Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
My D&D Next Experience at DDXP
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Osgood" data-source="post: 5800296" data-attributes="member: 32792"><p>Over the weekend, most of my gaming group and I traveled to Ft. Wayne to participate in the play test for D&D Next. Though I cannot reveal anything specific about the mechanics, I will attempt to relay our experience and impressions of the new game. </p><p> </p><p> First a bit of background. Our group plays 4E (but not Essentials) currently, and while we really enjoy it, there are a number of things most agree could stand to be reworked (feat/power bloat, magic items, immediate actions, hit points). I started over 25 years ago with Basic D&D, moved to 1E, then 2E, drifted to other games for most of the 90's and returned to D&D in a big way with 3.0 and 3.5. Of the others in attendance, two had started playing with 2E, two others with 3E, and one with 4E. The announcement of D&D Next was met with a near equal measure of excitement and trepidation. Some in our group (including myself) were more optimistic, while others more pessimistic. Regardless, we were all eager to test the new system.</p><p> </p><p> We sat down at the table and were very pleased to find out DM was Monte Cook. Characters were passed around, and most wound up playing a class they had played before and were familiar with. After a few minutes of reading over the character sheet and trying to get a general sense of our capabilities, Monte laid out the adventure. </p><p> </p><p> Monte is an excellent DM and he made the adventure fun and engaging. We won the day, kicking a lot of orc butt through luck, bold tactics, and good ideas. That said, a good DM can make just about any system enjoyable, for a while at least. About mid-way through I started to get bored with my character (and I normally love rogues) and my mind wandered. </p><p> </p><p> Combat was fast and deadly, but there are some oddly clunky mechanics that felt out of place to me. While I (who normally DMs) enjoyed that, there was a mixed response from the rest of the group. Not a single one of us was satisfied with how healing worked though. The mechanics are unusual and attempt to combine the approaches of a few editions, but it came off as a bit of a Frankenstein monster. One of us has a really good comment that nails it, but I think posting it would be at least bending the NDA... I'll say this much, it makes the adventuring day really feel like a <em>work day</em>. </p><p> </p><p> Perhaps the most crestfallen in our group were the ladies playing the cleric and wizard. The cleric player has roots in 3E, while the wizard started with 4E. Both felt the mechanics of the spells were counter-intuitive and confusing, and I think most of us agreed. One happens to be a mathematician, and she feels that spellcasters are at a distinct statistical disadvantage using the mechanics presented. </p><p> </p><p> Exploration was good, but it didn't feel particularly distinct from the way we currently play. This may be a result of my DMing style, were I encourage creativity. Monte kept trying to reinforce that we could do anything and not worry about what our character sheets said, but ultimately what we did we didn't particularly do well. In the end, compared to my home game I felt folks were <em>more </em>shackled by their ability scores rather than being free do whatever they wanted. </p><p> </p><p> None of us were particularly satisfied, and I cannot imagine the game as presented would be especially fun for my group (though I am fully willing to acknowledge that has as much to do with my DMing and adventure design style as the system). </p><p> </p><p> In fairness, we did play the base version of the game (and an obviously very early draft, given the occasionally contradictory information on the character sheets). I imagine several things will get cleaned up and/or altered by the time the open play test starts. The base game seems very targeted towards a particular group, and it is my hope that the designers make good on their promise that D&Dn will let everyone play the edition they want to play (mine would be a 4e/3E hybrid). I feel the game has a long way to go to satisfy all (or nearly all) of D&D players. I do have confidence that the design team is interested in making the best game possible and listening to feedback, so I am definitely looking forward to the open play test.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Osgood, post: 5800296, member: 32792"] Over the weekend, most of my gaming group and I traveled to Ft. Wayne to participate in the play test for D&D Next. Though I cannot reveal anything specific about the mechanics, I will attempt to relay our experience and impressions of the new game. First a bit of background. Our group plays 4E (but not Essentials) currently, and while we really enjoy it, there are a number of things most agree could stand to be reworked (feat/power bloat, magic items, immediate actions, hit points). I started over 25 years ago with Basic D&D, moved to 1E, then 2E, drifted to other games for most of the 90's and returned to D&D in a big way with 3.0 and 3.5. Of the others in attendance, two had started playing with 2E, two others with 3E, and one with 4E. The announcement of D&D Next was met with a near equal measure of excitement and trepidation. Some in our group (including myself) were more optimistic, while others more pessimistic. Regardless, we were all eager to test the new system. We sat down at the table and were very pleased to find out DM was Monte Cook. Characters were passed around, and most wound up playing a class they had played before and were familiar with. After a few minutes of reading over the character sheet and trying to get a general sense of our capabilities, Monte laid out the adventure. Monte is an excellent DM and he made the adventure fun and engaging. We won the day, kicking a lot of orc butt through luck, bold tactics, and good ideas. That said, a good DM can make just about any system enjoyable, for a while at least. About mid-way through I started to get bored with my character (and I normally love rogues) and my mind wandered. Combat was fast and deadly, but there are some oddly clunky mechanics that felt out of place to me. While I (who normally DMs) enjoyed that, there was a mixed response from the rest of the group. Not a single one of us was satisfied with how healing worked though. The mechanics are unusual and attempt to combine the approaches of a few editions, but it came off as a bit of a Frankenstein monster. One of us has a really good comment that nails it, but I think posting it would be at least bending the NDA... I'll say this much, it makes the adventuring day really feel like a [I]work day[/I]. Perhaps the most crestfallen in our group were the ladies playing the cleric and wizard. The cleric player has roots in 3E, while the wizard started with 4E. Both felt the mechanics of the spells were counter-intuitive and confusing, and I think most of us agreed. One happens to be a mathematician, and she feels that spellcasters are at a distinct statistical disadvantage using the mechanics presented. Exploration was good, but it didn't feel particularly distinct from the way we currently play. This may be a result of my DMing style, were I encourage creativity. Monte kept trying to reinforce that we could do anything and not worry about what our character sheets said, but ultimately what we did we didn't particularly do well. In the end, compared to my home game I felt folks were [I]more [/I]shackled by their ability scores rather than being free do whatever they wanted. None of us were particularly satisfied, and I cannot imagine the game as presented would be especially fun for my group (though I am fully willing to acknowledge that has as much to do with my DMing and adventure design style as the system). In fairness, we did play the base version of the game (and an obviously very early draft, given the occasionally contradictory information on the character sheets). I imagine several things will get cleaned up and/or altered by the time the open play test starts. The base game seems very targeted towards a particular group, and it is my hope that the designers make good on their promise that D&Dn will let everyone play the edition they want to play (mine would be a 4e/3E hybrid). I feel the game has a long way to go to satisfy all (or nearly all) of D&D players. I do have confidence that the design team is interested in making the best game possible and listening to feedback, so I am definitely looking forward to the open play test. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
My D&D Next Experience at DDXP
Top