More People Test One D&D Origins Playtest Than D&D Next

WotC has announced that more people have playtested the first One D&D playtest than the number of people who playtested the entirety of the D&D Next playtest 10 years ago, which led to the release of D&D 5E. The number of people who playtested D&D Next, according to the credits in the 5E Player's Handbook, was over 175,000 people.

In the first week alone, more of you have playtested One D&D than in the entirety of 5e playtesting! 🧙‍♂️🎉

Thank you to everyone who has helped shape the future of Dungeons & Dragons! 💥🐉

Screen Shot 2022-09-01 at 5.22.36 PM.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:

log in or register to remove this ad

Acolyte was missing from the "have you played?" section was present on the "evaluate this background" part. Cultist was missing from both. A couple of others were missing from both as well, all had the Magic Initiate feat from above.

At first I thought it was because they may have bumped out the magic initiative feat from their consideration, but I did see at least one background with the Magic Initiate feat included in both the played and evaluate sections. (Though I think it was the Sage which could easily be refluffed with the skilled feat.)

It was slightly annoying because the Cultist was the one that I briefly playtested and there wasn't an option for.... "other."

Not sure why they're soliciting feedback on specific backgrounds at all, since the system is completely build-a-bear.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

OB1

Jedi Master
Not sure why they're soliciting feedback on specific backgrounds at all, since the system is completely build-a-bear.
I actually responded that the sample backgrounds should be in an appendix at the back of the book to reinforce the idea of creating your own. If you don't want to or need help getting inspiration on what to do, you can look up the samples, but by not presenting it right after the rule, it makes it more likely that people will understand that the default is to create your own.
 



Parmandur

Book-Friend
Anyone else finding that stats in background leads to people picking optimal background for class, therefore being a bit uniform in decisions about characters? I fed this back as I can see it making new characters less diverse.
O know it's already been said, but the ASI is free floating, it can't be "gamed" as such.
 


FitzTheRuke

Legend
It's the best of both worlds. You can chose a background for a quick-build, like you would if you took equipment from your class and BG, or you can make your own, like if you spent your money on equipment. Or you can do what I expect most do (or, at least, it's what I would do, which is pick one, and then swap out one or two things for something else equivalent. It speeds up making a character, but DOES NOT limit you in any way.
 

Reynard

Legend
It's the best of both worlds. You can chose a background for a quick-build, like you would if you took equipment from your class and BG, or you can make your own, like if you spent your money on equipment. Or you can do what I expect most do (or, at least, it's what I would do, which is pick one, and then swap out one or two things for something else equivalent. It speeds up making a character, but DOES NOT limit you in any way.
It's not even an either or. You can replace any feature you like. That, I assume, will be by far the most common usage: choosing a background but switching out a language, tool proficiency, or feat.
 

Levistus's_Leviathan

5e Freelancer
It's not even an either or. You can replace any feature you like. That, I assume, will be by far the most common usage: choosing a background but switching out a language, tool proficiency, or feat.
Just as they intend. Because it's literally impossible for them to give examples of every possible imagined background a player character could have before becoming an adventurer.

A player can choose one of the prebuilt ones and run it as written if they want. They can also choose to customize it in any way they want (maybe they were a Farmer-turned-Soldier that still has the Ability Score bonuses of the Farmer, but got the gaming set proficiency and Goblin language of the Soldier), or make a completely new background (apprentice mage to a Hag that learned forgotten arcane secrets before turning on their master and joining up with a carnival). They intend for the "make your own"/"customize an existing background" to be the base, because that promotes more player creativity and doesn't restrict the feats and ASIs that the player wants and thinks would fit the character.
 

FitzTheRuke

Legend
It's not even an either or. You can replace any feature you like. That, I assume, will be by far the most common usage: choosing a background but switching out a language, tool proficiency, or feat.
Yeah, that's what I meant. Just like you might do with equipment.
 

MNblockhead

A Title Much Cooler Than Anything on the Old Site
They missed more than a few things in the lists, backgrounds were also missing.
I got quite a few questions on backgrounds. I wonder if their is some randomization going on. I can't see how my earlier answers would determine whether they ask or don't ask about backgrounds.
 


MNblockhead

A Title Much Cooler Than Anything on the Old Site
Anyone else finding that stats in background leads to people picking optimal background for class, therefore being a bit uniform in decisions about characters? I fed this back as I can see it making new characters less diverse.
Sure. Same with feats. I mentioned that in my comments but I also stated that while I think certain feats and backgrounds will be favored because they are mechanically seen as better, I am okay with feats and backgrounds not being "balanced" because some people will choose for flavor over getting the best mechanical benefit. As long as they are mechanically interesting and let you do fun things, and as long as their are good options for all play styles, pillars of play, and settings, I'm okay with some being "underpowered."

