D&DNext: Playtest Review

[Koumei]

I can't find the original post, because searching for it gives me someone's sig and I'm too lazy to sift through the results.

I had the same problem when trying to find the post where Mike Mearls was saying D&D is like playing Thrash Metal in Narnia if you're eating McDonalds... or something to that effect.

[MGuy]

Crashing through the night
Comes a fearful cry
Shadzar! Shadzar! Shadzar! Shadzar!
Grognard of the night
Nonsense taking flight!
Shadzar! Shadzar! Shadzar! Shadzar!
No where to run
No where to hide
Panic spreading far and wide
Who can turn the tide?


Nobody. Abandon all hope.

This is one of the best reasons for signing up here.

[Duke Flauros]

In case no one posted this
http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx ... l/20120813

They might as well have hired Sean Reynolds.(Is that Shadzar's secret identity?)

[yanko128]

As a big fan of 4e I find it really funny how people on these forums, who in general seem to dislike 4e, decry 5e being too much like 4e. While at the same time large number of 4e fans I know decry 5e being too much like 3e.

In either case 5e seems to be on a direct route to not pleasing anyone.

[K]

As a big fan of 4e I find it really funny how people on these forums, who in general seem to dislike 4e, decry 5e being too much like 4e. While at the same time large number of 4e fans I know decry 5e being too much like 3e.

In either case 5e seems to be on a direct route to not pleasing anyone.

Yes, in an attempt to please grognards of every edition, 5e is going to piss off everyone.

Mearls doesn't understand that the loudest voices often take surveys and are often wrong.

[Aryxbez]

As a big fan of 4e I find it really funny how people on these forums, who in general seem to dislike 4e, decry 5e being too much like 4e. While at the same time large number of 4e fans I know decry 5e being too much like 3e.

In either case 5e seems to be on a direct route to not pleasing anyone.

Also probably doesn't help that these people probably don't know what 3rd edition is actually like. Having played in relative ignorance, while their spellcasters were played with the terribad logic of an MMO (More DPRRRRRR), not noticing non-casters falling behind, all the while DM's coddling the non-casters with fiat swag, poorly played monsters and coddled encounters (grapple monsters wouldn't grapple, rust monsters don't rust, spellcaster creatures don't use metamagics, etc). Hell, I would've be surprised if most of them didn't even "play" 3rd edition, and are just jumping on the same voice bandwagon.

As for cries of it being like 4th edition, I recall Mearls even stating such ideas he's ripping from 4th edition. Nevermind they least were getting the hang of 4th edition a bit better with the math, so now with this, they're just pucking it all up anyway. In terms of Fandom, I currently play a long term 4th edition campaign (ran one for good while when it came out too), though I may like some ideas behind it, I recognize its flaws, and even personally, feeling the ill desire to want to play another 4th edition game beyond what I already am currently (D&D Encounters is alright, nothing special).

[Lago PARANOIA]

I've played and ran many games of 3E and 4E D&D. I've also played more 2E D&D video games than is healthy. Anyone who says that 5E D&D is like 3E D&D in more than a trivial sense is high on crack. The game does not have open multiclassing, skill points, or objective DCs. The only way 5E D&D even leans in the direction of 3E D&D over 4E D&D are semi-fungible spell slots and randomly rolled hit points.

The minion crap? The wonkiness of status effects? The refusal to provide objective DCs? The on-the-rails class system in which you get your choice of bullshit bonus? That's all 4E D&D, dude. That said, 5E D&D to me seems to be more 2E D&D with 4E D&D 'innovations' haphazardly grafted on top of it. I haven't looked at the second playtest documents, though, so maybe that's the case that they're back in 3E D&D's direction.

I'm aware that 3E D&D came out over 10 years ago and that the last official 3E book came out five and a half years ago, but c'mon. Only an idiot would think that 5E D&D was like 3E at all. Especially since both it and its Octavian successor puts the important parts and the vast majority respectively of its material on the Internet for free.

[yanko128]

Without getting into an argument of "what is a correct way to play pretend elf", 5e so far seems just full of stuff from the edition you (the general you, not anyone specific) do not like, and not enough stuff from edition you like. Which make me wonder why would anyone switch over to the 5e-the-half-assed-edition from the game they are currently playing and enjoying.

I see more people picking up and trying something completely new, then deciding they do not like it, rather than picking up a mockery of what they like in the first place.

[ishy]

Well lets be honest, 5e is not published yet.
It might still be released as a really good game. The first playtest was just in its infancy, where they were just throwing shit on a wall.
If they just do the opposite of everything they have been doing so far and actually start designing anything, who knows where they end up.

They haven't announced a release date yet, so we just need enough people saying that their current way of thinking is shit.

[Lago PARANOIA]

It might still be released as a really good game. The first playtest was just in its infancy, where they were just throwing shit on a wall.
If they just do the opposite of everything they have been doing so far and actually start designing anything, who knows where they end up.

