• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Bring all your pettiest complaints about the playtest

Transformer

Explorer
Now that we've talked about everything important from the second packet, it's time for a thread about incredibly petty things from the playtest that bug you. As in, you'd deserve to get snarked at if you ever called them dealbreakers.

1. I hate 3 foot tall halflings. Seriously. I know this debate has been had before, but I remain convinced that most people who think they want 3 foot tall halfling simply aren't picturing it right. Stand up from your computer, right now, and go get a yard stick. Please, just do it. Stay standing, and set the yard stick on the ground. Now imagine a person of normal human shape whose head juuuuuuust barely touches the three foot marker. It's ridiculous. I've heard it said that halflings are comically as small as toddlers; I'd say that's wrong. They're even smaller than toddlers. Toddlers are at least kinda round and broad and have big heads. 3 ft. halflings are just absurd. Halflings should be at least in the 3 1/2 to 4 ft. range, and dwarves in the 4 ft. to 4 1/2 ft. range.

In fact, I hate a few of the racial flavor conventions we've gone back. Elves spending 20 years in diapers, anyone?

2. The DM Guidelines packet actually tells DMs that they don't have to pick a DC before asking for a skill check, and that they can instead wait for a die roll and then just kinda decide on a whim whether it was a success or failure. No, no, NO! That's an awful habit to get into. It's too easy as a DM to let your psychology get in the way. Always try to set a DC before you see the roll. Otherwise you'll find yourself doing things like "well, the result was a 16, but the guy only rolled a 9 on the actual die, so no..." or "well, he got a 22 on the roll, and that probably would've been my DC, but you know, this was really supposed to be a hard thing to accomplish, and I was kinda expecting the roll to fail, so no..." Just remove the temptation and set the DC beforehand. That's the right advice for new DMs.

3. One ounce of ink costs 10 gold? What the heck? I mean, even if we're assuming a medieval-esque setting where most people can't write, and ink is reasonably expensive, seriously? 10 friggin' gold? That's what a normal D&D denizen makes in three months isn't it? How about 1 gold.
 

log in or register to remove this ad




2. The DM Guidelines packet actually tells DMs that they don't have to pick a DC before asking for a skill check, and that they can instead wait for a die roll and then just kinda decide on a whim whether it was a success or failure.

I don't think this one is petty or snark-worthy at all. I find it deeply disturbing, in fact.

And that's coming from someone who absolutely loves the M&M 2e "GM Fiat" rule, because that one's completely out in the open, and also rewards the players when the GM wants to fudge. The idea that the GM should be actively encouraged to *cheat* is a totally different thing.

3. One ounce of ink costs 10 gold? What the heck? I mean, even if we're assuming a medieval-esque setting where most people can't write, and ink is reasonably expensive, seriously? 10 friggin' gold? That's what a normal D&D denizen makes in three months isn't it? How about 1 gold.

This actually sounds fairly realistic to me. Writing was *expensive* back in the day. You think the ink is expensive, try buying decent vellum! I could see lowering the price of ink, if they made parchment and especially paper much more expensive. (A large book could take the skins of 1500 calves.)

This site is instructive. While it doesn't give explicit prices for parchment and ink, it does describe the price of books. One book is roughly equivalent to a plate cuirass, to give you an idea. ie, the torso section of plate armor. (They've got a spellbook equaling chain armor, which is roughly in the correct region, though I'd probably bump it up a bit more.) Of course, the price of a book reflected the labor of the scribe(s) in addition to the ink and parchment.
 

underfoot007ct

First Post
Now that we've talked about everything important from the second packet, it's time for a thread about incredibly petty things from the playtest that bug you. As in, you'd deserve to get snarked at if you ever called them dealbreakers.

1. I hate 3 foot tall halflings. Seriously. I know this debate has been had before, but I remain convinced that most people who think they want 3 foot tall halfling simply aren't picturing it right.
Humm, So only you know what Halflings really are, NO. Everyone has the RIGHT to have their own ideas, you included, but NO everyone else is NOT wrong. Anyways Halfling as fictional, I can put a yard-stick to one.
In fact, I hate a few of the racial flavor conventions we've gone back. Elves spending 20 years in diapers, anyone?
Again, you don't get to decide how & when Elves hit puberty. Run them anyway YOU want but in YOUR game.

2. The DM Guidelines packet actually tells DMs that they don't have to pick a DC before asking for a skill check, and that they can instead wait for a die roll and then just kinda decide on a whim whether it was a success or failure. No, no, NO!

This is a guideline, use it or don't. The longer you DM, the more things you run differently. nMany times I had a played what to do something complex and a bit silly. I have no idea what the DC would be, then they roll a 3 and be move on.
3. One ounce of ink costs 10 gold? What the heck? I mean, even if we're assuming a medieval-esque setting where most people can't write, and ink is reasonably expensive, seriously? 10 friggin' gold? That's what a normal D&D denizen makes in three months isn't it? How about 1 gold.

