D&D 5E D&D Next playtest post mortem by Mike Mearls and Rodney Thompson. From seven years ago.

[Charlaquin]

There's definately a much sweeter spot that we got.

Maybe instead of 1/2 level everything is 1/4 or 1-20 is the level max or maybe they are built using something like 4e companion rules (like SW saga damage scaling).

1/4 level would be less than 5e proficiency bonus.

 

[Haplo781]

Indeed, it seems that the whole game was built backwards, if that was supposed to be the goal.

The two rock-bottom simple combat options, Berserker Barbarian and Champion Fighter, are....poor, shall we say. The former pays dearly to use its fundamental feature and doesn't really get anything to compensate for that. The latter critically (heh) depends on getting lots and lots of combat rounds per day--as in, as close to the maximum stated amount as possible--which doesn't happen in real life.

Meanwhile, all other non-spellcasting classes are relatively complex in combat, while having literally almost nothing whatsoever to do out of combat other than "petition the DM and pray for a favorable ruling" and "check equipment list." So if you don't want to be a spellcaster, you choices are "something that doesn't keep up in combat and has no options out of combat" or "something that's finicky in combat and has no options out of combat."

Alternatively, you can be a spellcaster! ...where there's literally only one option that is somewhat low-complexity while in an actual combat (Warlock). Everything else rides pretty high on the combat complexity scale, other than maybe Paladin. Now, these options can totally do all sorts of stuff in the world outside of combat, in fact they're practically overloaded with tools for addressing that stuff if it catches their fancy.

So...you can be a spellcaster and be somewhere between slightly and severely complicated in combat, and actually feature-rich and complex outside of combat...or you can be a non-spellcaster and be somewhere between dirt-simple and low-performance or moderately effective but moderately complex in combat, and almost totally feature-deficient outside of combat unless you use spells (looking at you, Totem Barbarian and Eldritch Knight.)

It's like they heard the lesson, and articulated it, and then chucked it out the window and did what they wanted to do anyway.

(And, because the odds are literally 100% that someone will say something about this: Skills don't count. Everyone gets skills. That's not a feature provided by the Fighter class. It just straight-up isn't, and I guarantee you won't convince me otherwise. Way too many people have tried, none have succeeded.)

I've said it before and I'll say it again:

Remove skills from full casters.

I am only half joking.

 

[Gammadoodler]

I’d rather go about it the other way round, and take them out.

The spells from the PHB deserve a real good revision, as they vary from old edition holdovers to useless effects to spells that break the core math (shield and pass without trace).

They can’t convince me they had a shared vision when the spells were designed.

So, it is interesting.

On the one hand, while I agree that spells certainly could use some pruning, I am mostly fine with spells existing as is.

On the other hand, it drives me a little crazy the differential in the mechanical design budget devoted to spellcasting vs. any other mechanical interactions in the game.

So when I hear appeals to simplicity directed toward preventing additional options for the classes that are on the wrong side of the mechanical design budget allocation, it makes my eye twitch a little bit.

With that said, as it relates to the math-y bits related to physical stats, I'd be on board for just removing the math, if only to avoid playing the "how heavy is this in pounds...how far is that in feet" game and all the attendant equipment lookup and representative googling that seems to result.

 

[MwaO]

how would you evaluate the current survey?

Hard to know exactly without access to how they're using the data, but...
Seems better. They at least ask 1st edition played and have email addresses. They should ask favorite edition & classes in every playtest. Get that baseline going.

If my email address on the playtest survey about Rangers says I love Rangers and then on a different survey about Paladins. Or I just seem to randomly choose my favorite class...those are both signs that something funny is up with me.

 

[MwaO]

I think, intelligence can definitely influence fighting style. Does someone have a tell? How do you use spatial awareness? D&D tends to represent that by level and experience, but...

There's this great example of Andre Agassi owning Boris Becker on the tennis court because he realized Becker would stick his tongue out in a certain way if going down the line and a different way if going towards the edge. And then Agassi would selectively use it so as to not reveal to Becker that he knew.

And in play, it drove Becker nuts. He couldn't figure out how Agassi got into his head that way. After they both retired, Agassi told him and Becker about fell off his chair.

 

[glass]

It's definitely possible. That was 4E essentials before it died.

You really think that Essentials did not cater pretty closely to Mearls's preferences at the time? Because I am strongly of the opposite opinion.

once again on the same side... I am all for reivaluating it... I am just pointing out it already has been (maybe just not enough)

I know my buddy Jim was PISSED when he learned it wasn't 1 minute per level in 5e, and I was shocked cause I forgot it WAS that in 3e.

Wait, what? He thinks the 3e version (which unless you had warning combat was coming took up a precious standard action in combat) was stronger?

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Remove skills from full casters. I am only half joking.

While I would not go that far, I think casters should certainly get fewer skills than martials (rather than more, sometimes massively more, as they do in several editions).

 

[GMforPowergamers]

1/4 level would be less than 5e proficiency bonus.

1/3 level +1 for prof is what I was playing with... or prof is 1+1/3 level and non prof is + 1/5 level
1 1 0
2 1 0
3 2 0
4 2 0
5 2 1
6 3 1
7 3 1
8 3 1
9 4 1
10 4 2
11 4 2
12 5 2
13 5 2
14 5 2
15 6 3
16 6 3
17 6 3
18+7 3

 

[Minigiant]

You really think that Essentials did not cater pretty closely to Mearls's preferences at the time? Because I am strongly of the opposite opinion.

No, it think Essentials was designed in a way that things outside of Merl's and Co's preferences could and would be supported. It was designed in a way that eventually the Designers would have to design classes outside their comfort zone and force them to analyze their views

5e just came before in the design could fully get there.

 

[Jaeger]

I figured it was substantially more charitable to assume that the designers did not lie, and instead that this poster had a proposal of effective non-growth, than to assume that the designers did lie and that everything they've said should be treated as questionable until proven otherwise...

That was very charitable.

I was very uncharitable after watching the postmortem videos linked to in this thread, and marveling at the 5e's designers cognitive dissonance over their own design goals.

The tangent is based on the idea that the postmortem and surveys said that people wanted combat simplicity and one of the designer's goals was not to design with their own personal biases.

Indeed, it seems that the whole game was built backwards, if that was supposed to be the goal.
...

It's like they heard the lesson, and articulated it, and then chucked it out the window and did what they wanted to do anyway.
...

Along with the issues you listed.

Stuff like Mearls going on how they wanted to make combat faster and simpler - and then three video's later they tell the anecdote on how they got Mearls to greenlight 'bonus actions' as part of the action economy by essentially wearing him down by bringing it up over and over again as something that should be included.

And we could probably go through the so-called post mortem videos and find even more examples... (Like the fact that I completely disagree with how they structured their design team early on..)

The more I reflect on tightly designed RPG's Like Worlds without Number are when done by one man shops like Kevin Crawford, the more cynical I become of the so called 'industry professionals' working for WotC and Pazio.

 

[vagabundo]

1/4 level would be less than 5e proficiency bonus.

I've not paid much attention to 5e since the playtests. I noped out once they ditched XP budgets and 4e monster design. DM convenience was a deal breaker for me.

I've played in a game run by my ten year old nephew though.