That might be true for you. However, many of us have been around this hobby for a long time and played many game systems (as in close to a hundred or more) including various iterations of D&D. We have enough experience to know what works for *us* and what does not starting at a conceptual level.
I've played since the 1970s. I learned on Basic edition and AD&D 1e. I've played probably as much as you. I've played plenty of other systems as well. So, while I appreciate you have lots of experience, I do not appreciate the suggestion that my opinion differing from yours means I have not been around in this hobby a long time.
My experience tells me that playing with a rule is another thing than reading about the rule. That sometimes, indeed often, the rules we read end up being less or more important to the game than what we thought when we first read the rule.
I've expressed this opinion before, and many older players, including some in this thread, have agreed with me that nothing can replace the experience of actually playing the game to see what ends up being more or less important.
So, my recommendation, which you can take or leave as you wish, is for you to play the game, and then judge what does and does not work. That is the purpose of the playtest, to play the test rules. Not to simply read them and speculate.
I agree with everything everyone has posted in this thread. And that's the problem...'Next'; by trying to do everything well, does nothing well. Or distinctively.
My beef is calling it 'Next'. I hate that. Call it 5e, WotC.
I've expressed this opinion before, and many older players, including some in this thread, have agreed with me that nothing can replace the experience of actually playing the game to see what ends up being more or less important.
So, my recommendation, which you can take or leave as you wish, is for you to play the game, and then judge what does and does not work. That is the purpose of the playtest, to play the test rules. Not to simply read them and speculate.
And, I have had many older players in threads agree with me that the designers have taken a few of the best parts of previous edition, implemented them in the worst way and then combined them with the worst aspects of previous editions and some horrible "new" ideas which, when combined, override the few potentially decent things about NextI've expressed this opinion before, and many older players, including some in this thread, have agreed with me that nothing can replace the experience of actually playing the game to see what ends up being more or less important.
So, my recommendation, which you can take or leave as you wish, is for you to play the game, and then judge what does and does not work. That is the purpose of the playtest, to play the test rules. Not to simply read them and speculate.
That's the intent of the playtest, but playing D&D, as I'm sure you know, takes a lot more than just downloading the files and hitting run.So, my recommendation, which you can take or leave as you wish, is for you to play the game, and then judge what does and does not work. That is the purpose of the playtest, to play the test rules. Not to simply read them and speculate.
Good point. The people that really matter in this context are the conscientious ones who could go either way.This brings me to the flipside to your suggestion: WotC wants to get as many people playing the game as possible. Potential customers and wary customers are the ones they should be getting feedback from. The people who are sure either way are largely irrelevant.
And, I have had many older players in threads agree with me that the designers have taken a few of the best parts of previous edition, implemented them in the worst way and then combined them with the worst aspects of previous editions and some horrible "new" ideas which, when combined, override the few potentially decent things about Next
I don't need to playtest it. The game does not inspire me to playtest it.