D&D 5E (2024) One D&D origins playtest survey is live

[doctorbadwolf]

? I'm not sure what you mean. Why would you max a die you've already rolled and then roll it again? That's just a wasted step. I mean, yeah, it's the same thing, other than the waste of time.

What?

It’s simple. When you crit, you max the normal damage dice, you don’t roll them. Then you roll the dice “again”.

You always get a better result than you would have without critting, but you still roll dice for damage. It still has some swing.

Idk how else…a crit in 5e has two sets of damage dice. The houserule I’m referring to has you roll one set and max the other, and then add the result.

 

[Charlaquin]

Yeah, I REALLY hope that make it blindingly clear that the example backgrounds they give are just that--examples. Sure, a lot of players, especially new players, will just select an existing background, and that's fine--its good to have many examples to make it easy for new players to get started. But anything they do to make the use of custom background more common, the better. I mean, this is how is was supposed to work in the 2014 PHB, but so few people do this.

It is clear in the playtest document. But, some people just refuse to accept it anyway. I don’t think there’s a way to word it that will make those people believe them.

 

[Haplo781]

It is clear in the playtest document. But, some people just refuse to accept it anyway. I don’t think there’s a way to word it that will make those people believe them.

Put the rules for building your own background in the PHB with like 3 examples. Put the rest in the DMG.

 

[Charlaquin]

Ah, right. The old "hour of combat" idea. Nice they got rid of that weird bit. I forgot about it because I ignored it, not being able to imagine a combat lasting 601 rounds.

It’s not necessary for a combat to last 601 rounds to interrupt a long rest. Any combination of strenuous activity that lasts for an hour interrupts a long rest. That could mean 59 minutes and 55 seconds of walking and one round of combat, for example.

 

[Charlaquin]

Put the rules for building your own background in the PHB with like 3 examples. Put the rest in the DMG.

The problem with that is people who want to just pick an example and go would only have three options in the PHB to choose from. That’s not even enough to cover a reasonable selection of ASIs, let alone skills, tools, and languages.

 

[JEB]

The problem with that is people who want to just pick an example and go would only have three options in the PHB to choose from. That’s not even enough to cover a reasonable selection of ASIs, let alone skills, tools, and languages.

A workaround might be to present several variations of the same background, to explicitly show that they can be customized. And maybe walk players through it. Depends how much space they want to devote, though.

 

[MNblockhead]

When and where do they say this? And assuming it is accurate why do they bother with a public playtest at all other than as theater? Seriously, if the public playtest doesn't have enough information to actually judge whether a thing works, it is essentially useless for design -- which means the public playtest isn't about design, it's about "feelings" which literally no one responsible for a revised edition of D&D should give a single solitary naughty word about. It's disingenuous. Even worse, inviting the current fanbase to give their feedback with no intention of it mattering is predatory.

I think maybe they don't care what their fans think and will do whatever. Which is fine and is the way design should be done. But it's pretty naughty word to invite your fans in just to market to them.

I'll leave it to you and others who have put more thought into it on whether the stats are good and whether the playtest is just theater. But I disagree that nobody should care about "feelings." I think a huge part of 5e's success is the feelings it evoked. It felt like D&D getting back to its roots while still using a lot of modern mechanics. "Feelings" had a lot to do with why I bought 5e and got back into TTRPGs. They did a phenomenal job with the feel of the game. And yes, there are some rules that just by reading them wouldn't feel right to me and I wouldn't need to play test them.

 

[MNblockhead]

Having just finished the survey, I'd say the new inspiration and long rest rules are among the things most subject to change. They called them out specifically in my survey.

Starting to feel a bit alone in my liking the new inspiration rules.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

What?

It’s simple. When you crit, you max the normal damage dice, you don’t roll them. Then you roll the dice “again”.

You always get a better result than you would have without critting, but you still roll dice for damage. It still has some swing.

Idk how else…a crit in 5e has two sets of damage dice. The houserule I’m referring to has you roll one set and max the other, and then add the result.

I was talking about that in the post you first responded to. But for some reason you appeared to be instructing me to do it the opposite of what I suggested. (Which is, if you roll your attack and damage together, and you get a crit, you just add max weapon damage to the roll.)

For some reason it sounded like you were disagreeing with that, and telling me that I should instead max that roll, reroll, and add that result.

At ant rate, I assume we get to the same thing, even if for some strange effect of the limitations of conversing by post we appear to be disagreeing somehow.

 

[Charlaquin]

A workaround might be to present several variations of the same background, to explicitly show that they can be customized. And maybe walk players through it. Depends how much space they want to devote, though.

Well the packet does walk you through it. But I think an “Alice and Bob” example would probably be a good idea to have.