Any news out of PAX East?

[Piratecat]

I didn't go to the seminar today, but I imagine that Mearls and Jeremy Crawford were frustrated they couldn't say much yet.

Things I can say without violating my NDA:

- The playtest materials at PAX East were reportedly the exact same characters and rules as at DDXP. Newer rules iterations weren't included in those yet.

- My table had a lot of fun. Considering that most of the judges had never played before, It think it went pretty well. Lots of feedback.

 

[ExploderWizard]

As for the disappointment that there is no date announced for the open play test to begin, I'd be surprised if anything else were the case. Who really wants them to rush this? Why would you want them to chuck any old slop at us and say: test that. That would guarantee failure. They want to come up with something they are happy with and that they believe meets their goals. When it's ready they will open up the public playtest. We'll bash it to bits and with any luck at the end of it, we'll have a pretty cool game. Meanwhile, there are still plenty of cool games to play.

I'm not in any particular hurry for the playtest but the more nailed down things get in the design process the less likely a playtest is to bring about meaningful change.

 

[jbear]

Would you agree that releasing a playtest that is rushed in order to get it out there could lead to a massively negative backlash that could leave 5e dead in it's tracks before it even got out of the gate?

I can only speak from my personal perspective. 5e is going to have to have something special in order for me to turn from a system I'm very happy with, like, enjoy and have modified to suit all my needs. If I get asked to try out any old s*%@e ... well ... then I'm going to lose interest in the new version completely. If it's really good but there are some things I don't like or don't quite work ... well, then I can give that feedback in the hope that the issue is shared by others and will be addressed. And my interest and openness towards the final product will remain.

But that's just where I'm coming from. I understand everyone has their own agenda/needs/wants/desires/points of view etc. But I think it's reasonable for them to actually ask us to test something decent, not just some ol' half baked, well intentioned crap.

 

[jeffh]

Seriously, what did you expect? There is a closed playtest and the on-site playtest at the conventions. Both include an NDA - and while those two are going on, nothing else is going to happen. That's how every playtest works.

Yes, normally. However, they quite specifically said this one wouldn't. Three months later there's no sign of that being true, and the event at which it was more or less expected that would change has instead produced only an annoucement that they still have no idea when if that will change.

Given WotC's track record with promises of this sort, (a) I'm not sure why I would expect anything different but (b) on the other hand, if I were WotC I'd be doing my damnedst not to squander the tremendous goodwill the 5E announcement initially generated. Instead they seem determined to do just that.

 

[jeffh]

Would you agree that releasing a playtest that is rushed in order to get it out there could lead to a massively negative backlash that could leave 5e dead in it's tracks before it even got out of the gate?

Perhaps, but at some point not releasing it is going to have exactly the same result. And what really mystifies me, if it was as far from ready as it apparently was why the heck did they announce it in the first place?

Then there's the fact that according to Morrus they've been working on this for over a year. Given that much time, I, working entirely by myself, could have put something together in my spare time that was at least a serviceable starting point, and likely so could half the people contributing to this thread. Would it be as polished or balanced as you'd want a finished product to be, no, but that's why you playtest things. Can they really have next to nothing to show for all that time and effort?

 

[GX.Sigma]

Perhaps, but at some point not releasing it is going to have exactly the same result. And what really mystifies me, if it was as far from ready as it apparently was why the heck did they announce it in the first place?

Then there's the fact that according to Morrus they've been working on this for over a year. Given that much time, I, working entirely by myself, could have put something together in my spare time that was at least a serviceable starting point, and likely so could half the people contributing to this thread. Would it be as polished or balanced as you'd want a finished product to be, no, but that's why you playtest things. Can they really have next to nothing to show for all that time and effort?

I think you're overreacting. They need to have the core mechanics pretty solid, and the rest of the rulebook in a decently complete state (note: complete does totally not mean finished, it just means it covers everything in some form) before they can show it to the whole world and get tons and tons of feedback from everyone who's ever played D&D giving their opinion on why the playtest rules suck.

The beginning of last week's L&L basically says that. They need to have some kind of reasonably well thought out system for high level play so that when they release it, they'll get meaningful feedback on it.

I wouldn't be so quick to damn them. Let's have some chocolate bunnies and forget about it.

 

[jbear]

Well, because they wanted to go into phase 2 of development.

They wanted to begin having playtests on a smaller scale at events. They wanted to start talking about it and getting feedback on general ideas via DDI. But if this is fairly obvious to me then I don't think it can be that much of a mystery to anyone else.

If you really want to make a problem I guess go for it.

Like i said, I'm in no hurry personally.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Like i said, I'm in no hurry personally.

Heh, I could wait several years or more for the finished product. What I see happening though is a 'playtest' that is merely a glorified validation exercise for the finished game.

 

[Mercutio01]

Three months later there's no sign of that being true

You say this like its some sort of astronomically long time. Frankly, three months seems comically short to be complaining about. I find that each year I age, "three months" seems shorter and shorter.

 

[Guest 85555]

Then there's the fact that according to Morrus they've been working on this for over a year. Given that much time, I, working entirely by myself, could have put something together in my spare time that was at least a serviceable starting point, and likely so could half the people contributing to this thread. Would it be as polished or balanced as you'd want a finished product to be, no, but that's why you playtest things. Can they really have next to nothing to show for all that time and effort?

But that is the key distinction. One person making a game, a bit counter intuitively, takes less time than a duo or team (this has been my experience at least). Yes, writing text goes faster with multiple writers, but mechanics and core concepts take more time when they need to go through a team (you have to have meetings, get everyone on the same page, okay ideas, etc).

Also, my guess is they are attempting to do less of a rush job this time around. Don't know if the end product will be good or not. Will find out in due time.