D&D 5E Should D&D Next be having the obvious problems that it's having at this point in the playtest?

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I bet they're doing this too fast due to corporate pressure from upstairs. (The faster this comes out, the less time they're spending paying staff without getting revenue from selling core books.)

I'm reluctant to assign negative motives to the game designers. Even if I don't like their work much.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

I bet they're doing this too fast due to corporate pressure from upstairs. (The faster this comes out, the less time they're spending paying staff without getting revenue from selling core books.)

I'm reluctant to assign negative motives to the game designers. Even if I don't like their work much.

That's why I think companies like Paizo are better suited for table top role playing games because they don't have the pressure of suits breathing down their necks. I honestly think the suits at Wizards still haven't gotten the point that you can't produce fast paced RPG's using overhead and rake in the profits, mass produced RPGs in a way.

 

[Sunseeker]

I have playtested many games over the years, and adjusting damage is often one of the last elements of testing, and most often it starts off far too high, then swings down far too low, and then recieves many minor adjustments over a short time period(we are unlikely to see these minor changes in a packet until they find a "happy medium").

With capped ability scores and a slower BAB profession, a very minor adjustment to monster defenses or output can become a serious change in challenge. A closed system leaves much less wiggle room than an open one.

I think your expectations are unrealistic. WOTC is not just retooling an existing edition as Paizo did. It is attempting to build a whole new one and combine popular elements of previous editions. Further, you are comparing a completed, established, refined game to a BETA.

The base mechanics are there, the systems are in place, the specific amount of damage being put out is a very simple thing to adjust, even if it happens in spurts and swings, with those already set.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

I have playtested many games over the years, and adjusting damage is often one of the last elements of testing, and most often it starts off far too high, then swings down far too low, and then recieves many minor adjustments over a short time period(we are unlikely to see these minor changes in a packet until they find a "happy medium").

With capped ability scores and a slower BAB profession, a very minor adjustment to monster defenses or output can become a serious change in challenge. A closed system leaves much less wiggle room than an open one.

I think your expectations are unrealistic. WOTC is not just retooling an existing edition as Paizo did. It is attempting to build a whole new one and combine popular elements of previous editions. Further, you are comparing a completed, established, refined game to a BETA.

The base mechanics are there, the systems are in place, the specific amount of damage being put out is a very simple thing to adjust, even if it happens in spurts and swings, with those already set.

It's not unrealistic, it's establishing a functioning base mechanic before jumping off to something else. Other gaming companies do it so why does Wizards think they need to go a different route. Right now the playtest looks like a jumbled mess that will take them ages to get out of. I mean they have already jumped to level 20 before taking care of level 1 to 5.

 

[DaveMage]

That's why I think companies like Paizo are better suited for table top role playing games because they don't have the pressure of suits breathing down their necks.

Yep.

 

[Li Shenron]

The base mechanics are there, the systems are in place, the specific amount of damage being put out is a very simple thing to adjust, even if it happens in spurts and swings, with those already set.

Uhm... the combat system is definitely there (and I agree also that damage is not hard to adjust and will be adjusted), but I couldn't honestly say that the other systems are in place, because major things such as the spellcasting mechanic (of the Wizard), how martial damage dice is used by others than Fighter, and how skills work, have all changed in the last packet (skills and martial dice also changed in practically all the previous packets). Therefore there is no sign that their current version will be the last.

 

[B.T.]

I'm pessimistic about the whole thing. The very first packet had the AC math wrong. Up until this packet, the monster to-hit was wrong. I don't mind that WotC are still working out the kinks with the individual classes; I mind that the foundations of the game were bad even though they involved basic probability.

I mean they have already jumped to level 20 before taking care of level 1 to 5.

Yep.

 

[billd91]

Uhm... the combat system is definitely there (and I agree also that damage is not hard to adjust and will be adjusted), but I couldn't honestly say that the other systems are in place, because major things such as the spellcasting mechanic (of the Wizard), how martial damage dice is used by others than Fighter, and how skills work, have all changed in the last packet (skills and martial dice also changed in practically all the previous packets). Therefore there is no sign that their current version will be the last.

When are we supposed to have the final version? 2014 is the last information I've seen. With that sort of lead time, I have no problem with them experimenting with major changes in the play test.

 

[Ahnehnois]

I believe game design is difficult, but despite the legitimate intellectual challenge, they're making it look much harder than it is.

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

Well, the extended playtest has produced one major success: as far as I know, none of the D&D team have been laid off this Christmas. That's a first for the Hasbro-owned WotC, IIRC.