Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on July 10, 2021, 09:42:08 AM
The idea that 5e wasn't also a last minute rush job makes me laugh.

Yeah but 5e is widely praised because everyone in the industry wanted it to suceed.

If anyone but WotC had released it and it had been anything but D&D it would have been raked over the coals.

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on July 10, 2021, 09:42:08 AM
The idea that 5e wasn't also a last minute rush job makes me laugh.

5e wasnt.

I was a playtester for it. And got some things changed for the better despite WOTCs best efforts to fuck it up. And it still came out with a plethora of problems we wold them WERE problems and needed fixing.

But rushed? No. They took a fair amount of time refining it and be glad of that as if they'd rushed out with what they originally planned it would have 95% likely crashed and burned.

In fact theres a fair amount of hang time between playtesting stuff and release to a book so far. The stuff they don't playtest on the other hand? Who knows. Most of that is just the usual spending alot of pages to say very little and having little to no new mechanics.

I am surprised they so far are maintaining the sedate pace they have done for 5e.

5e doesn't really playtest.  They solicit opinions.  There may be a long wait time between UA releases and publication, but there's only a short time between UA release and feedback survey.  There's no way for class options to receive a thorough playtest in that time. 

What they are doing is really more market testing.  They probably also keep an eye on forums and the like to see if optimisers have noticed combos or interactions that they have not, which is not worthless, but I suspect the real playtesting, such as it is, happens in house.

What WotC try do to, as they did with 4e, is to design systems that are siloed enough that they don't really need playtesting, because the amount of things they could conceivably interact with is so limited.

Quote from: Omega on July 10, 2021, 07:17:10 PM
5e wasnt.

I was a playtester as well. They wanted to do a whole lot more with the system as written in articles now purged from their website.

5e is a rushjob in the same vein of 4e, it just is so forgiving, unfocused and lacking content (its not rules-lite) that people see what they want in it.

If they were rushing this stuff we'd see far more problems than we have.

Now the initial print run of 5e on the other hand very much was rushed on multiple levels. To the point it was not till about 11 or 12 print runs before they hammered out most of those. And STILL left in the stuff that causes problems like long and short rests and even re-inforced those problems.

Quote from: Omega on July 10, 2021, 09:05:42 PM
If they were rushing this stuff we'd see far more problems than we have.

Now the initial print run of 5e on the other hand very much was rushed on multiple levels. To the point it was not till about 11 or 12 print runs before they hammered out most of those. And STILL left in the stuff that causes problems like long and short rests and even re-inforced those problems.

Have a look at the current thread on ENworld about the Twilight Cleric.

But by and large there's very little that can go wrong.  That's why balance is not being broken.  Not because of rigorous playtesting.  Most of the new content they produce is races and subclasses.  Races are built to a formula and pretty much left to GM whim on being included anyway.  Subclasses are...almost nothing really.  Their mechanical impact on the game is generally pretty small - so in most cases there's not a lot of room for them to be overpowered.

If subclasses were something that could be taken independently of class like 3e Prestige Classes or 4e Paragon Paths, then the balance issues would be much greater, but they've designed themselves out of the need of playtesting to address that.

Quote from: Omega on July 10, 2021, 09:05:42 PM
If they were rushing this stuff we'd see far more problems than we have.

The core maths system is so utterly nothing there isn't much to break.
It fixed gangrenous fingers by means of amputating the entire arm.
And as pointed out, its by and large still poorly balanced. Character variance has just been severely lessened, so there is less stuff to fuck up.

But its not rules lite. Rules lite systems can make minimal changes be impactful, and have good improv suggestions or guidelines which 5e lacks.

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on July 10, 2021, 09:41:40 PM

Quote from: Omega on July 10, 2021, 09:05:42 PM
If they were rushing this stuff we'd see far more problems than we have.

The core maths system is so utterly nothing there isn't much to break.
It fixed gangrenous fingers by means of amputating the entire arm.
And as pointed out, its by and large still poorly balanced. Character variance has just been severely lessened, so there is less stuff to fuck up.

But its not rules lite. Rules lite systems can make minimal changes be impactful, and have good improv suggestions or guidelines which 5e lacks.

It's definitely not rules lite.  The idea that it even could be is based simply on the fact that it's D&D and people are expected to know it. 

