Quote from: Benoist;543547It's basically caving in to the idea that the rules are the game, and that if the rules don't give your MU an at-will at first level, then you "can't do anything" and you're "useless". It's bollocks. Any person who's ever played a MU in AD&D and enjoyed it will tell you it's bollocks. From flasks of oil to hirelings, from actual role playing to the exploration parts of the game, it's total bollocks. And that's this mentality I find harmful to the game as a whole.

Plus one...

Quote"...I like my wizards to feel magical..."

...and I like my fighters to be like Conan, that's why I try to accumulate XP for them.

...or you could just start your PCs out at higher levels.

Quote from: Planet Algol;543568...and I like my fighters to be like Conan, that's why I try to accumulate XP for them.

...or you could just start your PCs out at higher levels.

I might, if that comparison was in any way appropriate, but apples are not oranges.

Quote from: jadrax;543563Ah, but is Mage Hand 100% accurate? (The playtest rules do not say, btw).

I think so, but why would that matter? Oh, people would use magic missile instead of mage hand if mage hand could fail?

I still think if it's explicitly called out that magic missile can't be used to do things punching can't, people would use mage hand.

Quote from: Sigmund;543570I might, if that comparison was in any way appropriate, but apples are not oranges.

Bullshit.

"Generally" in genre fiction, "beginning" wizards are not shooting rainbows and cotton candy at will or using a mage hand to pull down big boobed women's tops.

I know that I'm debating imaginary wizards here, but (aside from horseshit like Harry Potter) in fiction if a magic dude is doing magic stuff at will all the time, that strongly implies that they are a powerful, advanced magic dude.

Quote from: Planet Algol;543575I know that I'm debating imaginary wizards here, but (aside from horseshit like Harry Potter) in fiction if a magic dude is doing magic stuff at will all the time, that strongly implies that they are a powerful, advanced magic dude.

Yeah, but outside gaming you rarely see even novices run out of gas.

More often, novices are alchemists, ritualists, summoners, illusionists, artifact users, or might suffer spell failure.

But none of that is in line with D&D, which is its own thing.

Quote from: Planet Algol;543575Bullshit.

"Generally" in genre fiction, "beginning" wizards are not shooting rainbows and cotton candy at will or using a mage hand to pull down big boobed women's tops.

I know that I'm debating imaginary wizards here, but (aside from horseshit like Harry Potter) in fiction if a magic dude is doing magic stuff at will all the time, that strongly implies that they are a powerful, advanced magic dude.

Sorry to disagree, but force bolts (or whatever), that do small amounts of damage are VERY in genre and quite popular with people that believe Dnd and rpg's in general do evolve past 1977.

There are plenty of examples of this that abound in fiction. Plus it is a generational thing. So to attact the under 30 crowd concessions do have to be made. As Sigmund says at-will magic was one of the few things 4e got right. I'm just glad they are taking a cue from that game and Fantasy Craft/Pathfinder and others to finally put non combat cantrips front and center. I could live without magic missle at-will as a baseline but luckily that will be possible to do. So the bitching is ridiculous to me.

I ran the Caves of Chaos playtest on Sunday for two grognards that usually only play AD&D. They each played two PCs. Their first instinct was to hide outside a cave entrance and ambush whatever came out...

For purposes of the playtest, however, they did agree to start exploring the caves. The game flowed pretty smoothly and we got in four combat encounters in about two and a half hours. I ended up dropping the fighter and the wizard in a nasty fight with a gnoll leader (due to a serious of lucky rolls on my part) and the fighter died before he could be stabilized, partly because they had already burned through their healing resources. I don't think they would have been so aggressive with 'real' characters.

It was generally a fun time. However, nothing in the system really stood out to me as innovative or exciting. It came across as sort of 3.0 D&D Lite. Hopefully, future playtests will add more chrome and polish to the rules. Right now the system seems very generic.

Quote from: Planet Algol;543575Bullshit.

"Generally" in genre fiction, "beginning" wizards are not shooting rainbows and cotton candy at will or using a mage hand to pull down big boobed women's tops.

I know that I'm debating imaginary wizards here, but (aside from horseshit like Harry Potter) in fiction if a magic dude is doing magic stuff at will all the time, that strongly implies that they are a powerful, advanced magic dude.

