D&D 5E So... what happened during the playtests?

[Ancalagon]

I think there's an interesting story behind that...but we may never hear it fully, it's Monte's to tell, and I doubt he'll tell it.

The timing is rather... interesting indeed isn't it. But I suspect you are right, and that Monte, if he tells his story, will only do so when time has made it safer/more appropriate. When 7e is out, it will be "ok" to talk about what happened. Not while 5e is still being sold.

 

[Raith5]

I've said it multiple times recently, but I actually decided to do just that with 5e, and DID create a document that does just that on DMs guild (called 5e Old school). I think that shows that 5e IS highly malleable and adaptable to other editions and even the older editions right back to the original...but that's my opinion and my take on the matter.

I think what may have happened in regards to the modularity was what I mentioned above, WotC realized that a majority of their audience was not going to come from the older edition players (despite that the numbers of these players outnumber the others at a 4 or 5 to 1 ratio...most are either too preoccupied with other interests these days like family, or will only play the older editions rather than playing a new 5e edition) and instead a majority of those taking the surveys and participating in the playtest were those who were familiar with 3e, PF, and 4e.

That made the focus change and of course, with the players coming from a majority of those disciplines, heavily changed what the emphasis and design ideas were towards the game.

I think it may have still turned out very differently if Monte had not left. In some ways, I think some of the older school ideas in 5e may be directly attributable to some of his contributions.

We are all going to have a different view of this. I quite like the recent editions, so I see a lot of 2e and 3e in 5e (and only tidbits of 4e, unfortunately in my view) . But I guess we agree that 5e could be adapted to include other editions/playstyles.

But was Monte a champion for 1e/2e? I guess other people will know his work better than me, but I have not thought of him in those terms.

 

[The_Furious_Puffin]

I liked the playtest fighter better then the current one. You got dice each turn and could spend them on maneuvers or just extra damage.

It'd worth while digging up the play test fighter - germ of something much more dynamic.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I'm looking at the August 2012 packet (the oldest I still have), and some of the key differences were:

Classes had different bonuses to attack with weapons vs. magic. E.g., a wizard got a +2 to attack with weapons and a +3 to attack with spells at first level. Fighters obviously got higher weapon attack bonuses than all other classes.

Cleric had orisons, which were minor spells. Wizards had cantrips, which were also minor spells. Both were rolled up into cantrips presently.

Sneak attack wasn't applied unless you had advantage unless you were a thug, where you could apply it if you had 2 allies within reach of your target. Thugs could also cause an effect to drop movement to 0 of the target with a sneak attack

All fighters had expertise dice from level one, but most of them were replacing weapon damage with expertise damage, and all were contingent of a rule (like replacing an attack, an opponent attacks an ally, etc).

Sorcerers had will power. Basically spell points. They did not have a spell table like all casters in 5e. It looked like a hybrid between current sorcerer with sorcery points, and the warlock with spells known and max spell level.

Warlocks didn't know spells. they only had invocations and ritual magic.

That's the classes. Races had built in bonuses to racial weapons. Dwarves, for instance, increased the weapon damage die type for axes or hammers. Elves did the same for long swords and long bows. Etc. Humans just had extra stat bonuses

 

[Sacrosanct]

And as mentioned, monsters were super weak with a lot of XP award. Bugbears for instance were level 6 with 480 XP award, but only had AC 14 and 18 hit points. During those early days of playtesting, level advancement was speed track fast.

*Edit* Oh, the monsters also had categories: regular, elite, and solo. So glad they got rid of that. Talk about video gamey.

 

[Magil]

I remember the feedback surveys... I gave feedback on the one class I played, fighter. I considered the fighter to be the litmus test of how much I would like the system--if I could make tactically interesting choices during combat with the fighter class (within the rules), then I figured I could give the system a shot.

I remember selecting from a list the maneuvers I liked the best, and the ones I was less impressed with, because at the time, the fighter was very heavy into the combat superiority dice system similar to that the battle master fighter now uses. In the next package, every maneuver I rated highest was removed. Every single one. Most of the others remained.

I'm relatively pleased with the final product, but at the time I stopped participating in the playtest. It put me off of 5E for the first year or so of its lifespan too.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I remember the feedback surveys... I gave feedback on the one class I played, fighter. I considered the fighter to be the litmus test of how much I would like the system--if I could make tactically interesting choices during combat with the fighter class (within the rules), then I figured I could give the system a shot.

I remember selecting from a list the maneuvers I liked the best, and the ones I was less impressed with, because at the time, the fighter was very heavy into the combat superiority dice system similar to that the battle master fighter now uses. In the next package, every maneuver I rated highest was removed. Every single one. Most of the others remained.

I'm relatively pleased with the final product, but at the time I stopped participating in the playtest. It put me off of 5E for the first year or so of its lifespan too.

Not sure which playest you used, but in the Aug 2012 version, you didn't even really chose your maneuvers. You chose a theme and went with a prepackaged set. For example, you could choose the sharpshooter theme and get precise shot at level 1, snap shot at level 3, and shift at level 5.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

Mr Mearls justified every one of his decisions with the survey results. I assumed it was clear that this was the only data he was interested in.

Huh. That's odd.

I wish my memory of details, and/or my desire to spend the time researching for that matter, were stronger. In either case, I would bother to list a few items MM specifically identified as being included in the final product that his personal preferences ran counter to. But instead popular opinion forced him to rethink some of his ideas and he gave us what we wanted because of it.

But hey, maybe my laziness and fuzzy memory will help you retain your belief that he got everything he wanted after all. So, good news for you.

 

[Magil]

Not sure which playest you used, but in the Aug 2012 version, you didn't even really chose your maneuvers. You chose a theme and went with a prepackaged set. For example, you could choose the sharpshooter theme and get precise shot at level 1, snap shot at level 3, and shift at level 5.

There were several iterations of superiority dice as a feature--one where Deadly Strike was a maneuver that you selected from a list, one where it was a "default" that all fighters had access to (presented in a manner that suggested it was for someone who wanted to turn their brain off for playing fighter--though it eventually ended up being cut because it was simply often more optimal to spend them on straight damage than anything else), etc.

In any case, I was referring to selecting individual maneuvers on the feedback survey. In the survey, they'd ask which classes you wanted to leave feedback for, then drop down a list of every single one of that class's features and ask you to rate it. For fighters, it was mostly their maneuvers.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Huh. That's odd.

I wish my memory of details, and/or my desire to spend the time researching for that matter, were stronger. In either case, I would bother to list a few items MM specifically identified as being included in the final product that his personal preferences ran counter to. But instead popular opinion forced him to rethink some of his ideas and he gave us what we wanted because of it.

But hey, maybe my laziness and fuzzy memory will help you retain your belief that he got everything he wanted after all. So, good news for you.

You're right. I distinctly remembering him wanting to put things in that he didn't because of feedback. I'm trying to remember a clear example, but my memory is a bit fuzzy. But I am positive I remember him posting about it.