D&D 5e: For real this time?

[JohnnyMayHymn]

Yet another Playtesting Packet, up to level 10.

[Lord Slasher]

Let's see now wizards and clerics can now only cast 2 spells per spell level today (And no word on bonus spells) thereby the 5 min workday is in full force.

Word of Power is nice though is it wasn't for the aforementioned spells per day it would actually make healing worth it.

And LOL WOTC, nice try with disguising 3.5 feats as if they where TOB maneuvers (newsflash there not).

In short, Bleh!

[Keldar]

Let's see now wizards and clerics can now only cast 2 spells per spell level today (And no word on bonus spells) thereby the 5 min workday is in full force.

Word of Power is nice though is it wasn't for the aforementioned spells per day it would actually make healing worth it.

And LOL WOTC, nice try with disguising 3.5 feats as if they where TOB maneuvers (newsflash there not).

In short, Bleh!

The more they put out the worse things look.  Fighter and Rogue are basically the same dumb thing now and get feats as class abilities.  As a bonus they can't even use those class abilities as freely as they can feats!  Yay!
Sorcerer and Warlock are gone now, the masses didn't like them or something.  Pity those showed a sign of inventiveness.

On the upside, the Fighter does get a second attack at 6th that no one else does.  They found one thing to do right with the class.  It only took them three editions to go back to the well. 

[Lord Slasher]

Let's see now wizards and clerics can now only cast 2 spells per spell level today (And no word on bonus spells) thereby the 5 min workday is in full force.

Word of Power is nice though is it wasn't for the aforementioned spells per day it would actually make healing worth it.

And LOL WOTC, nice try with disguising 3.5 feats as if they where TOB maneuvers (newsflash there not).

In short, Bleh!

The more they put out the worse things look.  Fighter and Rogue are basically the same dumb thing now and get feats as class abilities.  As a bonus they can't even use those class abilities as freely as they can feats!  Yay!
Sorcerer and Warlock are gone now, the masses didn't like them or something.  Pity those showed a sign of inventiveness.

On the upside, the Fighter does get a second attack at 6th that no one else does.  They found one thing to do right with the class.  It only took them three editions to go back to the well. 

Actually IMO the sorcerer and warlock were best thing to come out of the playtest. It was probably because they didn't feel like a sorcerer and warlock or something like that.

[FlaminCows]

Mearls said that they do want to keep a class like the Sorcerer of the previous packet in the game, they just might do it later or under another name. It being removed is not because they don't like the idea and it is never going to appear in the new edition but rather because they're going back into internal testing: the playtest packet isn't the full extent of the game they've made so far, rather, it is just the parts they want feedback on right now.

[Agrippa]

While I'm not part of the playtest I have been following the reviews of it so far. Mostly from this site and Dragonsfoot. As you can guess their complaints aren't the same as ours. Mostly they feel that the PCs are too powerful/durable (same thing by old school D&D standards) and that players end up looking at their rather sheets more rather than just playing the game. The vast majoraty of them don't even like the idea of maneuver like sub-systems and believe that they detract from the "feel" of D&D. A feel they find closer to characters like Cugel the Clever, Farfhd and the Grey Mouser and at the higher end Robert E. Howards' heroes.

[Libertad]

Well, I'm pretty sure that the 4th Edition fans have another set of complaints.

Different strokes for different folks.

[veekie]

That is why this will be an exercise in frustration for them. Appeasing(much less actually PLEASING) the disparate fanbase is going to be a rather uncertain goal. Much of the feedback is directly in conflict with each other.

We still hadn't really seen much of an image or ideal of the game that they are trying to make. It looks like a big lump of play-doh everyone tries to mold.

[FlaminCows]

One thing that I was very relieved to read is that the developers don't actually care about the feedback given in WotC's boards, in fact they only occasionally go there at all (they read the official feedback given through surveys, and the comments on their articles). It may sound harsh, but I am so damn thankful that the threads in the D&D Next board on WotC are to not have any major effect on the final game. Those people are insane.

[ChupacabraJohn]

One thing that I was very relieved to read is that the developers don't actually care about the feedback given in WotC's boards, in fact they only occasionally go there at all (they read the official feedback given through surveys, and the comments on their articles). It may sound harsh, but I am so damn thankful that the threads in the D&D Next board on WotC are to not have any major effect on the final game. Those people are insane.

Those boards are a satan pit 

[Libertad]

Monk Class just released.

[awaken_D_M_golem]

... to an immediate Alignment flame war.


Star Wars and Star Trek have had "pauses" between
productive eras.  WotC could just sit around for a while,
and let all the do-do un-hit-the-fan.  Should.  Won't.

[Libertad]

I'm not an Insider Subscriber.  What's going on with the Monk's alignment?

[Garryl]

You don't have to be a subscriber to see the playtest documents and stuff, just sign up with an email address.

Monks are Lawful only, once again. They're the only alignment-restricted class currently in the playtest.

Did anyone notice that with the change to Rogues using Expertise Dice, Sneak Attack is just a very limited version of Deadly Strike?

[Wilb]

The developers seem to be trying to bring the fighter to the "top" of the martial classes, and then flattening other nonmagical (or quasi-nonmagical in case of the monk) classes to sometimes match his damage output or defense (seeing as the monk needs to roll stats really well to equal a fighter in fullplate at least in AC).

The cleric seems to pull ahead right now, because as they`re built, they`ll go the same way as the 3.0-3.5 one, only casting a few "powerful" spells per day.

The wizard and his traditions seem to be the strangest right now. The academic tradition gets shafted compared to the rest, and they`re going all AEDU on the others. Vancian casters need to die or something, according to wizards forum members. Low level Illusion spells causing psychic damage really don`t feel ok to me. I thought Wizards could play ok in Next, but it seems that only damage dealing ones will remain in the end.

The previous package felt nice as a game but this one feels like the bastard kid of 4E and 3E who inherited only the bad stuff of the "couple".

Alignment wars as they are "fought" at Wizards`boards just enrages me. Why can`t the guys write the fluff they want if they already said that everything regarding limitations is purely optional?

I love the old campaign settings and the things they changed in 4E made me abandon it even before taking a look at the system, because I could always change what I didn`t like, but it was nice to see the story of each world developing along the editions. Without casting Raise Dead so that the right cows are brought back, no amount of work will make me pay for a system that just changes stuff to be different while keeping it fluffless where needed so that the "Dark n Edgy" guys will like it. I`ll keep the deeply flawed systems and worlds I already bought, thank you.

With this, I`m trying to say that if 4E had not killed so many sacred cows, I`d buy every book that contained fluff, even if i disliked the system (which i kinda enjoyed when playing one shots). If there is no standard fluff that is internally consistent and doesn`t throw all previous editions`fluff away (except 4E, which did just this), there is nothing that makes me stay. They should make it so that everything is optional,  and anyone can play their game as they wish, but never straying too far from the old times in the standards adopted, if they really wish to bring at least a fraction of their lost customers back.

Different mechanics can never be brought together perfectly, making each feeling remain present and separate, but a constant stream of fluff can at least keep some players together. People that build their own campaign worlds will only buy the system if the mechanics let they do what they and their players want, so they still need to decide which kind of integration they want with this edition, after all, there will always be players from every edition that will not leave them.

Sorry if this sounds offensive or out of place, it is not my intention to offend anyone, and I`m ready to receive criticism for expressing my limited and strange opinion on these boards.

[PlzBreakMyCampaign]

One thing that I was very relieved to read is that the developers don't actually care about the feedback given in WotC's boards, in fact they only occasionally go there at all (they read the official feedback given through surveys, and the comments on their articles). It may sound harsh, but I am so damn thankful that the threads in the D&D Next board on WotC are to not have any major effect on the final game. Those people are insane.

Those boards are a satan pit 

I didn't bother when it was obvious WotC wouldn't listen there, so I haven't looked to see. Why is it crappy?

[Wilb]

One thing that I was very relieved to read is that the developers don't actually care about the feedback given in WotC's boards, in fact they only occasionally go there at all (they read the official feedback given through surveys, and the comments on their articles). It may sound harsh, but I am so damn thankful that the threads in the D&D Next board on WotC are to not have any major effect on the final game. Those people are insane.

Those boards are a satan pit 

I didn't bother when it was obvious WotC wouldn't listen there, so I haven't looked to see. Why is it crappy?

Because the mods let the more rabid 4E fans bash the previous editions, as long as they keep this tag: "developers aren`t bothering with keeping the 4E players, they`re biased", and anything that relates to previous editions, be it fluff or crunch, is considered "a wrong way to play D&D". Another problem is that some users have the autonomy to do as they like, going as low as personally attacking the posters with almost absolute freedom, mods only slapping their wrists digitally, without any effect on the whole.

[veekie]

So basically unending edition warfare. You'd think that could be better handled by now.

[Libertad]

So, have they just given up on D&D or something?  Sounds like Mearls and co. are just half-heartedly slogging through things.

[awaken_D_M_golem]

... Alignment wars as they are "fought" at Wizards`boards just enrages me.

Why can`t the guys write the fluff they want if they ... (implying WotC ?) ... already said that everything regarding limitations is purely optional? ...

bolding mine.

Really? Wotc did say that?
If they did, technically that's very good.
(idk but I wouldn't know ; I'm not paying much attention.)

Might be a push toward "Law" having a historically implied meaning,
but not an etched-in-stone meaning.  Do the fluff you want, but not
so far off the beaten track.