I can say "Bullshit" too. We're not talking about genre fiction. However, equating mage hand and other minor cantrips with making the wizard the equivalent of Conan is the only "bullshit" I'm seeing at the moment. I get it, you don't agree. throwing out such a retarded comparison is not making your point very well, however. For me, doing minor magic like the students in Wizard of Earthsea, or yeah, "horseshit" like Harry Potter would be fun. What specific books or wizards are you referring to? Also, do you denigrate and verbally abuse everything you find not to your taste all the time, or only when you don't really have any other argument?

From today's live chat:

'Mearls: I think that for at-will abilities, we might have made them a little overpowered a bit in terms of math and feel. For instance, does it feel OK that magic missile does auto damage every round? The speed thing on ray of frost is tricky, because it can vary from being very powerful to being useless.'

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd%2F4news%2Fdndnextchat2

Quote from: Benoist;543547It's basically caving in to the idea that the rules are the game, and that if the rules don't give your MU an at-will at first level, then you "can't do anything" and you're "useless". It's bollocks. Any person who's ever played a MU in AD&D and enjoyed it will tell you it's bollocks. From flasks of oil to hirelings, from actual role playing to the exploration parts of the game, it's total bollocks.

It's not "can't do anything." It's "may as well be a commoner."

Quote from: jadrax;543583From today's live chat:

'Mearls: I think that for at-will abilities, we might have made them a little overpowered a bit in terms of math and feel. For instance, does it feel OK that magic missile does auto damage every round? The speed thing on ray of frost is tricky, because it can vary from being very powerful to being useless.'

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd%2F4news%2Fdndnextchat2

See? They are listening so I really believe a good balance will be achieved in the end that will satisfy myself and Ben.

Could you possibly post the whole thing when its done? My firewall is giving me issues.

[Yes, but the formatting sucks]


11:42
   
   
Trevor:
Welcome to this week's D&D Next Playtest Q&A. Mike and Jeremy will be joining us shortly. This is a moderated chat, which means we will see your questions and comments, but the room won't see them until we push them live so Mike and Jeremy can give you an answer.
11:43
   
   
Mearls:
Hello everyone.
11:44
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
Hi, everyone!
11:45
   
   
Trevor:
And the stars have arrived! Let's get a brief introduction from the two of you and then jump into some questions!
11:45
   
   
Mearls:
Hey everyone. My name is Mike Mearls and I am the senior manager for the D&D team.
11:46
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
I'm Jeremy Crawford, head of development and editing for D&D.
11:46
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
Bring on the questions!

Trevor:
Starting up the questions now!
11:47
   
   
Comment From Mike Looney
I've noticed that to hit doesn't seem to go up with levels or with monster's hit points. Is this in fact correct or is it an artifact of the play test material being for 1-3rd level only?
11:47
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
Mike is typing . . .
11:48
   
   
Mearls:
You don't see those number rise at levels 1 to 3, but we are overall toning down numerical advancement. The classes generally get more stuff to do, rather than bigger numbers. With a flatter curve, we can make monsters and characters scale much better. For instance, a 10th-level party can still take on orcs as a viable threat, they'll just fight a ton of them.
11:48
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
Yeah, we want to see less number inflation throughout the system.
11:49
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
Except for the number of monsters, that is.
11:50
   
   
Comment From Brian
Can you explain where the extra +2 damage for the fighter comes from (beyond Weapon Focus)? Will we get an explanation of the racial benefits to damage and hit dice soon so we can understand what to do as characters change equipment?
11:50
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
The fighter's bonus comes from the class's advancement table. It's a class feature.
11:51
   
   
Comment From mepstein73
Hello! Just wondering why the wizard's cantrips are so strong. Ray of Frost can end combat pretty quickly, and Magic Missile is very powerful if it's unlimited/day.
11:51
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
As for the racial benefits, there will more explanation when we release the information on building your own character.
11:53
   
   
Mearls:
I think that for at-will abilities, we might have made them a little overpowered a bit in terms of math and feel. For instance, does it feel OK that magic missile does auto damage every round? The speed thing on ray of frost is tricky, because it can vary from being very powerful to being useless.
11:53
   
   
Mearls:
I think getting the minor spells right will take a few iterations. NQ.
11:53
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
When we playtest things, we prefer to start powerful and tone things down, rather than starting weak and beefing things up, hence the spells' potency.
11:53
   
   
Comment From lucinian
Thanks for taking the time to do these chats. They're very informative, and help let us know you really care what we think. My question: There seems to be, overall, very little from 4E that's made it into the core rules for D&D Next. What can 4E fans expect going forward?
11:54
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
Things we love about 4th Edition continue to work their way into the design. The at-will spells are a great example of such a thing.
11:55
   
