D&D (2024) 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!

 

[MNblockhead]

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]

Same

Same here. But in comments I made clear that I read them and gave feedback in comments based on that.

 

[MNblockhead]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

 

[Nikosandros]

I didn't have the chance to actually playtest the packet and I told that much in the survey. Why assume that most of the respondents will lie?

 

[Tonguez]

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

 

[Parmandur]

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.