My main comment on backgrounds was that they were all satisfactory. I like the direction they are taking in making more clear that these are just examples and giving more tools and clear instructions for making your own backgrounds. I want them to lean into that more. Also, I would like anything that is more "nurture" based, like skills and proficiencies to be removed from race and put into backgrounds and class. I also said that while I worry that the "ability scores from elsewhere" section makes background creation a bit more complicated, I overall appreciate and approve of it for backward compatibility.

In my comments for the races, I stated that race features should be clearly more "nature" based and skills, languages, proficiencies and other "nurture" based attributes should be something you get from backgrounds and class.
 

Kronius

Explorer
WotC has announced that more people have playtested the first One D&D playtest than the number of people who playtested the entirety of the D&D Next playtest 10 years ago, which led to the release of D&D 5E. The number of people who playtested D&D Next, according to the credits in the 5E Player's Handbook, was over 175,000 people.

In the first week alone, more of you have playtested One D&D than in the entirety of 5e playtesting! 🧙‍♂️🎉

Thank you to everyone who has helped shape the future of Dungeons & Dragons! 💥🐉

View attachment 259842
Well I want to say Duh, because there are more people playing now that at any time in the past, especially when it was 4e. People were playing the "it" game, Pathfinder back during those transition times. We knew WotC was done with 4e. They told us. Even with the public playtest those influencers at the time were not really paying attention to the playtest. They were doing other things like 13th Age or other indie games.
 

Oncewasbenji

Explorer
O know it's already been said, but the ASI is free floating, it can't be "gamed" as such.
If it's free floating, why have different specific backgrounds give different specific stats? That takes away from the 'build it yourself' reading of those rules. The ua has specific stat increases for each background and that's what players will see/choose. Why do that unless you want people to use them? It misleads. There has always been an option to build your own background but in my experience (and I dm for a lot of people, I run 8 campaigns a fortnight) people will still just pick what is in the book. It is possible this is just me, but thus makes it feel less free tha it is now. If it's meant to be a free floating bonus not attached to anything, why is it not just a separate step, rather than happening in the background step?
 

Oncewasbenji

Explorer
Sure. Same with feats. I mentioned that in my comments but I also stated that while I think certain feats and backgrounds will be favored because they are mechanically seen as better, I am okay with feats and backgrounds not being "balanced" because some people will choose for flavor over getting the best mechanical benefit. As long as they are mechanically interesting and let you do fun things, and as long as their are good options for all play styles, pillars of play, and settings, I'm okay with some being "underpowered."

My main comment on backgrounds was that they were all satisfactory. I like the direction they are taking in making more clear that these are just examples and giving more tools and clear instructions for making your own backgrounds. I want them to lean into that more. Also, I would like anything that is more "nurture" based, like skills and proficiencies to be removed from race and put into backgrounds and class. I also said that while I worry that the "ability scores from elsewhere" section makes background creation a bit more complicated, I overall appreciate and approve of it for backward compatibility.

In my comments for the races, I stated that race features should be clearly more "nature" based and skills, languages, proficiencies and other "nurture" based attributes should be something you get from backgrounds and class.
I wasn't so much concerned with it being g underpowered as all fighters being ex soldiers or gladiators or whatever rather than something interesting like Noble or acolyte.
 

Li Shenron

Legend
Are they interpreting "downloaded the UA" as equal to "playtested"?

Because, I mean, I downloaded and read it. I haven't used any of it at the table, and probably won't. I'm sure I'm not alone in that.
Yeah, my guess is that 10% of the respondents will playtest and 90% will say they had, while all they did was rant or rave on a forum.
 


Tonguez

A suffusion of yellow
thats not really all that impressive considering how ubiquitous the tech is now compared to a measly 10 yrs ago...
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
If it's free floating, why have different specific backgrounds give different specific stats? That takes away from the 'build it yourself' reading of those rules. The ua has specific stat increases for each background and that's what players will see/choose. Why do that unless you want people to use them? It misleads. There has always been an option to build your own background but in my experience (and I dm for a lot of people, I run 8 campaigns a fortnight) people will still just pick what is in the book. It is possible this is just me, but thus makes it feel less free tha it is now. If it's meant to be a free floating bonus not attached to anything, why is it not just a separate step, rather than happening in the background step?
Those are explicitly just examples, it's a build system.
 

Visit Our Sponsor

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top