D&D 5E Player's Handbook Alpha *Spoilers*

[variant]

I have actually, and no, it hasn't, it changed a huge amount through the playtests. It's not dissimilar in the last two playtests (which were also bad), but it's also not the same. I don't think many people believe it would be untouched, but it was.

Bad in your opinion. Not bad according to me and the majority playtesting.

 

[Mistwell]

Common sense actually dictates that we shouldn't believe they've changed them much, DEFCON, because we can see that the setup of Basic makes assumptions that would not be made unless at least some of the Feats are very similar - the Healer one for starters.

Whether a WotC comment would help is debatable, but...

Also, given it went to print what, four months after this, and indeed has been printed now, it's not been "worked on for six months".

If the final game is this "God awful" thing you saw, will you play 5e or are you done with it?

 

[the Jester]

Or Dual-Wielding - Obviously a PC could normally draw both his weapons to attack right? No DM would enforce him drawing one one round, and one the next? Right?

I certainly would. Or use your action to draw the second weapon. Or, if you know the encounter is coming, draw them both before combat starts.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

If the final game is this "God awful" thing you saw, will you play 5e or are you done with it?

We'll see, won't we, eh? How bad they are and how fixable it is could vary a lot.

[MENTION=41293]variant[/MENTION] "Bad in your opinion. Not bad according to me and the majority playtesting." - That's not how the decision-making in the playtesting worked, especially re: healing.

I certainly would. Or use your action to draw the second weapon. Or, if you know the encounter is coming, draw them both before combat starts.

Well, that's on you, but it's the worst kind of rules-detail-obsessed, realism/simulation-AND-drama hating ultra-gamist DMing, imho. I didn't realize you were a hardcore rules-ist.

 

[variant]

We'll see, won't we, eh? How bad they are and how fixable it is could vary a lot.

@variant "Bad in your opinion. Not bad according to me and the majority playtesting." - That's not how the decision-making in the playtesting worked, especially re: healing.

Decisions were based on balance and opinions of playtesters. That was the point of the polls and why D&D Next playtest went through extreme changes from the beginning to the end.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Decisions were based on balance and opinions of playtesters. That was the point of the polls and why D&D Next playtest went through extreme changes from the beginning to the end.

No, they were not based solely on "balance" and the opinions of playtesters, they were also based on designer opinions (obviously, I would think).

Healing, specifically, they said was so split/divided that they had to make their own decisions, rather than trying to follow opinion at all.

 

[Mistwell]

We'll see, won't we, eh? How bad they are and how fixable it is could vary a lot.

WTH? You said you saw it. I am asking you to judge what you saw. What is this "we will see"? Are you saying your read of it might not be accurate, or it might not play out as you predict it will play when you read it? If so...shouldn't you be holding off on your proclamations of it being "God awful"?

 

[variant]

No, they were not based solely on "balance" and the opinions of playtesters, they were also based on designer opinions (obviously, I would think).

Healing, specifically, they said was so split/divided that they had to make their own decisions, rather than trying to follow opinion at all.

They said a number of times that many things the designers intended were changed solely based on the surveys. From the beginning they were upfront that the playtesters would decide what direction D&D Next would take.

 

[pkt77242]

Why? What would possibly be the need for them to do that?

"Hey folks! That copy of the Player's Handbook that you shouldn't even be able to be reading is six months old, and believe it or not, we've actually still been working on the game since then and thus what is in the book was not and is not the finished product."

No one needs to be told that... because of, you know... common sense. And if someone is lacking a little bit of that... then even telling that person straight away that things have changed in the last six months is probably not going to do a whole lot of good, cause the person probably won't believe what WotC tells them anyway.

Actually it is called PR(or in some cases damage control) but you are right the head in the sand theory is so much better. Also just because they have been working on something for 6 months doesn't mean that they have changed the parts that people are complaining about, but you know that would just be a little common sense and all.

While I don't think it has gotten to the point (at least on this forum, who knows about other ones) that it needs to be addressed by them yet, if there does become a larger outcry it would be intelligent to get out in front of it and answer some questions in a public forum to prevent the outcry from snowballing and possibly hampering sales.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

WTH? You said you saw it. I am asking you to judge what you saw. What is this "we will see"? Are you saying your read of it might not be accurate, or it might not play out as you predict it will play when you read it? If so...shouldn't you be holding off on your proclamations of it being "God awful"?

I didn't say it was "god awful". I said it was awful. You may want to read with more care!

If it's exactly the same as this playtest, just with a backgrounds chapter, I'd play but never run, and only buy the PHB at most. If it's improved, it depends by how much, and how easy the fixes prove (Healer feat = just proficiency with the healer's kit is a very easy fix, fr'ex).
[MENTION=41293]variant[/MENTION] "They said a number of times that many things the designers intended were changed solely based on the surveys. From the beginning they were upfront that the playtesters would decide what direction D&D Next would take."

Yeah, "many things". Not all things, or most things. Healing they explained was particularly not helped by the polls.