Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The difference between the internal and public playtest *pure speculation*
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Gundark" data-source="post: 6170567" data-attributes="member: 6148"><p>I have an acquaintance who was given the first internal packet back around the beginning of 2012, there was talk around doing internal playtesting and I was going to be a part of that. It never materialised, but I was given access to the first packet (I think it was labeled version 1.0 or something like that). It included character creation, feats, levels until 10 (if memory serves), and special rules for weapons (meaningful differences between taking a dagger vs. a short sword for example). Sure it was rough, but there were some interesting ideas in there.</p><p></p><p>Then I got my hands on the first public playtest and saw that it was very “safe”, no character creation, no feats, no special rules for weapons, really boring to be honest. We were given a pretty small sandbox to play in, a big contrast to what I had seen in the internal packet.</p><p></p><p>We’ve seen glimpses of cool stuff (Warlock, Sorcerer, Gladiator build for the fighter) but for the most part I’m thinking that we really just got these very </p><p>…well “safe” releases. There isn’t really anything in there that will shake the apple cart. </p><p></p><p>I suspect that WotC is testing interesting ideas, and cool stuff. I suspect that this is internal though, in fact I’d wager the internal play testing is way more interesting than what we’ve gotten as a public. I suspect that the finished product will contain this stuff, or we’ll see sourcebooks that have this stuff shortly after release.</p><p></p><p>The question is why? Why wouldn’t you give us the interesting stuff to test? I suspect it’s due to the fact that these ideas are in flux, and they are very concerned about how we perceive 5e. Notice that they use words like “iteration” instead of “edition”, “next” instead of “5th”. The public playtest could have gone nutty if they didn’t keep it safe (WHAT?! THAT DOESN”T FEEL LIKE D&D). Keeping it safe means that they’ve had people go “meh!” over the 5th ed. My guess is they have done a cost analysis and figured that they’ll lose less people this way then they would it they had ideas that people thought was crazy (and maybe even easier to get backl).</p><p></p><p>Thoughts?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Gundark, post: 6170567, member: 6148"] I have an acquaintance who was given the first internal packet back around the beginning of 2012, there was talk around doing internal playtesting and I was going to be a part of that. It never materialised, but I was given access to the first packet (I think it was labeled version 1.0 or something like that). It included character creation, feats, levels until 10 (if memory serves), and special rules for weapons (meaningful differences between taking a dagger vs. a short sword for example). Sure it was rough, but there were some interesting ideas in there. Then I got my hands on the first public playtest and saw that it was very “safe”, no character creation, no feats, no special rules for weapons, really boring to be honest. We were given a pretty small sandbox to play in, a big contrast to what I had seen in the internal packet. We’ve seen glimpses of cool stuff (Warlock, Sorcerer, Gladiator build for the fighter) but for the most part I’m thinking that we really just got these very …well “safe” releases. There isn’t really anything in there that will shake the apple cart. I suspect that WotC is testing interesting ideas, and cool stuff. I suspect that this is internal though, in fact I’d wager the internal play testing is way more interesting than what we’ve gotten as a public. I suspect that the finished product will contain this stuff, or we’ll see sourcebooks that have this stuff shortly after release. The question is why? Why wouldn’t you give us the interesting stuff to test? I suspect it’s due to the fact that these ideas are in flux, and they are very concerned about how we perceive 5e. Notice that they use words like “iteration” instead of “edition”, “next” instead of “5th”. The public playtest could have gone nutty if they didn’t keep it safe (WHAT?! THAT DOESN”T FEEL LIKE D&D). Keeping it safe means that they’ve had people go “meh!” over the 5th ed. My guess is they have done a cost analysis and figured that they’ll lose less people this way then they would it they had ideas that people thought was crazy (and maybe even easier to get backl). Thoughts? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The difference between the internal and public playtest *pure speculation*
Top