   
Mearls:
There are quite a few core 4e changes that are in the game - at will magic, the hit die mechanic, the clarity of the combat rules. These are all trend lines that started with 4e and have moved forward. In terms of powers, we're working on a combat maneuver system right now and will show that off as part the ongoing playtest.
11:55
   
   
Mearls:
Also, I did some work over the weekend on the tactical rules options. In many ways, the depth of 4e's approach to combat and options will sit atop the system you've seen so far as rules modules.
11:55
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
Our current work on monsters is also being informed by some of the advances that 4E brought to the presentation of monsters' abilities.
11:56
   
   
Mearls:
That's right - monsters haven't seen much work yet, so you'll see a 4e influence there, too. NQ
11:56
   
   
Comment From Guest
One of my questions is this... in the weapons descriptions the sling is listed as a 1d6 weapon. However, with the rogue character it is a 1d8. Why is that?
11:57
   
   
Mearls:
Races that have a cultural affinity for weapons get a die bump in damage. So, halflings are good with slings and therefore use a bigger damage die. NQ.
11:57
   
   
Comment From NumberOneTheLarch
Hello and thank you for answering our questions. I wanted to ask about skills themselves. In the playtest, your skill bonuses are derived from your Background. In your plans for DnD Next, is this the only source for skill bonuses, or will there be an option or implementation to select individual skill bonuses through other means? Thank you again!
11:57
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
Also, one of our developers is currently doing a review of every weapon. Expect some of the dice to change.
11:58
   
   
Mearls:
You can gain more skills through your class and through your theme.
11:58
   
   
Mearls:
The samples we showed off don't happen to offer that. But as an example - the rogue class receives a few bonus skill, and you can expect the same for the ranger. NQ.
11:58
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
We will also provide an option for you to build your own background, which effectively means you can choose skills a la carte.
11:59
   
   
Comment From Rheim
I have a question about Armor balance. From the playtesting guide, it seems that there isn't a good balance between Light/Medium and Heavy Armors. Are there revised rules coming out on this? Right now there seems little advantage to wearing say, Heavy Armor versus Medium Armor.
12:00
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
Armor--that's going through the same review with weapons, so I expect changes there too.
12:00
   
   
Mearls:
Yes, armor will go back to the drawing board. We included it in the document as a reference, but it hasn't received a lot of attention. I'd like to see if we even need medium armor in the game. Starting gear might also change - you might start lower on the totem pole and buy your way up to better armor over the first few levels. NQ.
12:00
   
   
Comment From Roll 3d6
I like where this edition is going. Thank you! Had a question regarding the Guardian Talent for the Cleric. We saw that there is currently no limit for how often the Cleric can shield someone. Should this be 1x/round?
12:01
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
That ability requires the cleric to use it as a reaction, and a character can take a reaction only once per round.
12:02
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
Next question!
12:02
   
   
Comment From The rogue
Why did you decide to remove the different types of actions? (Standard/Move/Minor/Free)
12:03
   
   
Mearls:
Two reasons. First, we wanted to speed up play. We found that some players felt that they had to use each of those actions, and would slow the game down trying to find things to do. Second, we decided to start with simple rules and see what people felt they needed added to the core, as opposed to a rules module, through the test. Sometimes, having the action buckets led to design that existed only to fill those buckets, rather than design that made the game more fun or more interesting.
12:04
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
We have played with several versions of the action system. The one you're using now is the simplest. We want to see how far we can go with it.
12:04
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
Next question!
12:04
   
   
Comment From Guest
About hiding. When I try to hide it is an action. If no-one see me (no LoS) I guess it's no roll and no action, right?
12:05
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
The thing to keep in mind is that hiding involves being both out of sight and silent.
12:05
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
If you're out of sight, you aren't necessarily hidden. You could be making a bunch of noise.
12:06
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
Hiding is something you do consciously and carefully, hence it requiring an action.
12:06
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
Next question!
12:07
   
   
Comment From Pentadrone
How will low wisdom rogues be able to scout effectively? Feats? Will you be adding skills back into the mix so characters can overcome stat deficiencies?
12:08
   
   
Mearls:
Obviously, the pregen isn't the best scout. We had talked about giving the rogue class an extra bonus to finding traps, so that's something we'll look at. The key with the rogue will be in making sure that the class does the things people expect. The error might simply be in treating Wis as the dump stat for the pregen. We've also thought about letting rogues use a different stat to find traps, such as Intelligence. NQ.
12:10
   
   
Comment From Darklight
Q: When are we going to be given the chance to provide some actual feedback, and when do you estimate the next phase of the playtest will take place?
12:12
   
   
Mearls:
I believe that the first survey launches later this week, plus we're watching forums and blogs for reactions. Posting a playtest recap in a forum or blog is great, because we get to read it and it helps get people talking about issues.

