Spoilers: Some guy in Friends & Family playtest apparently violates his NDA

[marleykat]

On a side note to all those who dislike the use of the term "Powers" for martial classes...

Would "tricks" or "maneuvers" be more acceptable terminology?

It seems like this is just a semantics argument. Or is the objection specifically to any non At-Will type of power?

For instance if you had a Power called Trip Attack... would it be any different than having a Trip maneuver? Or is the primary argument geared toward the Trip power being forced into say an Encounter Power rather than at At-Will "action"?

Yes, the more I have thought about it I think alot of the disconnect I have with 4e is literally the presentation. It makes not a lick of sense but there it is.

I had thought it was fake give it did sound just like 4e to me and there would be NO way they would have written and internally tested a module that big in such a short time. The playtest stuff had a different vibe to it, more like BXMI to me.

 

[Tortoise]

Have you had a look at the "deal-breakers" thread? There are people who say that they won't play 5e if it contains certain elements, even if they are optional. It's not a mindset that I find particularly encouraging, but it exists.

It is a mentality I cannot understand. "I don't have to use it, but if it is there for someone else to use it breaks the deal." WTF?

That thread is truely a showcase of sad.

 

[WotC_Trevor]

Trevor killed all the fun! DDN is against the fun! Let's burn down Wotc!

Fun-killer is the translation of my Fremen name, which coincidentally, is a killing word that only works on fun things.

In all seriousness though, I did want to point out that yes, that was me, and no, that didn't appear to be the material from our playtest.

To kimble - I believe the material was removed because it referenced someone claiming to be breaking NDA, which we wouldn't allow on our site. the ORC who actioned the content may not have been operating with all the information I had, but either way - we don't want material pointing to others possibly breaking NDA on other sites. If they are breaking NDA, we don't want to encourage it and we'll be taking care of it. If they aren't breaking NDA, we don't want to spread the misinformation.

 

[Tortoise]

Javelin of fire does sound boring. Why not an iconic spell like acid arrow?

If this is real, the only thing that has me more substantially worried is a thief turning invisible in the middle of combat at level 5. I put up with that stuff in Epic for 4e because Epic is magic sauce. I don't need magic sauce for low level martial characters.

I imagine you could rename the fire javelin as ice or something else like acid.

When it comes to the thief turning invisible, was magic involved or did the character have that as an inate natural ability. If the first, I can deal with it, if the latter, I dislike it.

 

[Dausuul]

I think we can forget this entirely. And thank god. What an awful, awful mess that sounded like.

Good freakin' deal. Nice to get the official word so quickly.

 

[kimble]

To kimble - I believe the material was removed because it referenced someone claiming to be breaking NDA, which we wouldn't allow on our site. the ORC who actioned the content may not have been operating with all the information I had, but either way - we don't want material pointing to others possibly breaking NDA on other sites. If they are breaking NDA, we don't want to encourage it and we'll be taking care of it. If they aren't breaking NDA, we don't want to spread the misinformation.

Oh, but I have no problem with closing the topic. No problem at all. It was pointing to some fake news, would mislead people, no problem.
I just didn´t like the 'we may terminate your account' tone, like I was trying to do something bad or illegal.

Thanks for the response

 

[Tortoise]

I think part of the problem lately comes from the fact that the old-edition-loving crowd has assumed - of course in part due to the marketing blurb - that "wo-hoo we won the war! 4E sucks and WotC finally acknowledged it!".

Please stop attributing to me and other long-time players who happen to enjoy older edition material, an attitude we are not espousing. Some people might say something like that, but I have not and I find being credited for it as offensive.

 

[Dausuul]

Oh, but I have no problem with closing the topic. No problem at all. It was pointing to some fake news, would mislead people, no problem.

Pursuant to this, can I suggest this thread also be closed? Since we now know for sure this is a fake, there's no reason for it to stay on the front page any longer than it has to, and not really anything to discuss.

 

[kitsune9]

No way will I play 5e from this playtest!!

Seriously, it was interesting read and it has my curiosity piqued though it would be nice if people don't break NDAs because they feel like it.

Oh wait, it was a fake. Nevermind!

 

[Someone]

So, isn't it time yet to tear our hair out and run in circles screaming?