Is this all there is?

Seriously?
How do we test this game with almost no rules.
We can't create our own characters.
We don't know how feats work.
Can't even look at possiblities for characters.

What we have here is a very very base set of rules.
Pretty much a slightly simplified version of 3.5

Is this really all Wizards of the Coast has done?
Damn, I've already made more progress than this on my own pen and paper RPG.
I gave up working on it hoping D&D Next would be good.

But who would bother with this?
Nothing even to see here or playtest with.

Wizards you disapoint me.
This is the very first playtest...They've stated that they wanted to make sure a few of the core mechanics worked before they started having the public test the more intricate details. We don't know how feats yet because it's entirely possible that Wizards doesn't even know yet. This is very early on in a game that is STILL BEING DEVELOPED - And they asked you to sign up for the playtest to help test the mechanics of the game, not to make completely unfounded complaints. Of course it's a very very base set of rules, because that's what they want us to test right now.
This is the very first playtest...They've stated that they wanted to make sure a few of the core mechanics worked before they started having the public test the more intricate details. We don't know how feats yet because it's entirely possible that Wizards doesn't even know yet. This is very early on in a game that is STILL BEING DEVELOPED - And they asked you to sign up for the playtest to help test the mechanics of the game, not to make completely unfounded complaints. Of course it's a very very base set of rules, because that's what they want us to test right now.



As any expereince table top player can tell you it is very hard to understand or test even the base core mechanics without a full overview of the current system.  Creating a character is the easiest way to understand the mechanics and the functionality of the game.

Giving a few premade characters with no customizations is not a test.

Giving us this limited data means virtually nothing.

We can see they've switched some core mechanics to a 3.5esc situation.
Beyond that we cannot see any real changes.

And this 'playtest' is virtually worthless.
..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />As any expereince table top player can tell you it is very hard to understand or test even the base core mechanics without a full overview of the current system.  Creating a character is the easiest way to understand the mechanics and the functionality of the game.



Yeah I definitely would have liked to see everything. Even if it was just everything for levels 1-3.

The playtest isn't a bad introduction to the system, but overall it's not a very good test. A lot of things change if 3E style multiclassing is in the game for instance.

guys this is really simple.

This first run is the very core rules of the game.  Roll to hit, make some  checks, run around and whack monsters and see if they die and you don’t.

You are given some very basic characters and a setting to run them through with monsters.

Worry less about how much detail your character has and more on if your saves are working ok and if the very basics of battle and adventuring work under these rules. 


 


Thinks to be looking at.


 


Is combat fun with other people?


Does it feel fast and fluid?


Are the rules easy to understand and fallowing during gameplay?


What points of the core rules did you like and why?


What points of the core rules did you not like and why? 


And this 'playtest' is virtually worthless.



Then don't participate. Seriously, have you not been following any of the information from Wizards about what they were releasing in the initial playtest and why?

If you had, then you would know that this first offering is to test the core of the game, the exploartion and combat. Character generation, which takes up say 20-30 mins of an entire adventure, will be released a little later, possibly in about 2 months according to an interview with Mike Mearls on Enworld.

If, as you say, you cannot get a feel for a game without generating characters, I take it you have never played at a convention in a game with pregenerated characters. I have, and its the best way to get the feel for a game s you get to see how he mechanics of the game work, session after session. 

You say your sick of Wizards fanboys, I'm sick of fools who won't try things before mouthing off.
I'm guessing we don't read the announcments located on this website? I think Wizards did a good job explaining what to expect in the playtest and why it will be limited materials at this point in time.


The playtest materials will initially consist of the basic core rules and a limited selection of classes and races. We’ll roll out the fighter, cleric, wizard, and rogue, along with the human, elf, dwarf, and halfling. In the earliest stages of the test, we’ll provide you with pregenerated characters.


We are intentionally starting small so that we can collect feedback on specific portions of the game. To start with, we want the core rules to receive a thorough inspection. Obviously, if the basic rules of playing and DMing the game aren’t working, we need to know that sooner rather than later.


As we collect feedback on the core rules, we’ll also release more material for players. We’ll start from a set of pregenerated characters, and then we plan on leveling up those characters to walk everyone through the first ten levels of the game. Once that is done, we’ll then loop back and release material for building your own characters.


In general, the playtest will start with the broad and then zero in on the specific. We want to make sure that the game feels right in terms of classes and races, ease of play at the table, the level of danger present in the game, and the flexibility of basic task resolution. Once we’ve established those baselines, we can start to look at player options, from classes to specific abilities, in more detail.


Depending on the nature of feedback, we hope to maintain a relatively brisk pace of pushing new content out into the wild.


Why are we going along this path rather than releasing the entire game at once? First of all, the game isn’t close to done. Second, we want to make sure that each part of the game is thoroughly tested. Releasing the material in small, controlled doses ensures that the feedback we receive is focused on a few specific areas. It makes both our work and your testing efforts more efficient.