The next phase will depend on what the feedback looks like. I'd like to start pushing out some more fighter options and perhaps show off the tactical rules module.

As far as an actual schedule, we're aiming at a big update about every 5 to 6 weeks. NQ.
12:12
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
Mike is typing away.
12:12
   
   
Comment From Scipio202
Right now there are no rules that give a downside for moving in combat. Opportunity attacks can get complicated quickly, but are you considering a simple version for the core rules? (e.g. the mover is only subject to OAs from enemies that made a melee attack at them within the last round)
12:14
   
   
Mearls:
A rule for breaking away from melee is something we've seen come up a bit. It's a tricky thing to navigate. It might come in as a rules module. The hard part has been finding a rule that works that also doesn't feel too restrictive. For instance, for a while the rule was that your movement stopped if you entered a hostile creature's reach. However, that feels a little artificial.
12:15
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
We have experimented with a number of opportunity attack alternatives. Ultimately, we don't want everyone in the core system to make such attacks, but we expect certain characters and monsters to be able to do so as a special ability.
12:15
   
   
Mearls:
Another one we talked about - leaving a creature's reach is an action. If you don't use that action, it gets a free hack at you. So, you can't attack and move away without a return attack. This is an area where after playing without such a mechanic, I'd like to put it out there as an option and see if people want it as an option or in the core. NQ.
12:15
   
   
Comment From Jon
Can you talk about the motivation behind the advantage/disadvantage?
12:17
   
   
Mearls:
This was a contentious issue on the design team. Basically, we wanted to do two things -

1. Make modifiers much more important, rather than relying on lots of little ones that don't have a big effect but require a lot of bookkeeping.

2. Introduce a benefit or disadvantage that you can apply after you rolled and forgot about it. I like that if you forget advantage or disad, you can just throw another die and resolve it. I've found in my games that sometimes people roll, announce a result, pick up their dice, and forget what they had when someone points out a missing mod 5 seconds later.

NQ
12:18
   
   
Comment From The rogue
Can distance be measured in squares instead of feet? As a european/non-american it's hard to convert from feet all the time>. In squares it's rather universal.
12:18
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
Sure! The rule of thumb is that 5 feet equal a square.
12:19
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
When we break out miniatures and a grid, we find ourselves saying "squares" instead of "feet." It's been easy, thankfully, to switch back and forth.
12:20
   
   
Mearls:
We tried to keep things at a 5 feet minimum because we felt that both with and without minis, that's the easiest distance to imagine in your head.
Personally, I actually like meters because if you draw a map with one meter per square, the dimensions of rooms are more realistic. Alas, we're based in the US and people like their non-metric measures here.
It might be something we'll look at for translations and such in the future. NQ.
12:20
   
   
Comment From Lyrant
As my group and I were going over our character sheets for the playtest we noticed a few numbers that were higher than anything on the page said they had a right to be. For instance, the Cleric of Moradin had a +2 to AC that couldn't be found anywhere, and some other characters had similar bits with their damage, whassup with that?
12:21
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
The bonuses are coming from a variety of sources, especially class and race.
12:21
   
   
Mearls:
I think I know where that comes from. Dwarves get +1 AC in medium and heavy armor. Also, I think that the armor chart in the test is 1 point off from the armor as given to the characters. When in doubt, use the character sheet number. That's what we based the monsters off of.
12:22
   
   
Mearls:
This stuff will all make sense when we move to letting people make characters for the test. NQ.
12:22
   
   
Comment From Guest
What makes a good theme or background? What do you look for?
12:23
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
A good background says something evocative about a character's place in the world, especially the character's place before the campaign started.
12:24
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
The background should have skills, a trait, and starting equipment that all say something flavorful about a character.
12:25
   
   
Mearls:
A good theme should be evocative and really speak to how your class operates. The themes we have right now are mostly mechanical in nature, but as we flesh them out you'll see more evocative ones.

For instance, I like the idea of a necromancer theme that alters all of your spells in some minor way. For instance, when you damage a creature with a spell you get some small healing. Or, if you kill a creature with a spell it pops back up as a skeleton or zombie.

If a class says what you can do, a theme says how you can do it. So, the paladin, fighter, or ranger who is a two-weapon duelist looks much different than the character who took the guardian theme and is an expert with his or her shield.