They haven't announced a release date yet, so we just need enough people saying that their current way of thinking is shit.

Optimism that ignores past events is stupidity's incest crackbaby.

[Voss]

Finally got a hold of the playtest docs (hurrah for being on the road for 3 days straight), just started looking at them, but all the optional bullshit in the character creation doc is actively pissing me off. You can _not_ do a meaningful playtest with people using completely different rules. You get no meaningful data.


As a bonus: some of the worst fucking alignment descriptions to date:
'NG: You do the best you can'

Really? All other alignments are just... slackers? What is this?

'CE: You act as directed by your greed, hatred and bloodlust'

OK, then. Either CE characters are directly solely by a grand total of three personality traits in every situation, or they are completely at a loss when confronted by any situation that doesn't involve wanting things, cutting things, or not liking things.

CHARACTER ADVANCEMENT
XP.....Level....Benefit
0.........1........Background, feat
650......2.......Skill training
1,825...3.......Feat
3,525...4.......Skill training, +1 to two ability scores
7,975...5.......Fuck you

Shouldn't the numbers mean something? Or follow some kind of systemic progression?

[Blicero]

Shouldn't the numbers mean something? Or follow some kind of systemic progression?

So the numbers are a vaguely exponential advancement. Presumably it's an intentional throwback to the AD&D days, where the XP numbers were just totally pulled out of Gygax's ass.

[Whatever]

7,975 is possibly the dumbest XP requirement of any edition. It's too hard to write 8,000? We're not discount shoppers, you don't need to disguise the price by taking less than 0.5% off.

[Blicero]

7,975 is possibly the dumbest XP requirement of any edition. It's too hard to write 8,000? We're not discount shoppers, you don't need to disguise the price by taking less than 0.5% off.

Oh, totally. These are probably even more bullshit numbers than the AD&D ones. (I seem to recall that those were fairly regular in progression, for any given class, up until high levels?) But the only semiplausible explanation I can think of for such erraticism is a thought process of "Wasn't it so cool back in the days when the XP tables were intentionally difficult to remember?"

[John Magnum]

Maybe it's some vestigial recollection that the experience tables were one of the very few elements of 3e core that wasn't reproducible under the OGL, so you have to prevent people from just memorizing and rederiving them on their own.

[Previn]

Maybe it's some vestigial recollection that the experience tables were one of the very few elements of 3e core that wasn't reproducible under the OGL, so you have to prevent people from just memorizing and rederiving them on their own.

3e experience is a governed by a formula, so you can just use that to determine the xp table, and as a formula isn't can't be trademarked, or copyrighted. To wit:

XP to advance to the next level = (L^2+L)*500 where L is equal to your current level.

[Whatever]

Yeah, the AD&D numbers would look like:
2000
4000
8000
16000
etc, up to 9th level or so, where they started incrementing additively instead of multiplicatively. The starting amount could vary from class to class, though, so rogues would level a bit faster than fighters or wizards.

There was actually a reason for those numbers, namely, that if you died and came back at level 1, you'd get your old level back in the time it took everyone else to get +1 level.

Likewise, the 3.X numbers multiply out nicely with XP rewards and level penalties. The numbers are elegant, sure, but for a reason.

That is, it's not just that there is underlying math at all, it's that the underlying math does what they wanted it to do. Which seems to be beyond the comprehension of the current team.

[Lokathor]

Maybe it's some vestigial recollection that the experience tables were one of the very few elements of 3e core that wasn't reproducible under the OGL, so you have to prevent people from just memorizing and rederiving them on their own.

3e experience is a governed by a formula, so you can just use that to determine the xp table, and as a formula isn't can't be trademarked, or copyrighted. To wit:

XP to advance to the next level = (L^2+L)*500 where L is equal to your current level.

More simply than that, you need your current level times 1000, and you go back to 0 each time you spend that many XP to level up.

[Koumei]

I see more people picking up and trying something completely new, then deciding they do not like it, rather than picking up a mockery of what they like in the first place.

This. People who like 2E are not going to swap from 2E (plus their assorted houserules) for anything, even if you offer them pizza and blowjobs. People who like 3.X are going to stick with either 3.X plus their own assorted houserules or 3.5 with some other dude's assorted houserules and nice picturesPathfinder, or maybe one of the other bizarre variants like Fantasycraft or Legend or IDon'tGiveAFuck. People who like 4E will stick with 4E or Essentials.

Nobody has ben given any reason to like 5th, and indeed, thanks to Mearls' "Split the Community!" tactic, where people focus on what they hate about every other edition, they are given reasons to hate 5th from the start ("It has X in common with Y, which sucks").

As for the XP table, I'm going to say something harsh but true: the fucking Rifts XP tables aren't as bullshit.

[Voss]

Shouldn't the numbers mean something? Or follow some kind of systemic progression?

So the numbers are a vaguely exponential advancement. Presumably it's an intentional throwback to the AD&D days, where the XP numbers were just totally pulled out of Gygax's ass.

