D&DNext: Playtest Review

Whatever · Post by **Whatever** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 7:51 pm

Exactly. It's a non-refutation of a non-argument. Hence, "argh".

AndreiChekov · Post by **AndreiChekov** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 9:27 pm

I like collecting small numbers so much, that I would play a game where you wander around the dungeons looking for +1s everywhere.
Whenever a new level gives me a +6 its even more exciting!

DSMatticus · Post by **DSMatticus** » Mon Sep 16, 2013 9:52 pm

Whatever wrote:
Anecdotally, A.
But, anecdotally, ~A.
argh

Whatever wrote:Exactly. It's a non-refutation of a non-argument. Hence, "argh".

Bwuh? Shadzar didn't even have an anecdote. He made a universal claim about people, and some people volunteered themselves as counter-examples. That's just how counter-examples work. It's a simple refutation of an unsubstantiated argument.

shadzar · Post by **shadzar** » Tue Sep 17, 2013 12:11 am

actually i didnt, go back and read the edit after i noticed the words had been transposed....

Voss · Post by **Voss** » Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:44 am

Cyberzombie wrote:
Voss wrote: It pretty much puts the nail in the 'modular' idea, however. There is only one version, and people who find skills too difficult are just going to have to put up with it.
The modular idea has gradually died as D&DN went on. It started with some crazy thing with a minimalist no options character travelling with a guy with a giant character sheet of options. That idea (which was totally unfeasable) was dumped for a bunch of modules you can swap in and out that applied to the whole group.

Yeah, I know. I mentioned it because we just had a bit of debate about it here- the fact that Mikey has publically confessed that it went in the bin with the other 500 ideas they've shoved through the shit-sieve known as the playstest (without directly saying so, of course) just seemed worth noting.

Whatever · Post by **Whatever** » Tue Sep 17, 2013 4:26 am

DSMatticus wrote:
Whatever wrote:
But, anecdotally, ~A.
argh

Whatever wrote:Exactly. It's a non-refutation of a non-argument. Hence, "argh".
Bwuh? Shadzar didn't even have an anecdote. He made a universal claim about people, and some people volunteered themselves as counter-examples. That's just how counter-examples work. It's a simple refutation of an unsubstantiated argument.

I have shadzar on ignore, so I only read the quoted portion of his post. He said "some people" don't like fiddly mechanics. I don't know if there was enough context to make it a genuine anecdote, instead of a bald assertion. Either way, it's not a universal claim, and presenting counter examples wasn't a refutation.

Antariuk · Post by **Antariuk** » Thu Sep 19, 2013 10:42 pm

So I just got an email from Wizards saying this:

"We've made it! Today we're releasing the final packet in the public phase of the D&D® Next Playtest. Thank you for your invaluable involvement in the playtesting process."

"Today’s playtest packet includes updates to many parts of the rules, and it includes the addition of the bard and multiclassing. For a full list of changes, please consult the Read First document in the playtest packet. We’ll send a survey in a few weeks to gather feedback."

I haven't looked at the playtest materials for quite a while now. Can anyone here provide some insight?

shadzar · Post by **shadzar** » Thu Sep 19, 2013 11:09 pm

wasnt that email sent out last week? there is already mutlipage discussion on it at enworld.

insight, Next is trash. D&D is dead. get ready for lawnmower with D&D logo on them so that the "brand" name can sell product.

deaddmwalking · Post by **deaddmwalking** » Thu Sep 19, 2013 11:53 pm

I have two lawn mowers right now. But if I didn't, I'd buy a D&D branded mower.

Death Scythe: Lawn Mower +1/+3 versus Plants and Plant Creatures

unnamednpc · Post by **unnamednpc** » Fri Sep 20, 2013 12:44 am

I don't know, but that seems like a pretty shitty lawnmower...

deaddmwalking · Post by **deaddmwalking** » Fri Sep 20, 2013 12:53 am

unnamednpc wrote:I don't know, but that seems like a pretty shitty lawnmower...

Says Mr. I have a Monty Haul garden supply store.

Previn · Post by **Previn** » Fri Sep 20, 2013 12:58 am

Antariuk wrote:I haven't looked at the playtest materials for quite a while now. Can anyone here provide some insight?

