D&D (2024) Playtest: Is the Human Terrible?

[Yaarel]

How can you get an ASI at level 1 in the 2014 rules? The only stat bonuses I know of at level 1 are those from race, which might be moving to background in 2024, so it will still be there. The Vhuman can get a feat that gives an additional +1, but that's not really an ASI.

Yeah. In a future context where a feat at level 1 becomes the default, it wont be usable for an asi.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

How can you get an ASI at level 1 in the 2014 rules? The only stat bonuses I know of at level 1 are those from race, which might be moving to background in 2024, so it will still be there. The Vhuman can get a feat that gives an additional +1, but that's not really an ASI.

I think just the VHuman. It's an "ASI" in that it's an increase to an ability score. (if you take a feat that offers a +1 I mean)

It's generally unnecessary at L1, as you just finished placing your ability scores. I mean, sure, it's always nice to have MOAR, but we're getting slightly more with the +2/+1 Background anyhow.

 

[tetrasodium]

My personal expectation is that ASI in the class description will be replaced with "Feat", and a getting a +1 to 2 stats will be a feat. I think getting a +2 to one stat at an ASI level will go away, to discourage tunnel visioning to get a 20.

I think max is probably closer to the end point than your suggesting here I'd not be surprised feat gains were regularly pegged to character level with feat prerequisites tied to whatever makes sense case by case per feat & attribute bonuses on their own schedule. We might see bottom shelf feats like actor & underwater basket weaving master that add to an attrib but most attribute gains I expect to come from reaching level x & y or magic items.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Somewhat off-topic and I have said this before, but this is exactly why releasing the playtest material in such a piece-meal manner and without at-least some guidance how past content is supposed to be converted in specific cases has been a bad idea.

We're arguing about the intent of whether past feats are supposed to have a level, what that level is, and what the designer's intent is. That will end up in playtest feedback. That could affect how level 1 feats are designed and supposed to work... without us having seen how feats that aren't level 1 are supposed to work, and whether past feats are being outright replaced or getting a patch to give them a level. Hence, now we have people accusing each other of rules lawyering and all sorts of things - which is not going to be helpful for getting stuff in for the playtest and getting feedback on how we feel about feats in this new verison of the game.

<.>

Sure, but 90% of people don't have a problem understanding the intent of the rules.

And releasing an entire PHB for us to test would be too much. You'd lose the vast majority of playtesters simply because no one can read and implement that many new rules in a reasonable amount of time.

 

[ReshiIRE]

Pathfinder 2e's playtest did effectively release an entire Player's Handbook, along with several adventures, to properly test out the system. Granted, those were paid which is a different model, but it's not impossible for a test.

My understanding of the D&D Next playtest was that it was a gradual releasing of vertical slices of the rules, enabling more through testing.

Cyberpunk Red's playtest version was released as a small handbook containing a subsection of the rules allowing them to be tested and games ran.

It is not impossible for WoTC to adopt a vertical slice approach, and split combat rules and changes to monster rules, character creation including a subjection of classes, exploration, and changes to spells into different playtest packets (along with other categories I have forgotten) that would be more modular and easier to test in a closed system way without requiring an entirely new PHB to be produced. Right now, we have a big mixture of different rules affecting different parts of the game mixed in together with unclear results on each other - a horizontal slice. I feel that's going to have a negative impact on the feedback received and the game design.

 

[Parmandur]

Pathfinder 2e's playtest did effectively release an entire Player's Handbook, along with several adventures, to properly test out the system. Granted, those were paid which is a different model, but it's not impossible for a test.

My understanding of the D&D Next playtest was that it was a gradual releasing of vertical slices of the rules, enabling more through testing.

Cyberpunk Red's playtest version was released as a small handbook containing a subsection of the rules allowing them to be tested and games ran.

It is not impossible for WoTC to adopt a vertical slice approach, and split combat rules and changes to monster rules, character creation including a subjection of classes, exploration, and changes to spells into different playtest packets (along with other categories I have forgotten) that would be more modular and easier to test in a closed system way without requiring an entirely new PHB to be produced. Right now, we have a big mixture of different rules affecting different parts of the game mixed in together with unclear results on each other - a horizontal slice. I feel that's going to have a negative impact on the feedback received and the game design.

Those were substances games. OneD&D is not really a different game than 5E, not like PF2E. They want people to use the 5E books because, largely, the rules aren't changing. This 21 page document, per Crawford, was rhe big one, with subsequent packets being targeted smaller bits of rules. This was already the big changes.

 

[Micah Sweet]

They aren't really worth a feat though. I assume they will be part of backgrounds?

I'm not sure there's a place for them at all in 6e outside of class. Level Up uses the Culture axis for that stuff, and it works great!

 

[Micah Sweet]

Still gets an extra Feat.

A level 1 feat. Seems like a significant difference so far.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yes but in theory if you are using the old stuff....you should be using the old stuff. If you want to cherry pick X race from the original with Y feat from the new you might get into some problems.

Its not compatible if you can't use parts from both ends.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The playtest so fat is focused on playing new bits with older material in the same character, let alone table.

Using old options likw Race or Class is fine. Old Feats might be a bridge too far...but those are a neglected variant rule in 2014 as it is.

Feats aren't a neglected variant rule in any game I've ever participated in or heard of outside this forum.

And if they were, why would WotC suddenly decide to make feats non-optional? This is why I question the received "wisdom" that most people didn't use feats.