Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 6118955" data-attributes="member: 7006">My first thought when any of these packets get released and we see things that seem out of place (had the packet been the actual commercial release), is to assume that there's a good chance it's there purely to spark conversation and make us look long and hard at those things.Putting alignment restrictions on the paladin and monk?&nbsp; It gets us talking (whether in favor or against).&nbsp; If they never brought it up at any point, how many of us would respond unprompted in the survey with our opinions whether they should have it?&nbsp; Probably not many.How many 9th level spells are getting playtested right now by people in the public playtest?&nbsp; I would imagine not many.&nbsp; So they'll do anything they can do to get us to play them-- including putting Ancient Red Dragons and Asmodeus into the packet and make them seemingly inconsequential to actually hit.&nbsp; But while we're railing against their ACs... we also&nbsp; are unconsciously coming to conclusions about some of the spells while we're at it.&nbsp; And if any of those make us go &quot;Whoa!&nbsp; Wait a second!&quot;... that'll bear itself out in the surveys too.I think in many ways... designing playtest packets are like playing Clue.&nbsp; When you make an Accusation, you sometimes deliberately include the item which you've already deduced is the murder weapon... purely so that you force the others to show you Suspects and Locations which you do not yet know are responsible and you need information on.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 6118955, member: 7006"] My first thought when any of these packets get released and we see things that seem out of place (had the packet been the actual commercial release), is to assume that there's a good chance it's there purely to spark conversation and make us look long and hard at those things. Putting alignment restrictions on the paladin and monk? It gets us talking (whether in favor or against). If they never brought it up at any point, how many of us would respond unprompted in the survey with our opinions whether they should have it? Probably not many. How many 9th level spells are getting playtested right now by people in the public playtest? I would imagine not many. So they'll do anything they can do to get us to play them-- including putting Ancient Red Dragons and Asmodeus into the packet and make them seemingly inconsequential to actually hit. But while we're railing against their ACs... we also are unconsciously coming to conclusions about some of the spells while we're at it. And if any of those make us go "Whoa! Wait a second!"... that'll bear itself out in the surveys too. I think in many ways... designing playtest packets are like playing Clue. When you make an Accusation, you sometimes deliberately include the item which you've already deduced is the murder weapon... purely so that you force the others to show you Suspects and Locations which you do not yet know are responsible and you need information on. [/QUOTE]

Verification