Satirical Bard
Explorer
I think I'd check up on the 'subtle changes' thread in particular, Blue, as those are the ones that won't be as obvious as, say, combat maneuvers, etc. Also the spells winners and losers, if you're a spellcaster in a5e.
Honestly, analysis and criticism of a product's merits and flaws is what I would expect from any discussion forum. Merits and flaws. There are merits I've noted. I've also pointed out flaws, and that's where we tend to get stuck conversationally - when people are rushing to deny the flaws instead of to address them. That's an odd thing I haven't encountered elsewhere.Rant, can I ask why you're even still posting here?
You've made it abundantly clear you not only don't like Level Up at all, you don't actually want a new rules system. Furthemore, you think it's a terrible product that reflects badly on all involved, who clearly don't know anything about good game design.
You've written something like 100 posts and an entire blog article to this effect.
What are you hoping to achieve by continuing to pour crap on Level Up and its authors on its own forum, mostly in the form of repeating the same comments again and again and again and again? And why do you think this strategy is going to be an effective way to achieve that hope, rather than getting on everyone's nerves, as it seems to be doing so far?
Playtesting is important. More so before a product is released. That's how most people view it, regardless of a few outliers who think the consumer tests a product. My questions on playtesting began with the "compatibility" question. How were those playtests conducted that "assure" compatibility? It's a reasonable question. It's also not the consumer's job to test the product. But it is logically our purview to judge it. The issue of Press the Attack is separate from the compatibility question (beyond the fact that it's a universal maneuver that isn't part of the rule system Level Up replaces, but that's a bit tangential) but it's an example of the questionable nature of the playtesting, from my perspective. Again: The pre-release playtesting, not the current "in the wild" consumer playtesting.You have chimed in as an armchair quarterback. Actually, I would say that the majority of armchair quarterbacks have at least seen a game of football, while you don't even have that distinction. That is not high on the credibility scale for what you pointing out mattering.
Yet you have just used a thread that is doing exactly that as a resource to support your point.
Are they not doing anything useful in that thread in which case it's no support for what you are saying?
Or are they doing something useful and you are just being hypocritical here?
Luckily, the goal wasn't "noble" nor "valuable". It was "credible". And yes, having actually tried something to see how if it works in actual play conditions as you expect from reading it is the minimum level of playtesting to be credible.
I seem to remember reading comment after comment from you asking about how they did their playtesting. Do you actually believe playtesting is useful, so here you are again speaking hypocritically, or in all of those did you not think playtesting was important and were just trying to win a point?
It was though. You’ve been told that multiple times by one of the authors.Typically playtesting happens before a product is released.
I don’t see why this is a big issue. If a berserker uses it the opponent cannot fall back.Press the attack and fall back are obviously messed up from a read.
I would require both of them to use the levelup spells. Allowing them to pick & choose o5e if they are better & vice versa would create a mess before even getting to rare spells & spell craft of custom spellsOn the subject of compatibility, I have a related question:
If I’m running a group with an O5e Wizard using O5e spells and an A5e Wizard using A5e spells and the former lets the latter copy the O5e version of fireball into their spellbook, does it supersede the A5e version, make it obsolete, or transform into it?
I don’t think that this is the case. I certainly don’t.I think we agree on that.
You’ve been told multiple times it was but you keep implying that it wasn’t.Playtesting is important. More so before a product is released.
I'm a bit surprised at the tone of the responses, however. Criticizing flaws in a product is a normal thing to do. Critical thinking is good, analysis is good.