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...

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
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Reynard

Legend
Based on the past ten years of playtest iterations, the result will likely tend very conservative. But thst has helped the game so far.
There is no doubt that whatever drove 5E's design was at least partially responsible for its popularity. However, just becasue a design is popular doesn't mean it is "good." Now, i am not saying 5E is bad, or badly designed, or any of that. What I am saying is that the public playtest doesn't necessarily improve the quality of the design and if anything serves more of a marketing purpose -- both to test how folks will react to changes, and as a way to preview design choices.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Parmandur

Book-Friend
There is no doubt that whatever drove 5E's design was at least partially responsible for its popularity. However, just becasue a design is popular doesn't mean it is "good." Now, i am not saying 5E is bad, or badly designed, or any of that. What I am saying is that the public playtest doesn't necessarily improve the quality of the design and if anything serves more of a marketing purpose -- both to test how folks will react to changes, and as a way to preview design choices.
I meant more the ongoing playtesting process that led to Xanathar's, then Tasha's, and now the 2024 Core. It's kept the game on an even keel.
 

Reynard

Legend
I meant more the ongoing playtesting process that led to Xanathar's, then Tasha's, and now the 2024 Core. It's kept the game on an even keel.
I am skeptical that the Xanathar's method is going to work for a core overhaul. There are too many moving, interconnected parts that have to be tested simultaneously. It's not just checking to see if a new subclass works or is overpowered. If you change a foundational element -- a race or class, for example-- the list of possible interactions and knock on effects is too big to discover in the 2 week survey window.
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
I am skeptical that the Xanathar's method is going to work for a core overhaul. There are too many moving, interconnected parts that have to be tested simultaneously. It's not just checking to see if a new subclass works or is overpowered. If you change a foundational element -- a race or class, for example-- the list of possible interactions and knock on effects is too big to discover in the 2 week survey window.
Neither any Race nor Class are are foundational elements in the system, those are modular plug and play elements. They have an internal, NDA bound system for that sort of thing, anyways, this playtest is, again, just a taste test to determine how far out they can push.
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top