D&D 5E So Now We Are Paying for Early Access?

Wulffolk · Jul 29, 2018

Aren't we all just paying to play-test for the next edition of whatever game we play anyways? I have been play-testing for D&D 6e since 1980 and have spent $100's of dollars along the way.

Satyrn · Jul 29, 2018

Wulffolk said:
Aren't we all just paying to play-test for the next edition of whatever game we play anyways? I have been play-testing for D&D 6e since 1980 and have spent $100's of dollars along the way.

I certainly paid a lot to playtest 4e, if people are right when they said the late 3.5 stuff were experiments.

Keefe the Thief · Jul 29, 2018

If I could get playtest material that was as high quality as what Baker delivered with the Eberron .pdf, I would pay for it every day. That stuff is good! Really good.

And it is immediately useable. This is not a kickstarter or an empty promise. It is a fully-featured book

77IM · Jul 30, 2018

Jester David said:
Unlike video games, the Wayfinder's Guide is completely and entirely playable. It's not a buggy mess.

I read the UA races article, and I was really digging it, and then I got to the line about "AC 16 + proficiency bonus" and my eyeballs seized up and spun around, and my throat made some horrible hacking noise. That's when I decided to skip the Wayfarer's Guide until it was officially released.

Jester David · Jul 30, 2018

77IM said:
I read the UA races article, and I was really digging it, and then I got to the line about "AC 16 + proficiency bonus" and my eyeballs seized up and spun around, and my throat made some horrible hacking noise. That's when I decided to skip the Wayfarer's Guide until it was officially released.

That caught my eye as well.
But, it's also a 5-second fix. I looked at that, did some quick math, and said "this should be 1/2 proficiency". Bam!

If it's a playtest, and the most broken thing in the book requires that little correction to be balanced, it's pretty solid.

Jester David · Jul 30, 2018

Zardnaar said:
So everyone has bought it recommends it?

I like it. It's pretty solid. Working on a full review.

Zardnaar said:
Are warforged the old UA ones, Bakers version or a 3rd version?

Neither. Closer to Baker's but an evolution/ refinement. Check out the free UA.

Zardnaar said:
And Dragonmarks are archetypes?

As others have said, they basically replace racial elements. They're a subclass plus. Weird, but it does make you defined by your dragonmark in a fairly satisfactory way.

cbwjm · Jul 30, 2018

Jester David said:
That caught my eye as well.
But, it's also a 5-second fix. I looked at that, did some quick math, and said "this should be 1/2 proficiency". Bam!

If it's a playtest, and the most broken thing in the book requires that little correction to be balanced, it's pretty solid.

I guess that's easier to remember than my math which was proficiency bonus -2.

77IM · Jul 30, 2018

Jester David said:
That caught my eye as well.
But, it's also a 5-second fix. I looked at that, did some quick math, and said "this should be 1/2 proficiency". Bam!

If it's a playtest, and the most broken thing in the book requires that little correction to be balanced, it's pretty solid.

I agree in concept, but I guess I am just more pessimistic. If something so clearly broken slipped through, what else might they have missed? How can I trust them to do more advanced game design when they don't see the hazards of AC scaling?

I do like your fix (1/2 proficiency is way more balanced). I'd just prefer to wait, and buy this thing AFTER a few thousand Jester Davids have combed through it.

cbwjm · Jul 30, 2018

Baker mentioned on Twitter that the proficiency bonus was the strengthening of the enchantments that make up the Warforged. It doesn't mean it can't be toned down a bit, but i can understand the reasoning for the addition of proficiency bonus to their AC.

Jester David · Jul 30, 2018

77IM said:
I agree in concept, but I guess I am just more pessimistic. If something so clearly broken slipped through, what else might they have missed? How can I trust them to do more advanced game design when they don't see the hazards of AC scaling?

I do like your fix (1/2 proficiency is way more balanced). I'd just prefer to wait, and buy this thing AFTER a few thousand Jester Davids have combed through it.

Here’s the dirty secret of public playtesting: sometimes you need to go big.

If it’s too close to working, no one gives feedback and it doesn’t get noticed. Which means it doesn’t get fine tuned. And you don’t know if people liked the mechanic’s concept at all.

If you go big and it doesn’t break your game, it might actually be fine. Or just need a smaller tweak. More people will give feed back like “good concept, bad numbers” or “I hate this”.

D&D 5E So Now We Are Paying for Early Access?

Wulffolk

Explorer

Satyrn

First Post

Keefe the Thief

Adventurer

77IM

Explorer!!!

Jester David

Hero

Jester David

Hero

cbwjm

Seb-wejem

77IM

Explorer!!!

cbwjm

Seb-wejem

Jester David

Hero

Similar Threads