WotC Jeremy Crawford Interview: Playtests from experimental to focused. By Christian Hoffer at GenCon.

[Snarf Zagyg]

I have recently been subjected to that, and yes it was not to my satisfaction, at all.

Not to yuck on anyone else's yum, but I have it on reasonable authority that hell is actually a home improvement store that you are stuck in for eternity, with an infinite variety of "white" paints, and you are required to come to an agreement on the best ... color ... with an indecisive significant other.

Hypothetically, of course.

 

[Stalker0]

So no evidence. I thought so.

Here’s mine:


The whole video goes into detail about their process, but around the 10 minute mark is where Crawford literally tells the audience what I’ve been telling you in this thread.

At no point does he say that 70% means it necessarily gets iterated on, and he even gives an example where something didn’t, that being the Jump Action. Feedback was meh, they looked at it internally, and decided against trying to rework it further.

So, if this is news to you, that isn’t really their fault, and your rage should have come back in January. At this point it’s just kinda silly.

Game Set Match

 

[Scribe]

Not to yuck on anyone else's yum, but I have it on reasonable authority that hell is actually a home improvement store that you are stuck in for eternity, with an infinite variety of "white" paints, and you are required to come to an agreement on the best ... color ... with an indecisive significant other.

Hypothetically, of course.

And if you dare to utter the phrase 'I dont care...pick one.'

Well...

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Same. I think their overall approach is pretty terrible, but I'm not mad about it. I'm just not going to drop the money on the new books.

I think their overall approach is pretty terrible, and I absolutely WILL drop money on the new books. I have always known that it was going to be very likely that I will wind up both disappointed and happy with the 2024 books, depending on exactly which elements I'm discussing.

Such has been the case with every edition (and revision) of D&D. I'd always like more changes toward a nebulous "better" version of D&D... and always get "playable" D&D, warts and all.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

We still have a ways to go before the playtest concludes, so I’m not making any decisions just yet. However, I will say that despite being critical of their process, I’m mostly pleased with the results so far. Yes, there are some ideas I liked that don’t seem to have made it in. But, I plan to tell them so in the surveys, since we now have confirmation that they make decisions on written feedback as well as satisfaction numbers. Moreover, just because not everything I liked made it in, doesn’t mean the process has been a complete waste. Some stuff I liked has made it in, and so far nothing I’ve hated has made it in. I’ve been critical of the process, and still am, but at the end of the day I can’t deny that it has produced my favorite iteration of D&D so far, and looks to be producing some real improvements to that game.

At this point 5E has slipped to 2nd favourite edition of D&D behind 4E and is in serious danger of slipping behind 2E, frankly.

The fact that the supposed improvements in the 1D&D have been increasingly shoddy and mismatched is definitely not helping. There's just a ton of stuff that's outright stupid (basic smite requires a bonus action) and the rest is mostly half-arsed attempts to to semi-fix things but not really fix them. The initial few playtests looked like something with some actual vigour, even if some of it was misdirected, but this year it's been pretty pathetic stuff, and most of what you're seeing as positive is seemingly "Absolutely godawful idea they wasted tons of effort on but was obviously awful" not getting in. Seriously. I'm struggling to think of any real improvement-improvements in the UAs this year. I can see a ton of stuff where it was "DISASTER AVERTED" or "total car crash turned into serious fender-bender with minor whiplash - still bad but not fatal", but I can't see anything good. Bard has been veering around the road and seems to be coming up for another sharp turn as they go back to class-based spell lists (the one almost-daring idea they had abandoned solely and entirely for the sake of the Wizard class, to hear them tell it! I guess Wizards of the Coast living up the name, they've damaged three editions in a row solely for the sake of that one class now).

I'm very unimpressed at this point, and I don't think any of the "normal" DMs or players I know is actually excited about the new version or even necessarily particularly aware of it. Maybe that's the new corporate strategy lol? Keep it on the down-low.

I was hoping one of the 3PP efforts would fare better but so far they all seem to be on track to be "What if we made 5E slightly better, but also way more bland?".

 

[Weiley31]

That they did not do so is the issue. WotC created the issue, WotC is at fault here

THAT WAS THEM SWINGING FOR THE BLEACHERS??? LMAOOOOO

This playtest was sabotaged just like the DND Next playtest was. Incredible. Just incredible.

actually it spells it out directly, not sure what you are missing. It got past the threshold for an iteration, WotC threw it out instead. Tell me how that is not what was described here

They failed the methodology, they failed the participants, they failed the game.

@WoTC

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Game Set Match

Yeah but watch it get ignored and Crawford’s words get twisted into nonsense, anyway.

@WoTC

Oof.

Y’all really working hard at this, to be at a point where I’m defending a publicly traded corporation, which is a type of thing I don’t believe should have the legal ability to exist in any form.

 

[Charlaquin]

At this point 5E has slipped to 2nd favourite edition of D&D behind 4E and is in serious danger of slipping behind 2E, frankly.

The fact that the supposed improvements in the 1D&D have been increasingly shoddy and mismatched is definitely not helping. There's just a ton of stuff that's outright stupid (basic smite requires a bonus action) and the rest is mostly half-arsed attempts to to semi-fix things but not really fix them. The initial few playtests looked like something with some actual vigour, even if some of it was misdirected, but this year it's been pretty pathetic stuff, and most of what you're seeing as positive is seemingly "Absolutely godawful idea they wasted tons of effort on but was obviously awful" not getting in. Seriously. I'm struggling to think of any real improvement-improvements in the UAs this year. I can see a ton of stuff where it was "DISASTER AVERTED" or "total car crash turned into serious fender-bender with minor whiplash - still bad but not fatal", but I can't see anything good. Bard has been veering around the road and seems to be coming up for another sharp turn as they go back to class-based spell lists (the one almost-daring idea they had abandoned solely and entirely for the sake of the Wizard class, to hear them tell it! I guess Wizards of the Coast living up the name, they've damaged three editions in a row solely for the sake of that one class now).

I'm very unimpressed at this point, and I don't think any of the "normal" DMs or players I know is actually excited about the new version or even necessarily particularly aware of it. Maybe that's the new corporate strategy lol? Keep it on the down-low.

I was hoping one of the 3PP efforts would fare better but so far they all seem to be on track to be "What if we made 5E slightly better, but also way more bland?".

There were some good ideas that I’m disappointed don’t seem to be making it in, and I can understand being upset about that. But the edition is not worse for the lack of change. It is, at worst, the same, which to me is still my favorite version of the game so far. And there have been some changes I think are genuine improvements, weapon masteries and cunning action being the most significant of them, along with some tweaks I’ve wanted for a long time like the Origins changes. Has WotC squandered a lot of potential in this playtest? Absolutely. Have they still managed to get a positive net result? Also yes, in my opinion. Exactly like what happened with D&D Next.

 

[Weiley31]

Whatever happens, I'll still have my current books, 5E or otherwise, to use along with the new versions.

 

[Shardstone]

Not actually anything like that, but it’s not like evidence or rational argument means anything anymore so go off I guess.

Certainly not to WotC loool