Sure!

New races include dragonborn, drow, frelling kender because that's totaly not a giant cluster waiting to happen, tieflings, and warforged. Bard class is in now.

Lots of fiddly and stupid changes to classes, and lots of non-changes 'Rogue's cant is now Thieves cant again' woooo!

Skills are back and backgrounds are what give you your skills and that's all backgrounds do. Well... they give you a single trait as well, but it's totally magic tea party and they still screed that up; Nobel gets the service of 3 retainers. Minstrel gets... free room and board if they preform every night.

You also get 1 skill from your class from a list of 3-4, plus some feats might give you proficiency with a skill.

Skill numbers totally hop off the RNG again. The 1st level difference between a skilled and unskilled person can seriously be 11 or more. At 20th you're looking at 16+. Monsters have no proficiency/expertise, so that's still all kinds of stupid interactions.

"If you have decided that an ability check is called for, then clearly it’s not a trivial task—you can eliminate DC 5."

Then why do you even have a DC5 check, because it will never be used?!?!

Ideals, Flaws and Bonds were added, and they do jack all mechanically that I can see with a quick look over, they're just MTP hooks for DMs. Seriously:

"Whenever a request or statement in an interaction touches on a character’s ideals, flaws, or bonds, it might have a positive or negative impact on the character’s reaction, making it easier or harder to persuade the character to act."

There is a bunch of bullshit crap after that, but it comes down to: the DM will magic tea party, and maybe have you make a single charisma check to determine how the whole interaction went, if he doesn't just magic tea party that too.

It is a giant pile of failure, but anyone who watched Mearls be an ass in the preview video already saw this.

Crits are max damage +1 weapon dice again, so meh.

They say 'fireball was changed" by which they mean the range was increased from 50' to 100' because apparently they found out that half the time people were fireballing themselves or had to basically be in melee to cast it on groups because that was a retardly short range. Mass Invisibility got changed, but it looks exactly the same functionally to me, so I don't know. Same thing with Seeming.

Multiclassing is in and it is terrible. If you want to multiclass you need two scores of 13+ for hybridy classes like bard or paladin or a score of 15+ for pures like fighter or cleric. If you're a cleric and you want to be a rogue, you need a 15+ dex. I won't even go into why that is stupid with 4e stats. All your caster classes add to determine spellcasting, but if you don't have lots fo fighter levels, you're jipped out of extra attacks.

It sucks just as much as you would expect it to.

Koumei · Post by **Koumei** » Fri Sep 20, 2013 1:16 am

deaddmwalking wrote:I have two lawn mowers right now. But if I didn't, I'd buy a D&D branded mower.

Is that the 4th-Generation lawnmower and the lawnmower that lets you find your path?

Because that basically sounds like the same reason plenty of people aren't interested in 5E. They already have their choice of two D&D games that are in any way current. More if they want their trusty old rollerscythe 3000 (TM) or their scissors that were produced in the 1860s but still deliver the best lawnmowing experience, honest.

Corsair114 · Post by **Corsair114** » Fri Sep 20, 2013 4:09 am

Previn wrote:
Antariuk wrote:I haven't looked at the playtest materials for quite a while now. Can anyone here provide some insight?
Sure!

New races include dragonborn, drow, frelling kender because that's totaly not a giant cluster waiting to happen, tieflings, and warforged. Bard class is in now.

Lots of fiddly and stupid changes to classes, and lots of non-changes 'Rogue's cant is now Thieves cant again' woooo!

Skills are back and backgrounds are what give you your skills and that's all backgrounds do. Well... they give you a single trait as well, but it's totally magic tea party and they still screed that up; Nobel gets the service of 3 retainers. Minstrel gets... free room and board if they preform every night.

You also get 1 skill from your class from a list of 3-4, plus some feats might give you proficiency with a skill.

Skill numbers totally hop off the RNG again. The 1st level difference between a skilled and unskilled person can seriously be 11 or more. At 20th you're looking at 16+. Monsters have no proficiency/expertise, so that's still all kinds of stupid interactions.

"If you have decided that an ability check is called for, then clearly it’s not a trivial task—you can eliminate DC 5."

