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
This Game is Deadly
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="SteveC" data-source="post: 6346596" data-attributes="member: 9053"><p>I'd just like to reply about what I call the playtest fallacy . "There was this huge playtest, so the stuff we're seeing in this edition is what the fans want, it has to be!"</p><p></p><p>As someone who's group participated in the playtest and send feedback all the time, I can say that 5E never had even basic design decisions in it the reflected the kind of game we wanted to play. The first edition of the playtest removed almost everything from 4E, and that was a deliberate choice. I definitely get that: 5E was designed to be a reaction to what happened with 4E, and to bring back the folks who left because of it. I get that.</p><p></p><p>The thing is, by not exploring, well, pretty much anything that came in with 4E WotC never gave anyone a chance to comment on those developments. There was never a public playtest of a fighter who had powers, for instance. There is supposedly the Battlemaster who will have maneuver like abilities, but the public never got to see it. </p><p></p><p>We had things like the "damage on a miss," and look what a kerfuffle that turned into. The thing was, the DOAM thing was taken as a rejection of all things 4E when it really wasn't a design component that anyone really cared about in the positive. The power system (AEDU) and character balance? Yeah, those were the important parts.</p><p></p><p>I didn't have much positive to say during the playtest. About the only thing I could talk about was when cantrips were added back in so that Wizards weren't entirely Vancian again.</p><p></p><p>As far as the assumptions of 4E being incorrect. I think one must take those comments with more than a grain of salt: if they're coming from the recent Schwab article, they're from someone who didn't actually like 4E in the first place. Moreover, they're exactly the sort of thing you'd say when you're making changes... they're just done with a better Diplomacy check than during the 4E period.</p><p></p><p>And here is my example of why I don't normally post on issues like this. I expect, "man, what's this guy's deal?" to be the large response to my post. I get that. Enjoy 5E. Hopefully when there's a 5.25 I'll join you. In the mean time, no one confiscated my 4E books, and 13th Age is awesome.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="SteveC, post: 6346596, member: 9053"] I'd just like to reply about what I call the playtest fallacy . "There was this huge playtest, so the stuff we're seeing in this edition is what the fans want, it has to be!" As someone who's group participated in the playtest and send feedback all the time, I can say that 5E never had even basic design decisions in it the reflected the kind of game we wanted to play. The first edition of the playtest removed almost everything from 4E, and that was a deliberate choice. I definitely get that: 5E was designed to be a reaction to what happened with 4E, and to bring back the folks who left because of it. I get that. The thing is, by not exploring, well, pretty much anything that came in with 4E WotC never gave anyone a chance to comment on those developments. There was never a public playtest of a fighter who had powers, for instance. There is supposedly the Battlemaster who will have maneuver like abilities, but the public never got to see it. We had things like the "damage on a miss," and look what a kerfuffle that turned into. The thing was, the DOAM thing was taken as a rejection of all things 4E when it really wasn't a design component that anyone really cared about in the positive. The power system (AEDU) and character balance? Yeah, those were the important parts. I didn't have much positive to say during the playtest. About the only thing I could talk about was when cantrips were added back in so that Wizards weren't entirely Vancian again. As far as the assumptions of 4E being incorrect. I think one must take those comments with more than a grain of salt: if they're coming from the recent Schwab article, they're from someone who didn't actually like 4E in the first place. Moreover, they're exactly the sort of thing you'd say when you're making changes... they're just done with a better Diplomacy check than during the 4E period. And here is my example of why I don't normally post on issues like this. I expect, "man, what's this guy's deal?" to be the large response to my post. I get that. Enjoy 5E. Hopefully when there's a 5.25 I'll join you. In the mean time, no one confiscated my 4E books, and 13th Age is awesome. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
This Game is Deadly
Top