What it boils down to is that the theme does something interesting or fun that rests outside character class. Think of it as the sum expression of your feats. NQ.
12:25
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
In many ways, backgrounds can be a guide to roleplaying. The commoner fighter and the noble fighter, for instance, are likely to have very different motivations.
12:25
   
   
Comment From August
In the 'How to Play' section (page 7), it notes that if you attack a creature from whom you are hidden, you gain advantage. That makes sense. But doesn't it make the Thief's 'Ambusher' power completely irrelevant?
12:26
   
   
Mearls:
Since the core math advancements rests only in class, we can afford for themes to be much more flavorful and specialized.
12:27
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
One more thing about backgrounds and themes: A background, ultimately, describes who you were before you started adventuring, whereas a theme flavors how you adventure.
12:27
   
   
Mearls:
There's a subtle point to Ambusher that make make it fairly lame in practice.

When you're hidden, you are no longer hidden the moment that you are no longer obscured from view. So, if you hide and then step out into bright light to stab an orc, the orc sees you as you attack and you lose advantage.

Ambusher negates that - you keep advantage until your turn ends, so you can step out into the light and then attack with it. I think the rule might be a little too fiddly, though. NQ.
12:28
   
   
Mearls:
Just testing my connection. I think I lost something I tried to post.
12:28
   
   
Comment From SlyFlourish
Is the plan to give each PC something exciting each level and how do you plan to put that burden across race, class, theme, and background?
12:29
   
   
Mearls:
Here it is again - there's a good chance that Ambusher will be revised or replaced based on feedback.
12:30
   
   
Mearls:
We're definitely aiming for something at each level, and you can expect that to be spread across class and theme. Race does not automatically give you something, but we've talked about race-based themes (dwarven defender) that speak to your race abilities.

So, you could imagine that at each level you get either a class thing, a theme thing, or an improvement to an existing ability. I do believe that your skill bonuses increase at a couple, specific levels, so backgrounds do improve. NQ.
12:32
   
   
Comment From Guest
Will characters only have one theme or background over their character life or will they be able to add more later? What about changing them out as the character changes over the story?
12:33
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
We expect certain characters to have more than one theme, and we are exploring the concept of advanced themes at higher levels.
12:33
   
   
Mearls:
Background is a level 1 choice that represents what you did before becoming an adventurer, so it doesn't change. However, you can gain access to more skills and traits at higher levels through class and theme.

For themes, you can pick one and advance in it, mix a couple, or build your own by selecting feats a la carte. I also hope that DMs see them as a tool to create custom themes for their campaigns.
12:34
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
We have even talked about fighters getting two themes at 1st level.
12:34
   
   
Mearls:
As far as changing stuff, that is an option we'll include. The first step will likely be, "Talk to your DM", but it makes sense to give people the option to do-over choices. NQ.
12:34
   
   
Comment From ExtendedRest
Is there a plan to deal with long term wounds? Right now having all health and everything reset after a long rest seems a little too easy. Especially with as little healing options as a Next party have access to on their own right now.
12:36
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
We're not likely to make long-term wounds a part of the core, but we have discussed providing a wound option for DMs to incorporate into their campaigns.
12:36
   
   
Mearls:
We erred on the side of letting long rests heal everything, primarily because we were fairly split on how to treat it. Personally, I'd like to see a rule where you get back a certain amount of hit dice each extended rest. It might be based on Con and/or class. I have to admit that the current rule picks at my sense of realism.
12:37
   
   
Mearls:
To follow-up what Jeremy said, I've toyed with a wound system where you get some effect each time you drop below 0 hp, to represent a bad injury, For instance, broken bones, strained joints, concussions, etc. NQ.
12:37
   
   
Mearls:
But that would be a rules module.
12:37
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
This is another example (the long rest) of us leading with the powerful version of something with the expectation that we might end up dialing it back, based on playtest feedback.
12:37
   
   
Comment From Duskreign
How exactly does the cone from Burning Hands look? We had a few issues with how it is supposed to look on the grid.
12:38
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
We will eventually show you how we expect things like cones to look on the grid.
12:39
   
   
Mearls:
Yeah, we'll figure out if its a template or if we draw it to fit the grid. NQ.
12:39
   
