When you are in the game business, playtesting is, by necessity, market testing - you are seeing if the game you have works and is fun for the market.
D&D (2024) One D&D is one D&D too much (-)
When you are in the game business, playtesting is, by necessity, market testing - you are seeing if the game you have works and is fun for the market.
JiffyPopTart
Bree-Yark
I don't agree at all with the idea that this is a false playtest, but I do think that because the end result has to be compatible with 5e there are a lot more invisible barriers to where the material can end up than when DnD Next was happening.
It's like we are remodeling a house (but can't change any load bearing features) rather than building a new house with reclaimed parts of the old one.
I don't think they are "invisible". I think, as well-versed gamers, we can probably see them when we look and think about it a bit.
The question there becomes "What is a load-bearing feature?"
The way I see it, these are some things that can't change in 5.5/6e/D&D Larry without risking breaking compatibility.
- Bounded accuracy/flattened math
- Action economy (with bonus actions)
- Spell progression and class feature accumulation
- Healing and recovery
- Default encounter building and challenge assumptions
Ruin Explorer
Legend
I think the last two are possible to change, but you have to accept there will be knock-on effects. Not enough to break basic compatibility though, imho. With Healing/Recovery you could change the default, but have an optional rule for the old default, and note that older material had that default.
With encounter building, I think you could change back to 3-4 "Hard" (by 5E rules) encounters as the default without causing a major problem. But yeah if you want much further than that you'd be changing maths more fundamentally.
DND_Reborn
The High Aldwin
Frankly, after my OP I really expected this to disappear into obscurity after half a dozen posts or something. I'm amazed people are still here.
a.everett1287
Explorer
I don't think it had that far to travel.
UngeheuerLich
Legend
I also think the last 2 should change to make the game better.
Prewritten adventures already don't really follow these assumtions, and even if they do, players don't want to play that way and recover more than they should.
Chaosmancer
Legend
Why is lack of reading comprehension WotC's problem?
Agree, these both need buffed. Though, I have noted that the Healer feat can be repeatable for immediate healing. I'm considering doing the following
you can heal 1d6+4+prof once for free per short rest. Otherwise it costs and HD and is HD + prof + their Con. I also want to give something for during short rests, but I'm not sure what.
Savage attacker... someone said something interesting about combining it with Charger, I'm going to be looking into that soon.
This is the most utterly bizarre argument I have ever seen.
On one hand, it will be terrible because everyone will hoard it and it will be wasted when they roll 20's. On the other hand, it will be terrible because one player won't hoard it and will get all that inspiration that would otherwise be wasted because no one can take it.
Huh? How is the player using their resource and taking what no one else can because they are all waiting for the long rest to delete their inspiration they held on to "just in case" a jerk? Seems like he's just lucky to be playing with a bunch of hoarders with good dice luck.
Other than the harsh rhetoric, I agree. I think using it for a re-roll or after the fact is the way to go. Heck, I'm planning on looking around and seeing if I can't build more funtionality into Inspiration anyways.
Lanefan
Victoria Rules
I'm sad to see they appear to want to lean even further into Inspiration. It's that type of meta mechanic - the type that has nothing to do with reflecting the fiction, instead it's "here, have a bennie" purely at the table level - that I'd prefer to see completely excised.
Similar Threads
