Hey, everyone. I'd like to try an experiment.
So it seems that many threads are devolving into reiterations of what-constitutes-and-edition warring, and it's sometimes quite hard to find actual discussion about the mechanics themselves.
I'm absolutely not saying that the arguments over whether the 2024 release counts as a new edition or not are unimportant - it's something people feel passionate about, and for reasons I can respect.
However, it's making it hard to talk about the mechanics, so maybe we should try a thread just for mechanic discussions. We use plus threads for things all the time, and the concept is a good one. Maybe we need an equanimity thread, where we try to keep things a little cooler, and leave space for more analytical discussion. Maybe there are other people out there who have been looking for this sort of discussion, maybe not. We'll find out if we can get a bit of analysis here.
So in a spirit of investigation¹, let's try a thread with a few simple rules:
1) Try to keep things to the analytical. This is not a thread for "This has been ruined forever", rather "This implementation lacks some critical aspects, such as <thing> that ruin it for me."
2) Try to keep the discussion about the basic subject - in this case, the mechanics in the playtest, not whether the playtest counts as a new edition or whether WotC should be stewards for D&D at all
3) If someone is not keeping to these principles, politely ask them to move their points to another thread. There are plenty of threads where those points are on topic (and they are valid and important things to discuss - just not here).
Here's my view on the playtest as a whole, as a starter for discussion:
Overall, I think the playtest is iterating in a good direction. I really appreciate the changelog they've been including to show what's been updated in the glossary, and this packet in particular has some broad updates I really like to the core chassis of the game - I've said elsewhere how much I like this iteration on Dying and Knocking a Creature Out, but this version also has some rules for Telepathy that would clear up a lot of confusion in several of my games, and a tightening up of the language into something that's a nice balance between the (sometimes too vague) descriptiveness of 5e and the (elegant, but sometimes too) mechanical keywords of 4e.
The druid is... a nice playtest chassis. It's not perfect, but the basic foundation of a good class is here, and one that will have some serious strengths. Wildshape in base 5e is messily balanced - over the 15 levels most groups won't progress beyond, it's probably okay, but it spends periods where it's just too powerful and periods where it's starkly underwhelming. It's sad to lose the hp buffer, yes, but there's enough in this that I could absolutely see myself playing a druid in 2024. It's sad to lose Tiny creatures, but I think easy access to a familiar fixes some of that.
The Paladin is also really nice. Some things cleaned up, but: This version of Divine Sense is a huge improvement, too - Bonus Action instead of Action, not blocked by cover any more, and lasts ten minutes instead of one round. They fixed Smite spells, too, and while I will miss the nova potential as a player, I think the changes also make it less likely players will hoard spell slots for a crit that may never come. Abjure Foes is also ... stunning. Wait, no. Dazzling. Yeah.
For the design of the two classes as a whole, I like the way they're both shifted to regain significant resources on a short rest - if that were something that was kept up with the classes in general (with everyone getting a mix of LR and SR recharges, so both are good for everyone) it would make adventuring days easier to manage as a DM.
What do you think?
--
¹ I hope the DC isn't too high
So it seems that many threads are devolving into reiterations of what-constitutes-and-edition warring, and it's sometimes quite hard to find actual discussion about the mechanics themselves.
I'm absolutely not saying that the arguments over whether the 2024 release counts as a new edition or not are unimportant - it's something people feel passionate about, and for reasons I can respect.
However, it's making it hard to talk about the mechanics, so maybe we should try a thread just for mechanic discussions. We use plus threads for things all the time, and the concept is a good one. Maybe we need an equanimity thread, where we try to keep things a little cooler, and leave space for more analytical discussion. Maybe there are other people out there who have been looking for this sort of discussion, maybe not. We'll find out if we can get a bit of analysis here.
So in a spirit of investigation¹, let's try a thread with a few simple rules:
1) Try to keep things to the analytical. This is not a thread for "This has been ruined forever", rather "This implementation lacks some critical aspects, such as <thing> that ruin it for me."
2) Try to keep the discussion about the basic subject - in this case, the mechanics in the playtest, not whether the playtest counts as a new edition or whether WotC should be stewards for D&D at all
3) If someone is not keeping to these principles, politely ask them to move their points to another thread. There are plenty of threads where those points are on topic (and they are valid and important things to discuss - just not here).
Here's my view on the playtest as a whole, as a starter for discussion:
Overall, I think the playtest is iterating in a good direction. I really appreciate the changelog they've been including to show what's been updated in the glossary, and this packet in particular has some broad updates I really like to the core chassis of the game - I've said elsewhere how much I like this iteration on Dying and Knocking a Creature Out, but this version also has some rules for Telepathy that would clear up a lot of confusion in several of my games, and a tightening up of the language into something that's a nice balance between the (sometimes too vague) descriptiveness of 5e and the (elegant, but sometimes too) mechanical keywords of 4e.
The druid is... a nice playtest chassis. It's not perfect, but the basic foundation of a good class is here, and one that will have some serious strengths. Wildshape in base 5e is messily balanced - over the 15 levels most groups won't progress beyond, it's probably okay, but it spends periods where it's just too powerful and periods where it's starkly underwhelming. It's sad to lose the hp buffer, yes, but there's enough in this that I could absolutely see myself playing a druid in 2024. It's sad to lose Tiny creatures, but I think easy access to a familiar fixes some of that.
The Paladin is also really nice. Some things cleaned up, but: This version of Divine Sense is a huge improvement, too - Bonus Action instead of Action, not blocked by cover any more, and lasts ten minutes instead of one round. They fixed Smite spells, too, and while I will miss the nova potential as a player, I think the changes also make it less likely players will hoard spell slots for a crit that may never come. Abjure Foes is also ... stunning. Wait, no. Dazzling. Yeah.
For the design of the two classes as a whole, I like the way they're both shifted to regain significant resources on a short rest - if that were something that was kept up with the classes in general (with everyone getting a mix of LR and SR recharges, so both are good for everyone) it would make adventuring days easier to manage as a DM.
What do you think?
--
¹ I hope the DC isn't too high
