D&D (2024) The WotC Playtest Surveys Have A Flaw

[Parmandur]

I mean, if they had designers who could actually develop for an improved game experience instead of a corporate's multi-billion dollar strategy, that would help.
As it is now, it's all being distilled into what will sell the most copies - not what will make the better game.

Can you articulate the meaningful difference between what would make the game better versus what would make it sell better...?

I fail to see the distinction, when people will buy a game if it makes them happy, so designing for making most users happy should sell more.

 

[bert1001 fka bert1000]

I haven't done more than look through a few of the current surveys so maybe it's gotten better, but I don't have a lot of confidence in prior surveys and how they are used/presented.

It's like the Fighter / Mythic Martial issue.

Surveys say Fighters are the most played class now so there's no issues!

Of course, it could be lots of things going on:

• games are played primarily at low level and so the Fighter is fine (not even getting into the issue that perhaps most games are lower level partly because of the magic / martial imbalance at high levels)
• people realize the fighter is not fine but people love the martial concept so much they are willing to hold their nose and play it anyway
• the fighter is fine at many tables because of house rules/table conventions despite design being underwhelming
• the majority of players are causal players and play fighters because they want a martial hero fantasy. if there was an alternative mythic martial class they might not have any issues playing that one over the fighter

etc

I don't often see this kind of nuisance in the surveys trying to test likely hypothesis of why certain things might be.

 

[Parmandur]

That's not entirely incorrect. But I think D&D relying on one special player (aka the DM) to do all the heavy lifting in order to make a table happen creates a weird situation.

Sure, the kind of people who hang out in ENWorld (our of which those who fill the survey are an even smaller percentage) are a silly folk. The average player cares a lot less about the martial/caster disparity, short rests being a viable mechanic, or there being very few ways to spend gold. But their DM probably does. And if the game doesn't attract the group's DM, then that group isn't playing D&D. They'll probably switch to Level Up or Tales of the Valiant or Pathfinder 2E or whatever alternative game the DM prefers (that isn't niche enough to turn off their average players).

So I think even though we are kinda weird, I do also think that 5E should listen to us. We're the loud minority that the game needs to satisfy for the game to happen.

I don't think that us forumites are representing of DMs, even. The pages active community for discussing 5E is the Dndnext Subreddit, and that is a small fraction compared to the number of people playing the game...in fact, that Subreddit is a fraction of the number of people actively engaged with this playtest! And EnWorld is way, way less representative than that, even.

And to approach @Ruin Explorer's point from another angle, I do think WotC's internal playtesting team has a very peculiar playstyle, and they've had that for a long time. These are the people who didn't realise the 3.5 Cleric was overpowered, because they just played the class as a healer and didn't push the class's potential to the fullest extent. AFAICT, 5E's internal playtesters also play the game like a classic dungeon crawler, even though the game has evolved into a very different playstyle. And I think these kinds of disparities ultimately lead to a product that isn't as good as it could have been.

They seemed to have made a major corrective to their internal playtest groups after their data gathering post-4E revealed to them how most people play D&D.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

I really wish they'd started with what PF2 did. 'hey, we're updating the core books because of the whole OGL thing, this is not a new edition, nothing to worry about'... and then, when they actually give you remixed Witch and whatever new stuff, you actually feel like you're getting more than was promised!

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I haven't done more than look through a few of the current surveys so maybe it's gotten better, but I don't have a lot of confidence in prior surveys and how they are used/presented.

It's like the Fighter / Mythic Martial issue.

Surveys say Fighters are the most played class now so there's no issues!

Of course, it could be lots of things going on:

• games are played primarily at low level and so the Fighter is fine (not even getting into the issue that perhaps most games are lower level partly because of the magic / martial imbalance at high levels)
• people realize the fighter is not fine but people love the martial concept so much they are willing to hold their nose and play it anyway
• the fighter is fine at many tables because of house rules/table conventions despite design being underwhelming
• the majority of players are causal players and play fighters because they want a martial hero fantasy. if there was an alternative mythic martial class they might not have any issues playing that one over the fighter

etc

I don't often see this kind of nuisance in the surveys trying to test likely hypothesis of why certain things might be.

Yeah this is right imo - WotC aren't even testing alternative hypotheses or seemingly considering why things are how they are. That's part of why I've called this "bad design".

Almost all the big things they have tried out, it's been like "What? Why? Who asked for that?" and literally none of them have been with martial classes - like they tried big changes to Druids and Warlocks, really weird changes, and the Warlock changes particularly, apart from the INT thing, which loads of people had been asking for, were just stuff that I'd never even heard critics of the Warlock ask for, let alone fans (the Druid changes at least people had discussed similar ideas).

Why go big trying out something weird with a class widely-regard as the best-designed class in 5E, and yet just basically leave Monks, Rangers, and Sorcerers exactly as they were! Just making really small sort of housekeeping changes? Absolutely bizarre behaviour. And I know even the Yutes regard Monk/Sorcerer/Ranger as the most problematic 5E classes.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I really wish they'd started with what PF2 did. 'hey, we're updating the core books because of the whole OGL thing, this is not a new edition, nothing to worry about'... and then, when they actually give you remixed Witch and whatever new stuff, you actually feel like you're getting more than was promised!

Wait where can I see this new PF2 stuff?

 

[CleverNickName]

And we dont have to neglect it, it was not neglected before, and here we are.

The game was not built on the backs of tweens, and need not be.

I'm not taking about the founding of the game, I'm talking about the point of entry. And for me and my friends, it was 5th grade and the Red Box rules.

 

[Scribe]

In not taking about the founding of the game, I'm talking about the point of entry. And for me and my friends, it was 5th grade and the Red Box rules.

5th grade seems awful young, but I was just running around in the streets at that age.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

Wait where can I see this new PF2 stuff?

Mephits are now called elemental scamps. I think that's the most important bit!

But, I honestly don't know where a list of the changes would be, it's just been covered in my feeds all over the summer...

(personally I'm just excited for Starfinder2 using PF2 as the base this time)

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Mephits are now called elemental scamps. I think that's the most important bit!

But, I honestly don't know where a list of the changes would be, it's just been covered in my feeds all over the summer...

(personally I'm just excited for Starfinder2 using PF2 as the base this time)

Oh is it still in playtesting? Presumably then to be collected into PF2.1 or whatever.