Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
The Paladin and the Stirges
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="Kynn" data-source="post: 5809619" data-attributes="member: 36754"><p>The approach they've taken with allowing certain high-profile bloggers, journalists, and visitors to a single con to playtest <em>something</em> and then talk about it "under NDA" is part of the process that I think is flawed.</p><p></p><p>It leads, for example, for gamers hungry for information about D&D Next to examine every dribble of information ("aha! there are DWARVES in D&D Next, we know that much!") as a potential clue to the system.</p><p></p><p>It would probably be better if they simply said either "talk about whatever you like, we're going to change it 137 times in the next week anyway" (i.e., no NDA) or had said simply said "don't talk about."</p><p></p><p>Instead there's this somewhat halfassed approached whereby many people who try to follow the topic are left confused as to whether stirges do Con damage that takes weeks to heal, or whether there's something odd about healing in general (as a few playtesters have reported), or if boss fights in 5e really take 5 minutes, or whatever. </p><p></p><p>Their releases of information on what they want to put in the system, from their seminars, have been okay -- but WotC is still being pretty deliberately tight-lipped about nearly everything, from the vague L&L columns on down. That doesn't seem like a great idea when you're (maybe?) 18 months out from a release; maybe they should be holding back less instead of dropping tantalizing clues, if they're not ready to even let anyone know when the "open playtest" is really going to be open? (So far it's all been an under-NDA playtest and not open.)</p><p></p><p>So yeah, I think WotC is handling this poorly in a way that isn't productive <strong>for them</strong> (putting aside whether people are speculating irresponsibly for a minute) and I think they could handle it better. It was probably premature to do a well-advertised playtest at this time, for example.</p><p></p><p>The fact that Dave's and Mike's posts ignited minor kerfluffles is proof there's a problem -- and yeah, part of the "blame" goes on those people who make assumptions. </p><p></p><p>(Which is why I thought it was appropriate to start this thread here and point out that faulty assumptions ARE being made when we interpret DM fluff decisions from DDXP reports as being something based in 5e rules.)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Kynn, post: 5809619, member: 36754"] The approach they've taken with allowing certain high-profile bloggers, journalists, and visitors to a single con to playtest [I]something[/I] and then talk about it "under NDA" is part of the process that I think is flawed. It leads, for example, for gamers hungry for information about D&D Next to examine every dribble of information ("aha! there are DWARVES in D&D Next, we know that much!") as a potential clue to the system. It would probably be better if they simply said either "talk about whatever you like, we're going to change it 137 times in the next week anyway" (i.e., no NDA) or had said simply said "don't talk about." Instead there's this somewhat halfassed approached whereby many people who try to follow the topic are left confused as to whether stirges do Con damage that takes weeks to heal, or whether there's something odd about healing in general (as a few playtesters have reported), or if boss fights in 5e really take 5 minutes, or whatever. Their releases of information on what they want to put in the system, from their seminars, have been okay -- but WotC is still being pretty deliberately tight-lipped about nearly everything, from the vague L&L columns on down. That doesn't seem like a great idea when you're (maybe?) 18 months out from a release; maybe they should be holding back less instead of dropping tantalizing clues, if they're not ready to even let anyone know when the "open playtest" is really going to be open? (So far it's all been an under-NDA playtest and not open.) So yeah, I think WotC is handling this poorly in a way that isn't productive [B]for them[/B] (putting aside whether people are speculating irresponsibly for a minute) and I think they could handle it better. It was probably premature to do a well-advertised playtest at this time, for example. The fact that Dave's and Mike's posts ignited minor kerfluffles is proof there's a problem -- and yeah, part of the "blame" goes on those people who make assumptions. (Which is why I thought it was appropriate to start this thread here and point out that faulty assumptions ARE being made when we interpret DM fluff decisions from DDXP reports as being something based in 5e rules.) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
The Paladin and the Stirges
Top