D&D (2024) What is positive?

[DEFCON 1]

Level Up is just as much a different edition than the 2024 game will be, albeit in very, very different ways.

The math of the game is  not the only thing that matters.

It does when the question is "When was the 2024 book written?"

@CleverNickName is trying to downplay the playtest because they think and keep saying essentially that the books are already all done... and thus implying the playtest isn't real and is merely just for show. Well... they are "correct" in that most of the game (including all the baseline mechanics) ARE in fact already written, because the baseline game is still going to be using everything that was designed for the 2014 books and ain't being changed. Level Up was the same way-- which is why it was designed and marketed to be an expansion of the 2014 5E, with the entire foundation of the game and how it works already handed to Morrus on a platter and thus everyone who buys it will know pretty much how the game plays except for all the added bells and whistles (like it is for every single 3rd Party designer and company.)

The stuff that is getting changed for 2024 is all the same top-level bells and whistles stuff... little rules issues being cleaned up, underwritten things from 2014 getting deeper dives, balance issues being brought better into line. And none of that stuff is or needs to be completely written right now. All that surface-level stuff can be tweaked, adjusted, and shined up real pretty for all the players who submit their surveys about what they like and don't like because doing so isn't a big deal. "You all really want the 'Use An Object' Action added back into the Thief's 'Cunning Action?' Really? Uh... okay... fine. We think the Action doesn't work very well and think there's probably a better design there... but if you all REALLY want it... we can put it back in if it means that much to you. It ain't hard to do and ain't gonna affect anything."

And the people who think there's no point in testing or submitting surveys? They say that because they know that the baseline game is staying just how it is, and since they don't like it or are bored with it or want it changed greater than what they know WotC intends to do... there's no reason for them to bother. The playtest is all lipstick on a pig for all of them. Which is fine.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Level Up is written to be compatible with 5e, not to be an expansion of it. It is its own game and is primarily designed to be played as such, although certainly compatibility with "the World's Most Popular Role-Playing Game" was an important consideration. Including conversion material in the books is just good marketing, and expands their player base to those who may not want to go "all-in" on Level Up.

 

[CleverNickName]

@CleverNickName is trying to downplay the playtest because they think and keep saying essentially that the books are already all done... and thus implying the playtest isn't real and is merely just for show. Well... they are "correct" in that most of the game (including all the baseline mechanics) ARE in fact already written, because the baseline game is still going to be using everything that was designed for the 2014 books and ain't being changed.

...

And the people who think there's no point in testing or submitting surveys? They say that because they know that the baseline game is staying just how it is, and since they don't like it or are bored with it or want it changed greater than what they know WotC intends to do... there's no reason for them to bother. The playtest is all lipstick on a pig for all of them.

I mean...that's a bit of an overstatement. I said they aren't looking for sweeping changes in the final product, and that the playtests are more likely a marketing tool. This isn't a harebrained theory that I dreamed up out of spite; the survey was mostly questions about demographics and general satisfaction--questions which are quite useful for marketing and branding, but not all that helpful for game design.

I don't think the playtest is "just for show," as you suggest. I think it's for marketing. And marketing is important.

 

[FrogReaver]

About the notion of survey answers - consider the 2 sets of questions below

Very Satisfied	vs	Very Satisfied
Satisfied	vs	Satisfied
Slightly Satisfied	vs	Slightly Satisfied
Neutral	vs	Neutral
Slightly Unsatisfied	vs
Unsatisfied	vs	Unsatisfied
Very Unsatisfied	vs	Very Unsatisfied

If all they care about are knowing the satisfieds, then removing the option of slightly unsatisfied won't change the results of what they are wanting to know at all. Those people would have either chosen unsatisfied or neutral.

 

[Horwath]

About the notion of survey answers - consider the 2 sets of questions below

Very Satisfied	vs	Very Satisfied
Satisfied	vs	Satisfied
Slightly Satisfied	vs	Slightly Satisfied
Neutral	vs	Neutral
Slightly Unsatisfied	vs
Unsatisfied	vs	Unsatisfied
Very Unsatisfied	vs	Very Unsatisfied

If all they care about are knowing the satisfieds, then removing the option of slightly unsatisfied won't change the results of what they are wanting to know at all. Those people would have either chosen unsatisfied or neutral.

Couldn't we god just number rating?

from 0 to 10?