Maybe it is just me, but so far I am just not seeing anything that makes this original enough to go out and buy all the core books for a whole new system. To be fair though, this is just a very basic playtest and should by no means reflects what the final will be like. But if it is, why not just re-release 3rd edition? I know I am not the only one thinking this, but they are going to have to step it up to top a certain other system which shall remain nameless (hint* it rhymes with mathbinder).

Just a tip to wizards: Find a way to may combat more varied than just "roll-hit-roll-damage-roll-etc." Also make sure and keep HP low. I see that it is somewhat low on the playtest I just want to make sure there are no 24 hp goblins running around making combat last 2 hours per encounter. Just make sure combat is dangerous for the PCs and monsters alike. They should have to come up with a plan prior to the encounter which gives them the advantage or they are going to get beat up. I understand you want to make sure people feel like heroes, but even heroes should not be able to blindly charge into combat without there being some consequences.
Maybe it is just me, but so far I am just not seeing anything that makes this original enough to go out and buy all the core books for a whole new system.


That's obvious, because there simply is not a "whole new system" yet. This is only the core mechanics. You've got enough to run an adventure, see how combat flows, how the new advantage/disadvantage system works, etc. That is what they want to test. They're not yet interested in testing character generation, because they first want to have the core mechanics right.

To be fair though, this is just a very basic playtest and should by no means reflects what the final will be like. But if it is, why not just re-release 3rd edition? I know I am not the only one thinking this, but they are going to have to step it up to top a certain other system which shall remain nameless (hint* it rhymes with mathbinder).


Rereleasing 3rd edition is not going to accomplish that goal. The entire reason they are revisiting core mechanics is because they want to make something that is fundamentally better, not just incrementally.

They should have to come up with a plan prior to the encounter which gives them the advantage or they are going to get beat up. I understand you want to make sure people feel like heroes, but even heroes should not be able to blindly charge into combat without there being some consequences.


Absolutely. I think the Advantage/Disadvantage system is very likely to encourage players to make a plan before combat in order to get that advantage over their opponents.
I'll say this.

I went from being incredibly excited about D&D Next to realizing it is just another **** Wizards of The Coast cash in.

Should never have hopped for it to begin with so really the fault is mine.
Care to elaborate on how exactly it's just a cash in?...

If you're going to make statements like that, you'd best back it up with a reason why.
Apparently someone forgot to read the letter from Mearls that came with the playtest, which states things like:


"These rules will likely look more compact than the most recent editions of D&D. In many cases, we decided to excise a rule or element of the game to see if it really is a key component of playing D&D."

and

"Our goal at this stage is to fine‐tune the core rules. We’ll ask for your feedback on character creation, advancement, and adventure design rules in the coming months."

For real.  This isn't the whole system.  It's a "how do the core mechanics feel" beta, not a "We have a finished product we're showing off" beta.  Unfortunately, thanks to many game developers mis-using the term "beta", those two concepts often get confused.  WotC is doing an actual beta test.  I'd say if you aren't intersted in helping them test the system, just sit back and wait for the final product to arrive.

*sigh* More of this? I thought we got past this yesterday. Okay, cliffnotes version:

Limited scope playtest is limited. More to be released. Patience is required. Testing core BASIC mechanics of combat and exploration. More complexity will be released. Yes things are weird and wonky and all the crying of bitter tears. More information will be forthcoming in weeks to follow. Be patient. Playtesting is for patient people who are willing to jump the hoops. It's a privilage not a right. They could have NOT asked us for our opinions and just released DDN in 2014 as the Next iteration of Dungeons and Dragons with all kinds of weird wonky stuff in it. etc. etc.

I think I covered everything?
This is the very first playtest...They've stated that they wanted to make sure a few of the core mechanics worked before they started having the public test the more intricate details. We don't know how feats yet because it's entirely possible that Wizards doesn't even know yet. This is very early on in a game that is STILL BEING DEVELOPED - And they asked you to sign up for the playtest to help test the mechanics of the game, not to make completely unfounded complaints. Of course it's a very very base set of rules, because that's what they want us to test right now.



As any expereince table top player can tell you it is very hard to understand or test even the base core mechanics without a full overview of the current system.  Creating a character is the easiest way to understand the mechanics and the functionality of the game.

Giving a few premade characters with no customizations is not a test.

Giving us this limited data means virtually nothing.

We can see they've switched some core mechanics to a 3.5esc situation.
Beyond that we cannot see any real changes.

And this 'playtest' is virtually worthless.



This is really early in the playtest process.  The "test" at this point is very basic.  Do the basic mechanics work, meaning initiative, to hit, damage, checks and contests. etc.  Do characters have to many/not enough hitpoints?  How did combat go?  There will be more options later on making the classes more complex, there will be rules for char gen.  They are testing the basic framework at this point.

as others said i can understand the decisions as to why they decided on what to add:

go look at how they do QA with videogames. they don't give 20 players 20 copies and say "beat the game".

they go :

"you will repeat the fight against Swordy McMurderspree constantly and test the arena for bugs: wall clipping, object collision, etc... every object, from every direction. jump, crawl, back into, walk into, strafe into. all while he's attacking you."

