Playtesting vs a .5 Edition

[drothgery]

SWSE is a different game though. When you have iconic weapons available to everyone (blasters) that do 3d6 or 3d8, you need the triple HPs at first level. Unless swords now do 3d6 or 3d8, which would make my eyes bleed...

Err... a 2d6 (3.5 greatsword) or 1d12 (3.5 greataxe) two-handed melee weapon with a +6 strength bonus to damage (with SWSE math, that happens with a 16 Str) will out-damage a 3d6 blaster pistol on average, and won't be far off from a 3d8 blaster rifle.

 

[Umbran]

And by their own admission, it's playtested less than 3e was.

Well, a point that's already been raised is that the amount of testing, in terms of person-hours, is not necessarily the relevant factor. What matters is a combination of the number of person-hours, and the effectiveness/efficiency of those hours.

So long as they've improved their process and testing focus since the days before 3.0, they can match or exceed previous testing while still doing less work on that testing.

 

[Grog]

Err... a 2d6 (3.5 greatsword) or 1d12 (3.5 greataxe) two-handed melee weapon with a +6 strength bonus to damage (with SWSE math, that happens with a 16 Str) will out-damage a 3d6 blaster pistol on average, and won't be far off from a 3d8 blaster rifle.

Indeed, even with a 15 Strength (iconic human 1st level fighter), a greatsword (2d6+3) does 10 points of damage on average, compared to 10.5 for a 3d6 blaster rifle. There's essentially no difference, and that's without min/maxing the D&D character at all.

 

[DonTadow]

I've taken myself out of the pre4th edition talk just becuase of these rants. Everyone in marketing and product sales raise their hand. You don't need a heck of a large focus group to test something out. You need some really good guys with attention to detail. Most people who are crying for a public playtest would simply just play the game and write good on areview. that won't help. Most polished companies do playtesting in house and I don't think they get too many complaints. the fact that this is an issue is a d and d geek thing that only we do. I don't see people talking about public play tests of halo 3 or for that matter the Settlers of Cataan edition.

 

[Shortman McLeod]

I've taken myself out of the pre4th edition talk just becuase of these rants.

Hmmm, stating that you aren't stating something? Kind of a zen koan, it is . . .

 

[Nikosandros]

We'll definitely have to agree to disagree. The changes to the 4E spell and magic system alone outweighs anything I saw for changes in the entire progression from 1E -> 2E -> 3E.

Yes, I also believe that the changes in 4e are extremely significant.

The power system has been mentioned, but to me the biggest change is that I believe that this time all the assumptions about D&D have been re-evaluated. We still have hit points not because of legacy considerations but because they were deemed the best possible mechanic to track damage.

I find it somewhat funny that the radical/not radical debate is seen as synonymous negative/positive attitude towards 4e. I personally think that the changes are huge and I'm glad about it. I think that the worse fallacy of 3e is the excess of legacy issues... IMHO it changed too much to be just an update of AD&D, but not enough to be fully its own game.

 

[Dragon Snack]

Err... a 2d6 (3.5 greatsword) or 1d12 (3.5 greataxe) two-handed melee weapon with a +6 strength bonus to damage (with SWSE math, that happens with a 16 Str) will out-damage a 3d6 blaster pistol on average, and won't be far off from a 3d8 blaster rifle.

Indeed, even with a 15 Strength (iconic human 1st level fighter), a greatsword (2d6+3) does 10 points of damage on average, compared to 10.5 for a 3d6 blaster rifle. There's essentially no difference, and that's without min/maxing the D&D character at all.

Wow.

First: Unless your campaign world is significantly different than mine, not everyone carries around a greatsword - especially at first level. A Greatsword is only usable by someone with the right Feat (usually just melee types) who has spent a significant amount of their starting gold on one. In SW, a blaster pistol is expected, it's affordable and usable by every class except Jedi (and you could have one as a Jedi). And it's easier to run away from a guy with a greatsword, less so than a ranged weapon.

Second: Let's compare apples to apples. If you want to go with a Greatsword instead of a Longsword, compare a Heavy Blaster Rifle. 3d10 damage, IIRC - 16.5 average damage not 10.5.

That's not even taking into account AC vs. RD, which sure seemed to make it easier to hit when we played SWSE.

And here I thought people were going to be jumping on me for saying a blaster pistol was the iconic SW weapon instead of a Lightsaber (FWIW, I think they both are)...

 

[drothgery]

Wow.

First: Unless your campaign world is significantly different than mine, not everyone carries around a greatsword - especially at first level. A Greatsword is only usable by someone with the right Feat (usually just melee types) who has spent a significant amount of their starting gold on one. In SW, a blaster pistol is expected, it's affordable and usable by every class except Jedi (and you could have one as a Jedi). And it's easier to run away from a guy with a greatsword, less so than a ranged weapon.

Second: Let's compare apples to apples. If you want to go with a Greatsword instead of a Longsword, compare a Heavy Blaster Rifle. 3d10 damage, IIRC - 16.5 average damage not 10.5.

That's not comparing apples to apples either. A heavy blaster rifle doesn't take merely a 'significant part' of a PC's starting credits. Unless you're a noble, it takes more than you're likely to have. If you're a Jedi, it takes more than it's possible for you to have. Even if you don't pay for the license for it. Moreover, because 'heavy' pistols and blasters are inaccurate weapons (and so ineffective at long range) and even more heavily restricted than conventional pistols and rifles, they're not really optimal weapons for most NPCs to carry.

 

[Grog]

Wow.

First: Unless your campaign world is significantly different than mine, not everyone carries around a greatsword - especially at first level. A Greatsword is only usable by someone with the right Feat (usually just melee types) who has spent a significant amount of their starting gold on one. In SW, a blaster pistol is expected, it's affordable and usable by every class except Jedi (and you could have one as a Jedi). And it's easier to run away from a guy with a greatsword, less so than a ranged weapon.

Second: Let's compare apples to apples. If you want to go with a Greatsword instead of a Longsword, compare a Heavy Blaster Rifle. 3d10 damage, IIRC - 16.5 average damage not 10.5.

Wow, yourself.

Lots of characters can use a greatsword (all fighters, barbarians, paladins, and rangers for a start) and it is certainly affordable for a 1st level character. And if you're going to increase the damage the Star Wars character is doing, we can easily do the same for the D&D character. Make him a half-orc with a 16 starting Strength (18 after racial adjustment) and he's doing 2d6+6 per swing. Make him a barbarian instead of a fighter and he can rage and do 2d6+9 for an average of 16, compared to 16.5 for the heavy blaster rifle. Again, this is without any real min/maxing of the D&D character.

The difference is not nearly as big as you seem to think it is.

 

[Dragon Snack]

I'm not increasing the damage the SW character is doing (or min/maxing), I'm using a weapon with the best damage output - like you did.

That's not comparing apples to apples either. A heavy blaster rifle doesn't take merely a 'significant part' of a PC's starting credits. Unless you're a noble, it takes more than you're likely to have. If you're a Jedi, it takes more than it's possible for you to have. Even if you don't pay for the license for it. Moreover, because 'heavy' pistols and blasters are inaccurate weapons (and so ineffective at long range) and even more heavily restricted than conventional pistols and rifles, they're not really optimal weapons for most NPCs to carry.

Note that you are confusing two separate points. And inaccurate at range is better than no range for Mr. Greatsword.

I notice that nobody has answered my question...

You know, the ON topic one:

Does anyone have an actual link to a quote that says "There will be no 4.5"?

Or are we just going by what was said at Gen Con?