Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="silentounce" data-source="post: 4386922" data-attributes="member: 67099">Thank you for explaining it better than I did.&nbsp; This was my point, but it was too late and I was too tired to explain myself in detail.&nbsp; These aren't just grammatical/typo errors.&nbsp; These are errors in core rule structure.&nbsp; Yes, it's wonderful they are doing this so quickly, etc.&nbsp; But it just adds to the feeling that this game wasn't ready to be released yet in the first place.&nbsp; I'm willing to bet that very little playtesting went on using the core rules as published.&nbsp; Yeah, they play tested all kinds of things, and I'm sure they playtested most rules.&nbsp; But I doubt they gave the &quot;final&quot; product to groups that hadn't played before to test it.&nbsp; That's what WE are doing now.&nbsp; It's their own fault for waiting until the last minute.&nbsp; It appears they were just playtesting a mishmash of rules willy nilly up until the end.&nbsp; How many statements have we seen where WotC personnel mention not being familiar with the rules because they played with so many different iterations and there were so many changes?&nbsp; Of course, this is fundamental to any game design, but really.&nbsp; Once they had a complete product, they should have done final testing for a while.&nbsp; I feel that they couldn't do this because of a deadline, and rather than delay the product they figured they'd just release it as is.&nbsp; It's things like this that cause .5 editions to be released.&nbsp; Yes, most of that is opinion and assumption.&nbsp; I don't have any more of an inside view into the process than anyone else.&nbsp; My I'm sticking by it.My multiclass Warlord/Ranger will love it, but I'm willing to bet this is an unintentional result and may end up with another errata.&nbsp; I doubt anyone even looked at how the newly errata'ed rules interacted with each other.&nbsp; More of the same.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="silentounce, post: 4386922, member: 67099"] Thank you for explaining it better than I did. This was my point, but it was too late and I was too tired to explain myself in detail. These aren't just grammatical/typo errors. These are errors in core rule structure. Yes, it's wonderful they are doing this so quickly, etc. But it just adds to the feeling that this game wasn't ready to be released yet in the first place. I'm willing to bet that very little playtesting went on using the core rules as published. Yeah, they play tested all kinds of things, and I'm sure they playtested most rules. But I doubt they gave the "final" product to groups that hadn't played before to test it. That's what WE are doing now. It's their own fault for waiting until the last minute. It appears they were just playtesting a mishmash of rules willy nilly up until the end. How many statements have we seen where WotC personnel mention not being familiar with the rules because they played with so many different iterations and there were so many changes? Of course, this is fundamental to any game design, but really. Once they had a complete product, they should have done final testing for a while. I feel that they couldn't do this because of a deadline, and rather than delay the product they figured they'd just release it as is. It's things like this that cause .5 editions to be released. Yes, most of that is opinion and assumption. I don't have any more of an inside view into the process than anyone else. My I'm sticking by it. My multiclass Warlord/Ranger will love it, but I'm willing to bet this is an unintentional result and may end up with another errata. I doubt anyone even looked at how the newly errata'ed rules interacted with each other. More of the same. [/QUOTE]

Verification