Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 5726493" data-attributes="member: 7006">I'm not comparing WotC's public playtesting to Paizo's by any stretch... because obviously Pathfinder was much more open than the NDAd playtesting of 4E.  But Zaphling was trying to make the point that WotC failed badly with 4E (something we all know is not the case) because they did not have an 'open feedback' playtesting period like Paizo had.Let us not forget that Paizo was one of (if not the first) game company to actually HAVE such a wide-ranging completely open playtest of their game.  I don't seem to recall open playtests of editons of Shadowrun, or Vampire, or Warhammer, or Mutants & Masterminds or any other major game line out there.  So you can't blame WotC for not doing it either, because up until that point pretty much EVERY game had closed playtests with game company employees and selected outside groups under NDAs.  Paizo was able to have an open playtest of Pathfinder partly because they were adapting rules that already were out there because of the OGL.  Most of the rules were already known by the playtesting populace because they'd been using them as part of 3.5 for years.  So there was little to no risk involved by having everyone and anyone use the rules along with the tweaks that Pathfinder added to the game.  But to retroactively blame companies for not doing the same thing BEFORE Paizo showed it could actually be effective and for very little risk is rather disingenuous.</blockquote>

Verification