D&D 5E Did the Next playtest focus on DM skills at all?

[Jeremy E Grenemyer]

Hello All,

Having not played more than one Next playtest, I am wondering if the playtests or feedback process focused at all on DM skills? Things like NPC creation, world building and campaign management?

I'm just wondering whether WotC are at all interested in encouraging DMs to world build, or be referees?

Your thoughtful and informed opinion is appreciated.

 

[Mistwell]

No, it did not focus on this because it's not something easily tested through an open playtest.

Yes, if you believe what they've said about they edition, they are very much interested in these things. They've also tested some of these concepts through the open polling on monster backgrounds.

 

[Minigiant]

Actively tested for it. Not openly. It would be hard to test refereeing and worldbuilding in a survey and get good results. And none of those types of questions appeared.

But you want DMs to referee and build a lot. Next looks like the most "lean on the DM to do the work" edition in since the beginning. There have been grey boxes on refereeing for a while.

It felt like one of the design goals was to make an easy method to referee, add content, and change things via the advantage system, bounded DCs err... accuracy, and basic DC range.

It's looks pretty much set up so DMs can create and make judgement calls without wacky results until WotC writes official rules for it. No sailor subclass or feat? Just give your fighter advantage on checks to balance,recall nautical lore, and sail boats until we make the corsair subclass. That should tide you over for a while.

 

[TerraDave]

Just to continue the, er, well, thread, I think the idea was to make DMing easier, to then give DMs time and space to world build and even house rule, if they choose to.


BUT, I sure am looking forward to the DMG (equivalent) to see what they really do about it beyond that.

 

[Li Shenron]

I am wondering if the playtests or feedback process focused at all on DM skills? Things like NPC creation, world building and campaign management?

Not at all.

The playtest focused on game concepts such as for example: main identity of each class (including what all members of each class must have, and what should not be mandatory), feats mechanic, proficiencies or skills, saving throws, subclasses mechanics and what they deliver, resting and healing mechanics, critical hits, exploration rules framework...

In most cases what was being tested was first the general concept behind mechanics and the rough mechanics itself, and second the actual options that can be chosen. For instance, "what should feats represent" and "how should feats work". Feedback was also asked on the actual feats presented, but as long as the concepts and mechanics were still under development, those actual feats could become invalid in next packet.

NPC creation, world building, campaign management were non-existent in the public playtest.

That obviously doesn't mean they have no place in 5e...

 

[Jeremy E Grenemyer]

NPC creation, world building, campaign management were non-existent in the public playtest.

That obviously doesn't mean they have no place in 5e...

I admire their effort to include the fans and gather feedback. It's something that keeps me happy when I'm otherwise not happy with DDI and the loss of Dragon and Dungeon magazines (however temporary that may be).

I wonder, though, how much energy and time Mearls and Co. have been able to give to the DM side of things?

I have not read all the columns online or in Dragon, so I wonder if anyone at WotC has talked (publicly) about what it means to DM 5E/Next?

Is it necessary to have a finished set of new rules before they consider the DMing side of things? If yes, why?

The DM guides for 3E and 4E are two of my favorite gaming books. They are consistently useful; the 3E book is detailed and concise while the 4E book is a model of simplicity and efficiency.

They each have their best parts and as someone who DMs far more than he runs characters, I'm very interested to see if WotC can take the best parts of both books and combine them (WotC's) knowledge of 5E/Next to create a book that inspires DMs.

Without a DM, you don't have a game. I hope WotC does not forget this during their push to perfect the D&D rules.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

Is it necessary to have a finished set of new rules before they consider the DMing side of things? If yes, why?

I can try to answer this one. I think yes. Because a large amount of the tone of the game is decided by the rules. A game where the treasure tables say to give out a million gold for each orc you kill and has a magic item list with prices where +5 swords cost 10 gp is going to have a different feel than one that suggests that magic items are never purchased and shouldn't ever by found until 10th level.

The advice on how to create encounters, create adventures and create entire campaigns is going to be quite different in the two games.

Same thing with skills. A game with skills that have tables of very specific difficulties listed is very different from one that says "guess at a difficulty each time the PCs attempt something. 5 is easy, 10 is medium, 15 is hard, and 20 is extremely hard." DMing these games will have a very different feeling and the things you need to focus on as a DM are quite different.

Don't get me wrong, there will definitely be some DMing advice that is fairly generic but you definitely need to know what some of the rules are so that you can give proper advice.

 

[the Jester]

And just how do you run a massive playtest of dming techniques that will actually help solidify the new ruleset?

I don't think a playtest is the appropriate venue for dm instruction. Not at all. YMMV, of course.

 

[MJS]

The playtest I was in had a good DM, but man, the adventure was pure railroad garbage. It involved a lot of political stuff and ended with a battle in a ballroom with sealed doors. Worst written module I've ever played in. Once I separated the ick of that from the rules, I found 5E too dice laden for my tastes, but the DM did his best with the pantload he was given to run.

 

[Jeremy E Grenemyer]

Did the playtest packets include areas for DM feedback?

If yes, did they throw out specific questions like how slow or fast was a given encounter, how long did the adventure take, did you feel compelled to change anything, etc.?