D&D 5E Rate Playtest 1 vs. Playtest 2
I put the first playtest at a firm 2 stars for introducing a few interesting mechanics while managing to take almost everything a step in the wrong direction.
The second playtest gets 3 stars for improving a lot of things (the first playtest fighter almost made me give up hope altogether, expertise dice helped a lot), and it looks like they're trying to make it better, but I still think it's holding onto some (imo) flawed concepts for the wrong reasons.
The second playtest gets 3 stars for improving a lot of things (the first playtest fighter almost made me give up hope altogether, expertise dice helped a lot), and it looks like they're trying to make it better, but I still think it's holding onto some (imo) flawed concepts for the wrong reasons.
The Shadow
Hero
I think a more interesting metric would be how much higher or lower people rate playtest 2 than playtest 1 - ie, answers ranging from +4 to -4.
Seeing the differences between the averages does not capture the same thing. (Though I'm quite surprised to see 1 having a higher average than 2 thus far.)
Seeing the differences between the averages does not capture the same thing. (Though I'm quite surprised to see 1 having a higher average than 2 thus far.)
Ahnehnois
First Post
I'm underwhelmed. On a very basic level, the approach to skills, class design, and other basics seems okay at least. Not perfect, but also not 4e. But the more specific content I see, the worse things look. The basic CS mechanic, for example, is a positive step, but nearly every maneuver associated with it is at least a little bit sketchy, and at the moment it's a fighter-exclusive class feature, not a system rule that fighters are good at.
The new casters were huge disappointments. The bestiary is very readable, but that's about the best I can say for it. The themes and backgrounds are not good.
I retained some optimism after the first release, but the second release dampened it significantly.
The new casters were huge disappointments. The bestiary is very readable, but that's about the best I can say for it. The themes and backgrounds are not good.
I retained some optimism after the first release, but the second release dampened it significantly.
MortalPlague
Adventurer
I was very pleased with Playtest 1; the ease of use, the speed of play, the flavor of race / class / background / theme, it all resulted in a very fun couple of gaming sessions.
I'm more pleased with Playtest 2; the fighter expertise dice lead the way, while all the options and the ability to make characters that transcend traditional class roles while remaining entirely within their own class makes me very happy. Also, the Blingdenstone adventure was superb. The monsters don't have any teeth, though, which is a big negative on the second playtest.
I went with a '4' on each.
I'm more pleased with Playtest 2; the fighter expertise dice lead the way, while all the options and the ability to make characters that transcend traditional class roles while remaining entirely within their own class makes me very happy. Also, the Blingdenstone adventure was superb. The monsters don't have any teeth, though, which is a big negative on the second playtest.
I went with a '4' on each.
slobster
Hero
I like the overall direction. Classes feel distinct and interesting. Fights are fast and furious, with some good tension. Monsters need work but that's no surprise, it's a very early playtest.
Lower hp in the second playtest was mostly a good idea. I'd like to see a bit more in certain elite style monsters, like some of the monsters in the first.
I liked the first fighter's reaper much better than the second's glancing blow, which is just awful. Combat Superiority in general still makes me giddily happy.
It was fun seeing the two new casters in the second playtest, and very refreshing to see them really trying to set them apart from the normal "wizard but with a different pair of pants".
I gave 4 to each as well.
All in all, I'm looking forward to playtest 3 and optimistic that it will be even better than its predecessors.
Lower hp in the second playtest was mostly a good idea. I'd like to see a bit more in certain elite style monsters, like some of the monsters in the first.
I liked the first fighter's reaper much better than the second's glancing blow, which is just awful. Combat Superiority in general still makes me giddily happy.
It was fun seeing the two new casters in the second playtest, and very refreshing to see them really trying to set them apart from the normal "wizard but with a different pair of pants".
I gave 4 to each as well.
All in all, I'm looking forward to playtest 3 and optimistic that it will be even better than its predecessors.
The Shadow
Hero
Good grief, you both are reading my mind. I gave them both 4's also.
I was disappointed they moved away from the ... less explicit ... skill system of the first packet, but very pleased by other developments, CS not least.
I was disappointed they moved away from the ... less explicit ... skill system of the first packet, but very pleased by other developments, CS not least.
slobster
Hero
Oh yeah, that is the thing I loved the most about the first playtest and grieved the most to see it absent in the second. I hold out hope that they will bring it back for round 3.
Would xp you, yadda yadda.
Similar Threads