Not really, in either case. If you ignore the last two digits (which you might as well, because there is no way that 50 or those 25s are actually meaningful) it is sort of 600 *3n + [arbitrary number], where n sort of doubles each time [at level 3 n=1, level 4 n=2, level 5 n=4]. 6th level should be somewhere around 15600, but the 'arbitrary number' seems to vary a hell of a lot (+50, +25, -75, +175) so it could be anything between 15000 and 16000.

AD&D was straight forward. It doubles until around 9th level, then you add a set amount (except for weird classes). Fighter was 2,000 base, then 200,000 per level, thief was 1,250 base, then 125,000 afterwards, 'magic-user' 2,500, etc. The fact that it was different on a class-by-class basis was annoying, but it was at least sane when it came to the actual numbers.

[Blicero]

Not really, in either case. If you ignore the last two digits (which you might as well, because there is no way that 50 or those 25s are actually meaningful) it is sort of 600 *3n + [arbitrary number], where n sort of doubles each time [at level 3 n=1, level 4 n=2, level 5 n=4]. 6th level should be somewhere around 15600, but the 'arbitrary number' seems to vary a hell of a lot (+50, +25, -75, +175) so it could be anything between 15000 and 16000.

(I seem to recall that those were fairly regular in progression, for any given class, up until high levels?)

But, as you admit,

It doubles until around 9th level, then you add a set amount (except for weird classes).

And, honestly, that isn't even true for the non-weird classes. I'm looking at a pdf of the AD&D PHB, and a cleric's XP per level goes like this:

Level, XP
1 0
2 1500
3 3000
4 6000
5 13000
6 27500


I don't think that that is doubling by level. And this is one of the standard classes. The same sort of irregularities appears in every main class's XP tables by like 6th or 7th level. Hence the whole "pulled out of Gygax's ass."


As regards my label of exponential, you are correct in that the actual numbers do not represent a meaningful exponential progression. Plotted, the data look sort of exponential, but that doesn't actually mean anything.

[tussock]

@5e XP.

0650, 0650, 650
1825, 1175, 525
3525, 1700, 525
(5750, 2225, 525)
7975, 2225, 0.

There is a simple underlying progression, but the amount between 4 and 5 is doubled because 5 is the maximum, or something. Or maybe it's tiered and they double it again at level 10.


The AD&D tables are fairly logical, it's just an arbitrary rounding of the steep reduction in per-level XP up high, which gives "free" levels to some classes via 96321 or 84321 reduction steps to get them to name level at the right time.

[hogarth]

650*1+525*0
650*2+525*1
650*3+525*3
650*4+525*6
650*5+525*9

Weird...

[Seerow]

So the Warlock and Sorcerer got released. If you care to see them, you have to redownload the playtest packet.

Sorcerer seems to follow the spell level progression from 3.5, where he gets his spells a level later than the Wizard. He also has a more restricted spell list, in addition to getting only 1 spell known per level.

In exchange for all of this, he gets to use spellpoints, which as far as I can tell have no logical progression to how many you get per level. It's almost like they tuned the spell point gains with the assumption the sorcerer would gain new spell levels at the same time as the Wizard, and then changed what level he gains his spells at the last second without modifying the spellpoints.

Oh, and the Sorcerer also has bloodline abilities. In particular the Playtest Sorcerer is Draconic, and thus gets a Dragon Breath, Dragon Scales, and Dragon Strength.


On the one hand, it is really annoying that, as predicted, the class is entrenched in its fluff. There is no way you could call this Sorcerer as Wizard, at all. On the other hand, the sorcerer does have one new mechanic that is interesting: After he has spent so many spellpoints, he manifests a passive ability. For example after spending 3 willpower, you gain +2 to melee damage rolls. After spending 10 willpower, you manifest dragon scales giving you resistance to an energy type. It may not be the best bonus in the world, but it's something I don't recall seeing before, and is fairly interesting.




The Warlock, unfortunately, is far less interesting. Rather than AEDU, it's just AE. With some rituals thrown in as well. It gains no daily powers, and its utility powers are wrapped up with its Encounter Powers, and all of those powers are pretty underwhelming. You get 2 Lesser invocations per encounter, which is roughly comparable to how many spells a Wizard is casting each encounter... yet the Warlock's invocations are far weaker. They have one that lets them go Ethereal for a round, which is cool and potentially useful, but then they have one that lets them turn out the lights and gain darkvision (oh hey look at that guy who just screwed over the whole party), and one to deal like 2d6 damage in a tiny area.

At least Eldritch Blast is a bit better than in 3.5, as it starts at 3d6 instead of 1d6. Unfortunately it doesn't scale as quickly, you hit 4d6 at level 3, but no bump at level 5.

[CapnTthePirateG]

I'm noting the wizard has far more spells on it's spell list. I'm also trying to figure out how a warlock necromancer would work - does it get spells?

I think you could be ok with the mass charm and the etherealness. You'll be spamming eldritch blast a lot though, hope you like pewpew.