"you will repeat the fight against Swordy McMurderspree constantly and try every weapon in the game ever to see if the game will glitch. yes, even the crappy fishing pole. and your fists. the joke RoseBouquet item. get to it." 

"you will repeat the fight againsts Sword McMurderspree constantly and test every armor to make sure it both works and if it doesn't mess with Swordy's abilities's collision box. yes, even the paper plate sheild, cardboard box armor & lead pot helmet. i know he'll probably insta-kill you. do it."

for the most part you give specific tasks under controlled tests to see what happens and slowly give more options.

that's playtesting. 

my main problem is what the playtest is showcasing to me as a potential buyer. if this is a showcase of what's to come, i'm simply not interested in this style. if it's too bare-bones for me to be supposed to make a judgement, as a buyer i'm simply not interested.
It's not a showcase...It's an active part in Wizard's development cycle, which they have decided to include their fan base in to listen to their feedback. They're not trying to sell the game to you right now, because there's not much to sell. They're trying to make the game.
I'll say this.

I went from being incredibly excited about D&D Next to realizing it is just another **** Wizards of The Coast cash in.

Should never have hopped for it to begin with so really the fault is mine.



Cash in? I don't see why people get so worked up for making a system and making money off of it. Money makes the world go 'round! This edition seems like the smallest money grab in WotC history, 3.5 being the biggest. They actually are listening to fans, and taking their time. Sure they've had some issues, but otherwise I would say it has been pretty smooth sailing. 

Come to 4ENCLAVE for a fan based 4th Edition Community.

 

as others said i can understand the decisions as to why they decided on what to add:

go look at how they do QA with videogames. they don't give 20 players 20 copies and say "beat the game".

they go :

"you will repeat the fight against Swordy McMurderspree constantly and test the arena for bugs: wall clipping, object collision, etc... every object, from every direction. jump, crawl, back into, walk into, strafe into. all while he's attacking you."

"you will repeat the fight against Swordy McMurderspree constantly and try every weapon in the game ever to see if the game will glitch. yes, even the crappy fishing pole. and your fists. the joke RoseBouquet item. get to it." 

"you will repeat the fight againsts Sword McMurderspree constantly and test every armor to make sure it both works and if it doesn't mess with Swordy's abilities's collision box. yes, even the paper plate sheild, cardboard box armor & lead pot helmet. i know he'll probably insta-kill you. do it."

for the most part you give specific tasks under controlled tests to see what happens and slowly give more options.

that's playtesting. 

my main problem is what the playtest is showcasing to me as a potential buyer. if this is a showcase of what's to come, i'm simply not interested in this style. if it's too bare-bones for me to be supposed to make a judgement, as a buyer i'm simply not interested.



Yes, this is very bare bones at this point.  But keep in mind that this is supposed to be a modular/tool box approach.  I don't think we have seen most of the tools yet.  At this point its the baseline game, which I think is supposed to feel intentionally "retro".  When more of the optional rules come out I think the game will feel more modern, if you want to use them.

It's not a showcase...It's an active part in Wizard's development cycle, which they have decided to include their fan base in to listen to their feedback. They're not trying to sell the game to you right now, because there's not much to sell. They're trying to make the game.


open testing not open design

big, colossal difference.

we have no assurance on how much they'll listen. all we know is that we're guiny pigs. i've helped test minecraft. that was open testing. what i want, however, did not necessarily make it into the game. i wanted the original pistons that threw you upwards dangit! 

and yes, they are trying to sell me the game, whether it's concious decision on their part or not, i cannot say. they're giving me a look at their product, no matter how early it is in the design. if the design ideas they showcase doesn't grok me, i won't buy the end product.

no matter how barebones they make it, some design ideas will still flow through.

as for modularity:

i have game that works very well for my needs with little modification needed, most being for aesthetics rather then rule fixes. to make this [5th ed] game resemble one i would want to play, whether it's through houseruling or adding several of the buzzword of the day "module", it would seem to require more work.

why should i get 5th ed? 
You should get 5th ed because you like the finished product.  We are still a country mile from a finished product.  Deciding if you like the game at this point is like deciding if you like a car after looking at only the transmision.  
As any expereince table top player can tell you it is very hard to understand or test even the base core mechanics without a full overview of the current system.


Actually, this sounds more like a personally-imposed limitation.

I would say the reverse is true: the more experienced you are as a tabletop player, the easier understanding and testing the base mechanics will be without a full overview.



Judging 5E from this first playtest is like trying to judge a connect-the-dots picture by only looking at one dot.

If it's too difficult for you to playtest, then don't playtest. 

Reflavoring: the change of flavor without changing any mechanical part of the game, no matter how small, in order to fit the mechanics to an otherwise unsupported concept. Retexturing: the change of flavor (with at most minor mechanical adaptations) in order to effortlessly create support for a concept without inventing anything new. Houseruling: the change, either minor or major, of the mechanics in order to better reflect a certain aspect of the game, including adapting the rules to fit an otherwise unsupported concept. Homebrewing: the complete invention of something new that fits within the system in order to reflect an unsupported concept. Default module =/= Core mechanic.