Then why do you even have a DC5 check, because it will never be used?!?!

Ideals, Flaws and Bonds were added, and they do jack all mechanically that I can see with a quick look over, they're just MTP hooks for DMs. Seriously:

"Whenever a request or statement in an interaction touches on a character’s ideals, flaws, or bonds, it might have a positive or negative impact on the character’s reaction, making it easier or harder to persuade the character to act."

There is a bunch of bullshit crap after that, but it comes down to: the DM will magic tea party, and maybe have you make a single charisma check to determine how the whole interaction went, if he doesn't just magic tea party that too.

It is a giant pile of failure, but anyone who watched Mearls be an ass in the preview video already saw this.

Crits are max damage +1 weapon dice again, so meh.

They say 'fireball was changed" by which they mean the range was increased from 50' to 100' because apparently they found out that half the time people were fireballing themselves or had to basically be in melee to cast it on groups because that was a retardly short range. Mass Invisibility got changed, but it looks exactly the same functionally to me, so I don't know. Same thing with Seeming.

Multiclassing is in and it is terrible. If you want to multiclass you need two scores of 13+ for hybridy classes like bard or paladin or a score of 15+ for pures like fighter or cleric. If you're a cleric and you want to be a rogue, you need a 15+ dex. I won't even go into why that is stupid with 4e stats. All your caster classes add to determine spellcasting, but if you don't have lots fo fighter levels, you're jipped out of extra attacks.

It sucks just as much as you would expect it to.

Kids, make sure you do drugs so you don't grow up to be Mike Mearls and design the above. Do *lots* of drugs.

Voss · Post by **Voss** » Fri Sep 20, 2013 2:18 pm

Spell DCs dropped to 8+ stat modifier base. + your proficiency bonus if you're holding a thing that is deemed a spell focus for that class. So not only do you have small numbers of spells, but they're all less effective to boot.

Also, 'proficiency bonus' handles everything -attacks, skill checks and save DCs. Which is why all classes have identical progression on prof bonus: A wizard is just as accurate with a melee attack as a warrior type because he needs to be more able to mind control because thieves need to be more able to open locks.

The bestiary, at a glance, does not seem to be different as far as DCs go.

Nebuchadnezzar · Post by **Nebuchadnezzar** » Fri Sep 20, 2013 3:10 pm

A silly thing I saw was that it behooves a druid to take 1 level in mage or cleric, just to get them on the multiclass spells/day chart instead of their own.

Voss · Post by **Voss** » Fri Sep 20, 2013 3:52 pm

Nebuchadnezzar wrote:A silly thing I saw was that it behooves a druid to take 1 level in mage or cleric, just to get them on the multiclass spells/day chart instead of their own.

Ah. That potentially stacks oddly. The druid's chart is that way because of the way they split shifter druids and caster druids. A caster druid is effectively on that chart, but with bonus spells. Which means multi-classing is a bit exploitable for a caster druid.

And wow, those multi-classing rules are fucking terrible. They're reasonably bad for casters because even though you have the spell slots, you don't have higher level spells. You also have to have all of your tools to get proficiency bonus on your save DCs, which is fine when they overlap, I guess (druid/wizards have to hold a wooden phallus of some kind), but for future classes, it is going to be a headache. You also have to deal with MAD issues unless the classes happen to use the same stat, or a particular spell is on both lists. The book-keeping here (and for spell preparation) is a bit on the wtf side.

For the other classes (including paladins and rangers because they suck at being spellcasters, and the multiclassing rules for spells can be a net gain for them), multiclassing lets you pile up a signifcant haul of abilities. The only thing that you have to worry about is losing extra attack if you overdo the monk or rogue levels without taking 5 fighter levels to compensate (which isn't necessarily a bad thing, as a lot of the fighter abilities are nice). But you can stack up all the proficiencies, including weapons, armour, skills, tools and saves. You might even be able to pull ahead in the ability bonus game- though this is really dependent on class. Some classes don't get another increase until 9 (most get their first at 4), so you can get some ahead of schedule, but other classes get their second at 7, which means they actually lose ground.