No game where you have to stop and have a discussion on why you can only cast a cantrip because you used a bonus action spell, or why you can't take an opportunity attack because you already used a reaction to do something completely different, or why you can't misty step and dual wield in the same turn would ever be held up as rule lite if it were held to the same standard as every game out there that is not D&D.

It's a simpler tactical board game than 4e was, but it's not less of a tactical boardgame.

As I said once somewhere else, 5E has enough of the trash produced in 4E left over in it to make me dislike it instinctively.

Filing off the serial numbers on 4E mechanics, and changing the presentation somewhat, does not erase their stink.

The only thing to "get" about 4E is rid of it.

Quote from: BronzeDragon on July 11, 2021, 09:25:40 AM

The only thing to "get" about 4E is rid of it.

Now show us on the doll where 4e hurt you....

Quote from: Batman on July 12, 2021, 02:24:22 PM

Quote from: BronzeDragon on July 11, 2021, 09:25:40 AM

The only thing to "get" about 4E is rid of it.

Now show us on the doll where 4e hurt you....

I know, right? Its not enough to say you don't like 4E, it must be memory-holed and erased with no one allowed to even play it in the privacy of their own home as if it never existed for some people to actually be happy.

There's a reason I say just because someone is anti-Woke it doesn't necessarily make them someone you want to be allies with; sometimes it feels like the only reason some are opposed to the SJWs is that THEY want to be the ones wielding the power of who is or isn't cancelled.

Quote from: TJS on July 10, 2021, 07:31:13 PM
5e doesn't really playtest.  They solicit opinions.  There may be a long wait time between UA releases and publication, but there's only a short time between UA release and feedback survey.  There's no way for class options to receive a thorough playtest in that time. 

What they are doing is really more market testing.  They probably also keep an eye on forums and the like to see if optimisers have noticed combos or interactions that they have not, which is not worthless, but I suspect the real playtesting, such as it is, happens in house.

What WotC try do to, as they did with 4e, is to design systems that are siloed enough that they don't really need playtesting, because the amount of things they could conceivably interact with is so limited.

They do playtest, but as you said, it's in-house. Why leave balancing to reddit? The UA releases are for marketing.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic on July 12, 2021, 03:11:22 PMThey do playtest, but as you said, it's in-house. Why leave balancing to reddit? The UA releases are for marketing.

Well then their playtesting and balancing sucks eggs in-house. The argument was that 5e was not rushed, using UA as evidence of that.

Quote from: Chris24601 on July 12, 2021, 02:40:52 PM
I know, right? Its not enough to say you don't like 4E, it must be memory-holed and erased with no one allowed to even play it in the privacy of their own home as if it never existed for some people to actually be happy.

That was why I wanted to make this thread. Me saying that 4e wasn't for me, but I felt I learned some of its merits. That there are worthwhile things to take from 4e from a educational standpoint at the very least.

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on July 12, 2021, 03:47:22 PM

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic on July 12, 2021, 03:11:22 PMThey do playtest, but as you said, it's in-house. Why leave balancing to reddit? The UA releases are for marketing.

Well then their playtesting and balancing sucks eggs in-house. The argument was that 5e was not rushed, using UA as evidence of that.

Quote from: Chris24601 on July 12, 2021, 02:40:52 PM
I know, right? Its not enough to say you don't like 4E, it must be memory-holed and erased with no one allowed to even play it in the privacy of their own home as if it never existed for some people to actually be happy.

That was why I wanted to make this thread. Me saying that 4e wasn't for me, but I felt I learned some of its merits. That there are worthwhile things to take from 4e from a educational standpoint at the very least.

Absolutely.  Here's a quote from myself over on ENWorld a long time ago

Quote
I voted "other" because none of the things I like about 4E were mentioned. I liked the cosmology, especially the fey and shadow planes, or whatever they were called. I liked the "bloodied" status. I liked the alignments. I liked minions and solos. There were some things I thought were good ideas but poorly implemented, like skill challenges and warlords. And most of the rest I really hated, but that's a topic for another thread.

People used to get so worked up about these discussions though, that it was easier to take an emotional, extreme position rather than a rational, nuanced one.

Greetings!

Indeed, cast 4E into the bonfires! 4E deserves to burn for being a terrible abomination!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK