D&D 4E Finally, a playtest reporting there are good things from 4e in Next!!

[Kynn]

Puff piece. Doesn't really say anything we haven't heard in L&L.

That's all anyone can write at this point.

Either happy fluffy "my trip to DDXP" stories about how everyone got along despite edition differences, or somewhat more grumbly stories about it how seems there's more yet to be done to make D&D Next work well but they're still glad they got in the playtest.

This goes back to the Parable of the Paladin and the Stirges -- we can't really expect anything BUT puff from the playtesters' blog posts, because the NDA prohibits them from discussing mechanics.

 

[kitsune9]

Interesting read on the playtest.

 

[Rechan]

On a side note, a 4e wizard charging 6 orcs with battle axes would likely be dead in a round. 4e PCs start out a bit more robust than ones from earlier editions, but not that robust!

Yeah, that comment bothered me too. Especially because a character of mine - an armored 1st level warlord with more Hp than a wizard - got ganked last week by getting surrounded by controllers who killed him in two rounds with melee basic attacks. So I totally call BS.

But I am glad that the D&D N isn't lethal like earlier editions. Unlike the OP, I like superman characters.

 

[Charles Dunwoody]

I find it interesting that BS is being called on my comment about the wizard not charging into combat, but I never said I was talking about the 4E wizard. Interesting assumption that it had to be 4E there. I wonder why that assumption was drawn? In fact, I never said that it doesn't work that way in all editions now and the trend just continues. Odd response really, assuming I was picking on 4E!

I wrote several examples of where I was coming from and what I experienced within what my NDA allows. The game played differently from both 4E and 3.5 which is in my mind a good thing, as these rules were bare bones. The mix of all editions was there, 1E to 4E, and I've played them all. I have years of writing at rpg.net both in my column and as a reviewer. I have no need to BS and no one to impress. I was just excited to share my play experience, just like i have many times before.

 

[Rechan]

Edit: You know what, this argument isn't worth it.

 

[Kynn]

Then I really have to question what the hell was going on at your table where a wizard wouldn't get creamed by 6 orcs in melee unless they're minions?

I think you're misreading the thread and/or original post, because he didn't really make any claims about wizard survivability in other, non-D&D Next games. (Only that they wouldn't survive in D&DN.)

Pushing him too hard on this one throwaway line seems rather extreme.

 

[Dragonblade]

I find it interesting that BS is being called on my comment about the wizard not charging into combat, but I never said I was talking about the 4E wizard. Interesting assumption that it had to be 4E there. I wonder why that assumption was drawn? In fact, I never said that it doesn't work that way in all editions now and the trend just continues. Odd response really, assuming I was picking on 4E!

As to a puff piece I call BS. I wrote several examples of where I was coming from and what I experienced within what my NDA allows. The game played differently from both 4E and 3.5 which is in my mind a good thing, as these rules were bare bones. The mix of all editions was there, 1E to 4E, and I've played them all. I have years of writing at rpg.net both in my column and as a reviewer. I have no need to BS and no one to impress. I was just excited to share my play experience, just like i have many times before.

Thanks for responding! I didn't say you were focusing on 4e, but that notion that 4e PCs are invincible supermen keeps coming up. In a blog post on Critical Hits, Mike Shea seemed to delight in punishing 4e players who had no prior edition experience when he ran a 5e game at DDXP.

That comment really irked me. If all they know is 4e, then they are bound to approach 5e with 4e assumptions. IMO, the DM is not being fair to them if you don't prepare them for the difference in game style ahead of time.

 

[Consonant Dude]

Call me crazy but I like a variety of playtest reports from different standpoints. I want as many viewpoints as possible. I also don't really care if the reports come from people who share my DnD preferences, provided I have a good idea where they stand.

I don't believe anyone can truly be unbiased, so to me it's just about collecting those reports and trying to make sense of them.

Even if Jack Chick himself wrote a DnD-Next report telling me the game sucks because it still has demons and arcane powers, I'd find it helpful cause it would tell me the game still rocks in that respect

Bottom line: If you played DnD-Next, I hope to hear about it and you have my thanks in advance for sharing!

 

[Essenti]

Thanks for responding! I didn't say you were focusing on 4e, but that notion that 4e PCs are invincible supermen keeps coming up. In a blog post on Critical Hits, Mike Shea seemed to delight in punishing 4e players who had no prior edition experience when he ran a 5e game at DDXP.


That comment really irked me. If all they know is 4e, then they are bound to approach 5e with 4e assumptions. IMO, the DM is not being fair to them if you don't prepare them for the difference in game style ahead of time.

Mike Shea on Critical Hits:

... they would need to take hold of their own destiny. The world wouldn’t save them, they would have to save themselves, and the best weapons they had were their imaginations.

Once that transformation took place, the whole game changed. The antagonism between player and DM transformed into a true cooperative story. Described by Monte Cook as the core mechanic of the game, the players told the DM what they wanted to do and the DM told them whether they succeeded or not.

We don't know what the DM actually said to them going in to the adventures... he may have warned them, or not. I fully agree that preparing new players of any game is absolutely necessary, regardless of which edition they are coming from.

It seems to me Mr. Shea delighted more once the players got their minds wrapped around how the prototype of DDN played... Not that he was specifically punishing 4e players. There was a learning curve, they got through it, and apparently had a blast after that. Although we only have his opinion on that.

 

[Dragonblade]

That was part of it, but it was the bit that Shea wrote about 4e "entitlement" as well.

Anyway, I enjoyed Kravell's write-up and my clarification of 4e wizard durability wasn't intended to take away from that. Merely to add a footnote.