The only thing you do lose is some progression and late level stuff, but that isn't likely to matter. The former might, but it really depends what abilities are actually important. You're going to have a pretty large pile of stuff either way.

Also, the spellcasting feats, which were already really terrible, aren't even a bad joke now. You can set it up to lose effectively nothing, gain better spellcasting skills and a pile of other abilities as well.

Bonus activity: for whatever reason, they made the Temple of Elemental Evil module (well, compilation) free on D&D classics (or rather Drivethru RPG). Everyone feel free to check out the thousands of gp you can loot from the friendly village.

It starts like this:

Key to the Village
1. PROSPEROUS FARM COTTAGE AND LARGE BARN
{flavor text}
stat blocks for 3 level 0 dirt farmers and 2 farm dogs.
and finally:
The farmer has 57 pp hidden in his mattress and a blue spinel (worth 500 gp) secured in his pouch, saved for hard times.

Ah, Gary. Reasons for such a strong love/hate relationship are readily apparent by page 7. And remember, this is 1st edition, so this also becomes 787 xp if you get it home safe.

Previn · Post by **Previn** » Fri Sep 20, 2013 7:12 pm

Man, I missed the saves being proficiency based too. And am I missing something, or is the fighter really no better than a mage at actually stabbing things in terms of numbers?

Voss · Post by **Voss** » Sat Sep 21, 2013 3:03 am

Previn wrote:Man, I missed the saves being proficiency based too. And am I missing something, or is the fighter really no better than a mage at actually stabbing things in terms of numbers?

As far as I can tell, it isn't referenced anywhere else. As in, there isn't a section that tells you what proficiencies really do, just a very vague reference in Ability Checks that it is on of the bonuses you always apply if there is one. You just sort of have to have the awareness and system mastery to catch that it thus applies to attacks, saves, skills, spell DCs (unless you're a paladin or ranger, and then it doesn't) and tool proficiencies, which include thieves tools and mounts. Yeah. There isn't a ride skill, because proficiency: mounts (land) honestly covers it. And tools are viable subjects for expertise as well (though saves, attacks and spell dcs are not); just skills and tools. But it is fucking annoying that these things are inferred, rather than stated outright.

And for attacks you have to grasp the idea that an attack is a special kind of ability check, and the reference to weapon or magic training actually refers to proficiency; otherwise the only reference to proficiency under attacks is being hit with disadvantage if you don't have it. Yeah, you kind of have to assume that you get a hit bonus from level at all.

Presumably, having proficiency in armor types doesn't actually add proficiency bonuses anywhere, but that is honestly an assumption on my part. It seems to be for armor proficiency (and armor proficiency alone), proficiency merely negates the non-proficient penalty.

And you are not missing anything. Everyone has the same level based bonus bonus and it applies to everything: +1 at level 1, an additional +1 at level 3 and every 4 levels thereafter (7, 11,15,19). It makes part of the multiclassing rules really easy, since proficiency bonus is always based on character level, but it also makes it really exploitable (and some combinations are pretty damn terrible).

Sadly, conceptually, I actually like the skill system presented. Some of the tool/skill choices are kind of fucked up, and the tools particularly are overly limiting (no lockpicking without thieves tools, for example). Climbing kits are the epitome of stupid, since they do the exact same thing as the athletics skill, but only for a single task (climbing). Which is to say, the climbing kit allows you to add your proficiency bonus when climbing, or rather, specifically to Strength(climb) checks.

However, the numbers are crazy bad, and the decent concept dies horribly in execution. Here's a rough sketch of things with point buy.

You grab a 16 in your main stat. Because its your fucking main stat, and that is as high as you can buy. You gain +1 from your racial bonuses (no class bonuses anymore as there were earlier), unless you're a half-orc, which means you get a +2 str, +1 con, which also means you can start with a main stat of 18 (str), but I'm going to ignore them, since str affects exactly one skill -athletics. Everything is built up from 8, so 8 is the minimum stat.
So, skill checks are, at the extremes:
-1 (stat) +0 (non-proficient)= -1
-1 (stat) +1 (proficiency) = +0
+3 (stat) +1 (proficiency)= +4
+3 (stat)+1 (proficiency) +5 (expertise, only rogues at level 1) = +8