   
Comment From Jon McCarty
Given the feedback about Save or Die mechanics, I sort of expected we might see something a little different in the bestiary. From what I've seen, it appears that only the Medusa really has such a mechanic, and it appears to be the old sort without anything like an HP threshold. Do we have anything more forgiving coming up? Are Stirges supposed to be a less direct save or die monster?
12:39
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
As we've mentioned before, the rules do not assume the use of miniatures, but we will provide support for the use of miniatures. Almost everyone in the office likes to use minis at some point during an adventure.
12:41
   
   
Mearls:
Monsters are still a work in progress. With the medusa, we tried a mechanic where a character can choose to take a risk or avert his eyes and suffer a drawback. The stirge also shows something of a 4e approach, with a condition that gets worse and can scale up. It does have an issue with stacking, though, so the final form might be a save or check each round, rather than a situation where three stirges pounce on and kill a character. NQ.
12:42
   
   
Comment From Stephen
What was the thought process behind brining electrum back into D&D?
12:43
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
Bringing electrum pieces back is a nod to the game's history. The coins also have a nice story now; they're remnants of lost kingdoms and fallen empires.
12:44
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
In other words, we don't expect electrum pieces to be part of a kingdom's normal economy. They're exotic.
12:44
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
Next question!
12:45
   
   
Comment From Guest
Are critical hits always only maximum damage, i.e. is there every anything additional? Criticals seem noticeably weaker and more boring than in past editions.
12:45
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
We've playtested more critical hit systems than I can count.
12:45
   
   
Mearls:
This is another area where we kept it simple and will see what kind of feedback we get. NQ.
12:46
   
   
Trevor:
Alright, one last question then we'll let these guys get back to work.
12:46
   
   
Comment From Felix T. Katt
What has the quality of the playtest feedback been so far? Are there things you would like the community to sound off more or less about?
12:48
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
Mike is typing a novel.
12:48
   
   
Mearls:
The feedback so far has been good. The big thing is to write about the conditions of the game - did you play it like a regular session, was it just a test of the combat rules, and so on. It also helps to get a sense of what you want and where the game failed to deliver it.

Really, everything is useful. It can range from doing some math and finding something that looks to good to coming across an unclear rule in play. For instance, the questions about the Ambusher ability show us that it isn't clear and might be too fiddly.

The feel is very important, too. Does this feel like D&D? Are you missing rules? Did rules get in the way?

The big thing is to avoid snark and an overly antagonistic attitude. We're human, and it's easy to tune out someone who comes across as a crank.
12:49
   
   
Mearls:
So, basically play the game, read over the rules, ask questions, and post your thoughts. This is a big undertaking - the biggest tabletop gaming play test ever - and we're committed to making it work.
12:50
   
   
Mearls:
Thanks for the questions, everyone! It's great to see what issues are coming up and how the game is playing.
12:50
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
We also like it when people make a distinction in their feedback between their reading of a rule and their play of it. The two experiences are often quite different from each other.
12:50
   
   
Jeremy Crawford:
Yeah, thanks, everyone! We hope you're enjoying digging into the game. We look forward to your feedback now and in the months ahead.
12:51
   
   
Trevor:
That wraps our this Q&A. Thanks much to everyone for being a part of this and the D&D Next playtest! We'll keep you updated on the upcoming chats and other communications!

Quote from: Fifth Element;543584It's not "can't do anything." It's "may as well be a commoner."

But that's precisely it: it does feel like you are the apprentice alchemist, with your flasks of oil and mirrors and chalk and the like. You have a promise of greater rewards and discovery, greater power, IF you can make it long enough to learn and discover more about the power you really hold (i.e. gain a few levels). That's an exciting challenge that appeals to the players not only interested in resource management at the level of the game's system (with spell slots and so on), but also at the level of the game itself (where managing your resources like equipment and hirelings, managing the way you then choose to use that equipment, rewards your tenacity).

I do get that some people don't want that and want more of a Harry Potter feel right out the gate, but that doesn't have to be the case for everyone playing D&D. We can both get what we want, and making those at-wills an unalterable baseline of the game ain't it. Thankfully, it looks like the likes of me are being heard, and I'm grateful to WotC for considering various approaches in which we all could finally get what we want, however we want, at our own game tables.

QuoteAlso, do you denigrate and verbally abuse everything you find not to your taste all the time, or only when you don't really have any other argument?

Meh, I'm just of the opinion that Harry Potter is garbage. People say that they think things are crap all the time.

If someone say to me that they think that Dungeons & Dragons or Judas Priest or Jack Vance is a bunch of horseshit, well than I know that we're not going to be playing D&D/listening to Judas Priest/lending each other Jack Vance books, and I get on with my day.