that WoTc is progressing slowly, and overall I don't mind. I am still excited to playtest the system, and I'm sure that when new information arrives, my level of excitement will rise again.

It is difficult for us to say how we as independent gamers can best "help" WoTC with their game. I'm sure that the feedback they've received is giving them a lot to think about.

It would be nice, however, to get more playtest material over the summer since for most people, summer is usually a slower time of the year (business wise). Heck, teachers and students have lots of free time to spend reading and playing.

 

[Mark CMG]

Thing is, we were demanding it. Quite vociferously. Continually asking "Is it here yet?" like kids in the back seat of a car. Criticizing them for it not being here fast enough.

WotC probably prefers this to any number of alternatives.

 

[TrippyHippy]

Really. Sorry, brosiah, I'm not inclined to trust a large corporation that

(a) published the poorly-playtested 3.0,
(b) published the slipshod errata document that was 3.5,
(c) churned out splatbook after splatbook of awful material in a worse moneygrab than the publication of 3.5 was,
(d) lied to the customer base, telling them that 4e was not in the works when it was,
(e) ignored legitimate criticisms of the 4e system and the general dissatisfaction of the fanbase,
(f) continued the splatbook treadmill present in 3e,
(g) created the unworkable mess of skill challenge mechanics,
(h) wrote out hundreds of pages of errata for 4e, which included redoing the entire math of the early Monster Manuals,
(i) did yet more moneygrabbing with D&D Essentials,
(j) didn't understand that classes routinely adding +8 to +10 on an attack roll would completely destroy any semblance of mathematical balance,
(k) failed to deliver with lofty promises about the character visualizer and online tools (not to mention the entire Gleemax fiasco),
(l) failed to realize their own design goals for 4e (no Christmas tree magical items, math that "just works," and so forth),
(l) have worked on 5e secretly for months and yet have only been to produce a mediocre set of incomplete rules.

Forgive me for doubting the wisdom of our glorious corporate betters, but I just get this nagging feeling that I can't trust them.

Hmm..you know if I edit out all the leading, emotive language, what I get is:

a) Published 3.0.
b) Published 3.5.
c) Published supplements.
d) Designed 4e, and then published it.
e) Encountered some fan issues about 4e.
f) Published supplements.
g) Designed skill challenge mechanics.
h) Published errata for 4e.
i) Published D&D Essentials.
j) Encountered some fan issues about 4e.
k) Didn't release some gaming aids.
l) Encountered some fan issues about 4e.
m) Are playtesting a 5th Edition, and have released some stuff as a public playtest.

Totally evil, I guess.

 

[B.T.]

Totally evil, I guess.

Nah, just greedy and incompetent.

Mod Note: please see my post below. ~Umbran