5 being; so-so.
10 being; You could not do it any better then you did. Even with MY help.
0 being; you wasted extra oxygen for mental effort while doing this.

average of 7.0 needed for "pass"

 

[FrogReaver]

Couldn't we god just number rating?

from 0 to 10?

5 being; so-so.
10 being; You could not do it any better then you did. Even with MY help.
0 being; you wasted extra oxygen for mental effort while doing this.

average of 7.0 needed for "pass"

I think that tells you even less than what they did.

 

[NotAYakk]

And the people who think there's no point in testing or submitting surveys? They say that because they know that the baseline game is staying just how it is, and since they don't like it or are bored with it or want it changed greater than what they know WotC intends to do... there's no reason for them to bother. The playtest is all lipstick on a pig for all of them. Which is fine.

But the "baseline game" is much smaller than that.

Like, literally "fighters get 4th attack at level 20" vs "fighters deal an extra set of weapon damage dice at 17" is within the level of tweaking that could occur even close to the last minute (last year?) for a game.

And that level of difference is something people are going to care about.

Now, the difference between "PCs power is roughly linear with level" vs "PCs power doubles every 2 levels" would be much, much harder to fit in. But, honestly, adding optional rules that make power level grow much steeper, and even alternative encounter building rules for steeper power growth, is something they could add quite close to publication. They wouldn't be as polished as the baseline game, but neither was 3.5e. ;P

 

[Clint_L]

Folks need to keep in mind that they are expressly NOT writing a new edition. They are writing an updated 5e PHB. These are very different design and marketing goals. Their aim is not to have everyone rush out to replace their books, but to maintain the managed growth of the D&D brand.

Why would we assume that they are not trying to get the most accurate data they can? That would be a strange goal for them to have.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Folks need to keep in mind that they are expressly NOT writing a new edition. They are writing an updated 5e PHB. These are very different design and marketing goals. Their aim is not to have everyone rush out to replace their books, but to maintain the managed growth of the D&D brand.

I don't think that these two fact can be taken as a given... if you believe it is or is not a new edition (or a new .5 edition) aside, of course they want to have everyone rush out to replace there PHB/DMG/MM... I see no reason to believe they don't.

The very fact that the rewrites we have seen so far are whole new versions of races, whole new versions of classes (that will need errata to use previous subclasses) and whole new versions of feats shows' that the game (as of info we have today dec 2022) is going to change.

The example I give all the time is a Mtn dwarf with +2 str +2 Con showing up to a table in 2024 is most likely being told to redraw there species (not even a race anymore) and a bard is going to be told to redraw there class (we can add cleric to that list too) Anyone that has Lucky, or Sharpshooter or Great Weapon Mastery are most likely to be told to change the way those feats work...

the 2014 PHB just (from what we know as of today in dec 2022) not going to work as building a character at most tables...

and weather you call it an edition or a .5 edition you will HAVE to call it something. You will call it what rules you are using. Is exhaustion 5 or 10 levels? is daze a thing? What version of haste and ranger are you... oh wait that was 3e to 3.5

 

[Micah Sweet]

I don't think that these two fact can be taken as a given... if you believe it is or is not a new edition (or a new .5 edition) aside, of course they want to have everyone rush out to replace there PHB/DMG/MM... I see no reason to believe they don't.

The very fact that the rewrites we have seen so far are whole new versions of races, whole new versions of classes (that will need errata to use previous subclasses) and whole new versions of feats shows' that the game (as of info we have today dec 2022) is going to change.

The example I give all the time is a Mtn dwarf with +2 str +2 Con showing up to a table in 2024 is most likely being told to redraw there species (not even a race anymore) and a bard is going to be told to redraw there class (we can add cleric to that list too) Anyone that has Lucky, or Sharpshooter or Great Weapon Mastery are most likely to be told to change the way those feats work...

the 2014 PHB just (from what we know as of today in dec 2022) not going to work as building a character at most tables...

and weather you call it an edition or a .5 edition you will HAVE to call it something. You will call it what rules you are using. Is exhaustion 5 or 10 levels? is daze a thing? What version of haste and ranger are you... oh wait that was 3e to 3.5

This is what I'm talking about. It doesn't matter to most fans that the math is the same in both editions. What they care about is how the pieces of the game they will actually engage with are going to be different. And it looks like a lot of those things are going to change. Given that fact, it is unreasonable for WotC to expect people to just accept that this is not a new edition.