At level 20, the skill checks are:
-1 (stat) +0 (non-proficient) = -1
-1 (stat) +6 proficiency = +5 (yep, you can keep that 8 forever)
+5 (stat max) +6 proficiency = +11 (didn't dip into rogue or bard for expertise)
+5 (stat max) +6 proficiency +5(expertise) = +16

Another wrinkle is bards inspiring competence, which is adding their proficiency if they sing 'Bluff, bluff, bluff, the stupid ogre' at you. At level 1, this is +1 so you don't actually care. At level 19+, their proficiency bonus could well be greater than your total bonus (though obviously only by 1). But it gives capped characters a decent chance at hitting a DC30, and makes that actually possible, if unlikely, for just plain folks (of level 19+).

No idea if there are spells or magic items that also buff skills, but even if there aren't now, more than likely there will be later.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Sat Sep 21, 2013 6:52 am

So if you want to be stealthy, you have to be "proficient in soft shoes". And then you actually need the soft shoes equipped to get the bonus, and you wouldn't be able to move silently in socks or bare feet.

That is needlessly baroque.

-Username17

Voss · Post by **Voss** » Sat Sep 21, 2013 4:51 pm

FrankTrollman wrote:So if you want to be stealthy, you have to be "proficient in soft shoes". And then you actually need the soft shoes equipped to get the bonus, and you wouldn't be able to move silently in socks or bare feet.

That is needlessly baroque.

-Username17

Well, no. There are skills and tools. In that particular case, stealth is a skill. It is in fact far more confusing and baroque than you imagine.

Some of the lines are sort of vague and making something a tool has odd consequences. For one thing, there isn't a complete list of tools anywhere.

But these are skills:

Athletics

Acrobatics
Sleight of Hand
Stealth

Arcana
History
Nature
Religion
Search

Animal Handling
Insight
Medicine
Perception
Survival

Deception
Intimidation
Performance
Persuasion

and tools include:
artisan's tools (mutiple kinds)
mounts (land)
disguise kit
gaming set
navigators tools
disguise kit
thieves' tools (covers locks and traps)
musical instrument (multiple kinds)
healer's kit
herbalism kit (which lets you make unspecified herbal concotions with proficiency bonus, or just make potions of healing with 25 gp of raw materials)
vehicles (land)

artisan's tools and musical instruments are annoying, because I think you have to have proficiency with each 'kind,' but that is woefully undefined (indeed artisan's tools is actually multiple tools related to a craft, so... yeah).

thieves tools have a very specific annoying effect- improvised picking attempts are pretty much verboten by default. There is simply no recourse for it. Thieves tools also have a specific list of what the set entails, which makes me wonder why, because in theory you should be able to pick up scissors, pliers, a small mirror, some picks and a file anywhere. Though actually, looking at the entry for 'lock' in the equipment list, the requirements for picking the lock are just proficiency with thieves tools, not actually having them. So that is a fun contradiction. Base DC is 15 (which is actually reasonable- a level 1 non rogue can have a 50/50 shot at it, while a rogue can hit 75% with expertise), but can go higher for higher priced locks (not specified, of course).

Several of the tools also just suck- climbing kit, navigator's tools, disguise kit, healers kit; they just let you add your proficiency bonus to a specific function of a skill (climbing, not getting lost, not getting your disguise figured out, stabilizing fools), which are all aspects of athletics, survival deception, medicine respectively. And there is no indication if you add your proficiency bonus again if you are proficient in both. The rules simply decline to say.

On the other hand, there is also equipment like the crowbar, which allows you to add 2 to strength checks where the 'crowbar's leverage would apply.'

Or the Tome. Which is stupid and badly worded, but basically boils down to each tome has a field and a DC. Spend an hour studying the tome, and you can auto-pass a arcana, history, nature or religion check with a DC equal to the tome's (or less). No idea if the 'field' actually matches up to the listed skills in any way, or if you can study Faerie Faith in Celtic Countries and auto pass any arcana, history, nature or religion check that happens to come up about Celtic Fairies or the people who believe in them. But either way, this isn't a tool or a skill, just something a specific mundane item does.