Really? Really? We are hopefully "playtesting" the rules, early playtest rules, to see If the work, rate them, give meaningful feedback.

Does anyone buy enough ink that it matters, put that in your feed back. I'm not sure If I ever had a char buy ink. House rule ink as anything you want, If you feel so strongly.
 

Raith5

Adventurer
Now that we've talked about everything important from the second packet, it's time for a thread about incredibly petty things from the playtest that bug you. As in, you'd deserve to get snarked at if you ever called them dealbreakers.

1. I hate 3 foot tall halflings. Seriously. I know this debate has been had before, but I remain convinced that most people who think they want 3 foot tall halfling simply aren't picturing it right. Stand up from your computer, right now, and go get a yard stick. Please, just do it. Stay standing, and set the yard stick on the ground. Now imagine a person of normal human shape whose head juuuuuuust barely touches the three foot marker. It's ridiculous. I've heard it said that halflings are comically as small as toddlers; I'd say that's wrong. They're even smaller than toddlers. Toddlers are at least kinda round and broad and have big heads. 3 ft. halflings are just absurd. Halflings should be at least in the 3 1/2 to 4 ft. range, and dwarves in the 4 ft. to 4 1/2 ft. range.

I am with you on this. 3 foot is really silly - I mean it is way too short to even hold a short sword with any type of effectiveness. I also think that 4 foot (no matter how broad) is too short for a battle axe.
 


Nikosandros

Golden Procrastinator
1) Yes, 3' is very short, but IIRC hobbits in LotR are typically hat short.

2) Full agreement here. Setting the DC after the roll is, IMHO, a very bad idea.
 

delericho

Legend
1. I hate 3 foot tall halflings. Seriously. I know this debate has been had before, but I remain convinced that most people who think they want 3 foot tall halfling simply aren't picturing it right.

3 feet is about the same height as my 3-year-old nephew. Granted, he's big for his age, but it's still very small.

That said, halflings aren't small humans; they're fantasy creatures in a fantasy world. What's not to say they don't have the proportionate strength of ants?

But, yeah, you're right - that's definitely fodder for a petty complaint! :)

In fact, I hate a few of the racial flavor conventions we've gone back. Elves spending 20 years in diapers, anyone?

Again, fantasy creatures, fantasy world. Seems a bit silly to me, but also easy enough to fix. Good choice for a 'petty' complaint.

2. The DM Guidelines packet actually tells DMs that they don't have to pick a DC before asking for a skill check, and that they can instead wait for a die roll and then just kinda decide on a whim whether it was a success or failure. No, no, NO! That's an awful habit to get into. It's too easy as a DM to let your psychology get in the way. Always try to set a DC before you see the roll. Otherwise you'll find yourself doing things like "well, the result was a 16, but the guy only rolled a 9 on the actual die, so no..." or "well, he got a 22 on the roll, and that probably would've been my DC, but you know, this was really supposed to be a hard thing to accomplish, and I was kinda expecting the roll to fail, so no..." Just remove the temptation and set the DC beforehand. That's the right advice for new DMs.

I agree - except that I don't think this qualifies as a 'petty' complaint. This is a really bad habit to be getting into, and is really not something WotC should be advising DMs to do. Might as well tell them not to bother with the rolling, and just decide the result entire.

3. One ounce of ink costs 10 gold? What the heck? I mean, even if we're assuming a medieval-esque setting where most people can't write, and ink is reasonably expensive, seriously? 10 friggin' gold? That's what a normal D&D denizen makes in three months isn't it? How about 1 gold.

Eh. It was 8gp in 3e. I'm guessing it's probably just a holdover from that.

As for how realistic or otherwise the cost is, I don't know. I'm guessing it's something to do with Wizards transcribing spells, and so may well represent not just normal ink, but ultra high quality ink suitable for that purpose. Or something.

Anyway, good choice for a 'petty' complaint.

Now, my own contributions:

- I don't like that they've gone back to "natural language" descriptions for spells. Sure, they're more flavourful, but when the PC Wizard casts a spell in the midst of a complex spell I don't want that flavour - I want to quickly assess what happens in the game!

- Ability scores giving a +1 mod per 2 points, coupled with races and classes giving +1 bonuses is A Bad Idea. This is acceptable only if random rolls are the only way to generate stats (or, I suppose, if using the point-buy method also means you don't get the racial/class bonuses) - otherwise, it's a mix-max-er's paradise.

- For that matter, I don't like that the game seems to assume that every 1st level character will have an 18 in his prime stat.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top