D&D General Does anyone else starting to feel like FR: HoF & FR: AiF were starved of resources because of the Core Books

[Parmandur]

Truly cannot wrap my head around how someone arrives to this conclusion. These two books are probably my favorites in all of 5e outside of the core rules.

Well, while I agree with you and not the OP, for the sake of argument I will say I do see and understand where @Henadic Theologian is coming from: for those folks who enjoyed the 2E/3E era of breakneck novels and game products carefully curating a shared metaplot, these books are not a return to that form. It continues the sort of hazy quantum approach to "canon" that WotC has been using for some years now, and for the "consistent Canon is possible and even desireavle" crowd...that can be disappointing.

 

[Reynard]

Just because some element was not part of a public playtest, does not mean it was not playtested. WotC public playtesting is little more than marketing anyway, and I think it is better to trust the designers rather than capitulate to the loudest slice of the fanbase.

 

[Parmandur]

Just because some element was not part of a public playtest, does not mean it was not playtested. WotC public playtesting is little more than marketing anyway, and I think it is better to trust the designers rather than capitulate to the loudest slice of the fanbase.

Subclasses are the main elements they seem to feel the need to run past the broad public for a vibe check: Subclass choice is a pretty significant wlement of play that can stick with a player for years, so it makes sense.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

Just because some element was not part of a public playtest, does not mean it was not playtested. WotC public playtesting is little more than marketing anyway, and I think it is better to trust the designers rather than capitulate to the loudest slice of the fanbase.

That is no replacement for the public playtests, the quality of what they produce with proper public playtests is almost always better and more reliably so that just private playtests.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

Subclasses are the main elements they seem to feel the need to run past the broad public for a vibe check: Subclass choice is a pretty significant wlement of play that can stick with a player for years, so it makes sense.

Well given how unbalanced the feats are, they need better playtesting for other materials and even major lore changes.

 

[Parmandur]

Well given how unbalanced the feats are, they need better playtesting for other materials and even major lore changes.

But, are they though...?

 

[DEFCON 1]

That is no replacement for the public playtests, the quality of what they produce with proper public playtests is almost always better and more reliably so that just private playtests.

The public play tests only check for audience approval. They have little to do with balancing. That's all their internal team and their alpha testers.

And quite frankly I wouldn't trust the general public for balance testing anyway, since the tens of thousands of testers would all have different values for what is "balanced".

 

[Morrus]

That is no replacement for the public playtests, the quality of what they produce with proper public playtests is almost always better and more reliably so that just private playtests.

Cite?

To determine that you'd need to do a thorough study of everything published, categorising each and every item as either publicly playtested or privately playtested, and then somehow gather some kind of objective quality rating for every rule, spell, feat, feature, monster, etc.

I suspect that you have not done that, and what you mean is "I have a hunch based on my own personal anecdotal preference for a couple of things I saw".

 

[billd91]

But, are they though...?

I think there's a degree of unevenness among the feats. A few seem kind of specialized in their benefits. And if any player in an adventuring group I'm in takes Mythal Touched, I'm either gonna slap them or stay more than 15 feet away from them at all times.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Well, while I agree with you and not the OP, for the sake of argument I will say I do see and understand where @Henadic Theologian is coming from: for those folks who enjoyed the 2E/3E era of breakneck novels and game products carefully curating a shared metaplot, these books are not a return to that form. It continues the sort of hazy quantum approach to "canon" that WotC has been using for some years now, and for the "consistent Canon is possible and even desireavle" crowd...that can be disappointing.

WotC don't pay its staff enough for them to read through the vast pile of largely terrible novels.