There is also the unfortunately named 'adventurer's kit,' which isn't actually a kit (in the game sense, I am aware of the slang) or a tool, but a collection of standard adventuring gear. But so many of the tools are called kits, it has the potential for hilarious confusion, especially since it includes a 'healer's kit' and a 'mess kit,' side by side, which will really fuck with stupid people.

infected slut princess · Sat Sep 21, 2013 5:01 pm

What a minute. Are you telling me they put fucking DRAGONBORN back in the game?

Voss · Post by **Voss** » Sat Sep 21, 2013 5:08 pm

And I didn't see this before but, a version SR 'lifestyles' got tacked into the end of the Equipment document. Just an upfront monthly cost (starting at nothing for 'Wretched') and a vague description of your circumstances. The costs for the better lifestyles are significant for first level characters (50gp for comfortable, 100 for wealthy and 250+ for aristocratic), but increasingly trivial as any campaign goes on.

Sadly no mechanical stuff attached, though 'wretched' and 'squalid' both mention disease, hunger and people wanting your stuff, and wealthy and aristocratic (which bugs the fuck out me, by the by, because it oversimplifies a lot) include servants.

It also gives example of people who live at each level, and what is effectively their monthly costs (food, drink & accommodations), which is helpful to know. The spectrum is Wretched, Squalid, Poor, Modest, Comfortable, Wealthy, Aristo.

Voss · Post by **Voss** » Sat Sep 21, 2013 5:21 pm

infected slut princess wrote:What a minute. Are you telling me they put fucking DRAGONBORN back in the game?

Yeah. They stuck a few 'Unusual races' in the back of the document, and shifted gnomes, half-elves and half-orcs there. Plus added dragonborn, drow, kender, tieflings, and warforged.

The additions are not as good as the normal races, because they don't have the subrace options and thus, are matches for fewer class/race combos- though this isn't as big a deal as it was, since they dropped the class stat bonuses. With point buy, you can only max to a 16, or 17 with racial, or 18 with halforc's strength. This effectively means no one (but half-orcs) can cap out a stat at 20 until their second stat increase, which helps trivialize the racial bonuses. But they do have fewer options

The dragonborn is pretty much what you'd expect as a translation from 4e: +1 str and charisma, a lineage that gives a damage type and breath weapon dimensions (30' line or 15' cone, cold and poison are con saves rather than reflex saves), a 1/encounter (sorry, 'short rest') breath weapon, and resistance to the breath weapon damage type.

Handy, but not particularly interesting or useful. The breath weapon damage does scale, but really badly. (2d6+1d6/5 levels, so 5d6 at 16th)

The background fluff is pretty quirky- dragons can only breed if they have the 'blessing' of Bahamut or Tiamat. They can lay eggs even if they don't, but those eggs hatch into dragonborn. And in some worlds, those dragonborn have interbred and effectively formed their own species. (one where the parentage isn't obvious). It isn't clear why they (Tiamat especially), wouldn't want their chosen races to breed, but.. whatever.

And interesting side effect of all this is the default race scenario is effectively Tolkien- only humans, elves, dwarves and halflings. Everything else is 'unusual,' though that says nothing about their existence, only their active presence as adventurers (drow and gnomes are noted to be on every almost world, but don't usually mingle or adventure). Naturally, there isn't a real guideline here, but it does give the DM (and group) an excuse to tell you to go fuck yourself if you want to play a kender. (Though not as much as just not including the stupid things).

Sashi · Post by **Sashi** » Sat Sep 21, 2013 6:24 pm

The background fluff is pretty quirky- dragons can only breed if they have the 'blessing' of Bahamut or Tiamat. They can lay eggs even if they don't, but those eggs hatch into dragonborn. And in some worlds, those dragonborn have interbred and effectively formed their own species. (one where the parentage isn't obvious). It isn't clear why they (Tiamat especially), wouldn't want their chosen races to breed, but.. whatever.

There's something interesting there. Dragonborn would pretty much be spawned from eggs of "fallen" dragons. Which would make a red scaled dragonborn the spawn of good red dragons who rebelled against Tiamat.

But I have a feeling that's not at all what's going to happen.