Something Awful leak.

[KarinsDad]

Ahh so, the logic is that if the product doesn't look any good, it can't possible be an alpha build.

Where do people come up with off the wall comments like this that have nothing to do with what I said?

Speculate all you want about my thought processes, but you're blowing smoke with comments like these.

Or, this is broadly the game as they envision it (less some text needing to be re-written and basic editing goofs like the turn undead thing), and it's just not a very good design WRT the stated goals.

And you know this how? Psychic? Or maybe you are breaking an NDA?

Even if this leak is true, it's a leak of 1.0. You are putting serious credence into something that at best is a first rough cut and at worse is a hoax or a partial hoax.

How can you playtest when you don't have a game to test? What are they testing is everything is subject to change?

They are testing design and mechanics ideas and the synergy of those ideas.

Of COURSE a lot of this is subject to change.

And where on earth do you get the idea that they're breaking new ground when everything we've seen, in the leak and outside of it, suggests the opposite?

How many RPGs have EVER gone back and created a merged version of multiple earlier editions?

Answer: ZERO.

It's not breaking new rules ground (although there will be some of that), it's breaking new ground in merging multiple editions (and new rules) into something unique.

It has to be different enough to sell new product and be unique. It has to be the same enough that a high percentage of D&D players equate it to D&D.

Something that I trust them to do a lot more than I trust some armchair quarterback like yourself that just complains.

You guys can brush this off for the next year, and then when it launches, you'll come up with another excuse to defend it. There will always be another excuse.

I'm not defending jack. I have no idea how the game will turn out.

But, you are consistently attacking a game system that is in an extremely early stage of development without even knowing if what you are attacking is even a real version of that game.

Brilliant.

 

[GX.Sigma]

Begun, the edition war has.

I think this has taught us why they had an NDA in the first place: if even the slightest little bit of information gets out, suddenly you have 4e players saying it sucks, 3.x players saying it sucks, and everyone arguing about which parts of it suck more than the other parts.

I think everyone needs to take a deep breath and realize the following things:

1. One's opinion cannot overrule another's opinion, and neither is the same as fact (or even consensus)
2. If this is true information, the game is obviously in a very rough state (see: copy&pasted rules; the inconsistent "advantage" wording; undead technically being immune to turn undead [which itself is being redesigned even now]; status conditions being very contrary to the stated philosophy about such things; the fighter being a version playtested before the designers admitted that they still haven't figured him out yet; pending open playtest; etc. etc.)

Edit: Just thought of something. The leaker said that only the four classic classes were in the playtest rules, but we definitely know that Warlords were in the DDXP playtest. Also, he doesn't mention Themes hardly at all, and those are supposed to be a big thing.

 

[Someone]

That looked... unfinished.

However, even taking it as a very rough guideline of the general game's design, I don't really see anything that attracts my interest.

 

[Kzach]

Dear God, 13 pages of debate over an early April Fool's prank. I promised someone I wouldn't troll people here anymore but man, you guys make it SO easy it's hard to resist.

 

[Hussar]

On the point about WOTC's lack of commentary:

The leak was posted on the 15th. It's entirely possible that no one at WOTC even heard about yet. Good grief, it's been a day. And a Friday at that. I've heard a rumour that those guys at WOTC actually work once in a while, and not spend the day poncing around Internet forums putting out fires.

As far as the veracity of this particular leak, I have no idea. I highly doubt it to be honest. Sure, they want to unify the different play groups. Fine and dandy. But, 4e is still the largest block by a whole bunch (at least at En World - every poll taken puts 4e at about 2:1 over other editions) so, it's pretty unlikely that they're going to go too far to ignore that.

Although, I have to admit, this looks EXACTLY the same as it did back in 2006-7 with the 4e announcements.

Hey guys, what shape do you see in those clouds over there?

 

[Mark CMG]

On the point about WOTC's lack of commentary:

The leak was posted on the 15th. It's entirely possible that no one at WOTC even heard about yet. Good grief, it's been a day. And a Friday at that. I've heard a rumour that those guys at WOTC actually work once in a while, and not spend the day poncing around Internet forums putting out fires.

You can bet if they didn't spot it themselves, they would have noticed the hundred plus emails they probably got from concerned parties.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

One thing should be clear is that 5e isn't going to please everyone, even the playtesters. So there's always going to be someone who says:

1. They are just appeasing the grognards!
2. They just rewrote x edition instead of improving my x edition!
3. I hate how they did [insert whatever complaint here]

To be honest, I don't think 5e will be a win-all for me either, but I'm not going to dismiss it.

The polls do look biased, but the way I think they are is simply because game designers are game designers, not biostatisticians and market researchers who specialize in writing unbiased polls and surveys.

The polls need to be biased. Because they design the game and usually have a great idea in their mind. So they make the poll to look if they are completely off track or not.
Designing a game is no democratic thing. If you have a completely "free" poll, you get 25% for each of the four different answers and are back were you begun.

 

[FireLance]

Hey guys, what shape do you see in those clouds over there?

You might see a Cloud, but I see Lightning.

(Obscure Final Fantasy joke.)

 

[DEFCON 1]

That looked... unfinished.

Well... DUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!

 

[kiltedyaksman]

I realize it's still early in the process, but this isn't the style of game I was hoping for - all min-maxy. No thanks. Here's hoping major revisions are undertaken through the playtest.