I Give Up & I'm Taking 4 Groups With Me

It's obvious to me at this point that WotC is going to be completely unresponsive to changes I think need to be made to Next before it will be worth playing over my preferred editions and other RPGs in general. I know this because on some of the issues Mearls has flat out said he is doing it his way no matter what the feed back is, which to me sounds like he is trying to sink the brand. 

Now I know I'm not popular here on these boards  and you will be glad to see me go but you know who wont be? WotC's bank account because they don't give a flying **** how rude I am here as long as I am a potential customer. Well they have done what it takes to lose me and when I go I am going to ensure my group, santaclaw's group (though he was already leaning this way himself) and two other groups of 5-7 individuals never give Next the time of day because how pig headed Mearls is being and because I already know plenty of rules light systems that are Fiat Heavy and I don't play them because no one I know likes that, if that's the way D&D is heading promises of modules or not I want no part in it and neither will enough of the other players I associate with to ever get any of the groups playing it. 

This is a clear message to WotC that we will stick to other systems and products we already have.
Cite or your a lying liar who doesn't know anything. (being sacastic, but really cite your source that says that.)
Don't let the door hit you.
Don't know why, but I have a tendency to stick around even if things seem to be going terribly for me.

Your loss won't effect my opinion about the game at all, but I will admit that I'm not optimistic about how this playtest is turning out either way. I could only hope for some major changes and additions in content, or that the game somehow turns out to be awesomely bad, rather than just bad.
It's obvious to me at this point that WotC is going to be completely unresponsive to changes I think need to be made to Next before it will be worth playing over my preferred editions and other RPGs in general. I know this because on some of the issues Mearls has flat out said he is doing it his way no matter what the feed back is, which to me sounds like he is trying to sink the brand. 

Now I know I'm not popular here on these boards  and you will be glad to see me go but you know who wont be? WotC's bank account because they don't give a flying **** how rude I am here as long as I am a potential customer. Well they have done what it takes to lose me and when I go I am going to ensure my group, santaclaw's group (though he was already leaning this way himself) and two other groups of 5-7 individuals never give Next the time of day because how pig headed Mearls is being and because I already know plenty of rules light systems that are Fiat Heavy and I don't play them because no one I know likes that, if that's the way D&D is heading promises of modules or not I want no part in it and neither will enough of the other players I associate with to ever get any of the groups playing it. 

This is a clear message to WotC that we will stick to other systems and products we already have.




Seriously, how about stating what those issues are?

Obviously, if only one person feels a certain away about something, its not gonna sway WOTC to make the change, you really have to consider the sheer amount of fans who play this game.

Personally, I am impressed at the amount of feedback they are gathering from questions and play-test. Its a huge improvement from the past.
It's obvious to me at this point that WotC is going to be completely unresponsive to changes I think need to be made to Next before it will be worth playing over my preferred editions and other RPGs in general.


I'd like to know how you determined this given that you've seen precisely one version.

Nevermind the fact that they were responsive to some things specifically from my playtest group during the closed playtest, as well.  As in, there are direct things that we provided feedback on that they responded to in a future iteration.

But fine, if you really want, take your ball and go home.  Your loss as far as helping make Next a game you want to play.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
Seriously, how about stating what those issues are?



Yeah, I'm curious as to what issues were so major as to get him to rage quit. Not to mention that this is still phase 1 of the playtest so they haven't even taken playtester input into account yet for modifying the game.

It's obvious to me at this point that WotC is going to be completely unresponsive to changes I think need to be made to Next before it will be worth playing over my preferred editions and other RPGs in general. I know this because on some of the issues Mearls has flat out said he is doing it his way no matter what the feed back is, which to me sounds like he is trying to sink the brand. 

Now I know I'm not popular here on these boards  and you will be glad to see me go but you know who wont be? WotC's bank account because they don't give a flying **** how rude I am here as long as I am a potential customer. Well they have done what it takes to lose me and when I go I am going to ensure my group, santaclaw's group (though he was already leaning this way himself) and two other groups of 5-7 individuals never give Next the time of day because how pig headed Mearls is being and because I already know plenty of rules light systems that are Fiat Heavy and I don't play them because no one I know likes that, if that's the way D&D is heading promises of modules or not I want no part in it and neither will enough of the other players I associate with to ever get any of the groups playing it. 

This is a clear message to WotC that we will stick to other systems and products we already have.




Seriously, how about stating what those issues are?

Obviously, if only one person feels a certain away about something, its not gonna sway WOTC to make the change, you really have to consider the sheer amount of fans who play this game.

Personally, I am impressed at the amount of feedback they are gathering from questions and play-test. Its a huge improvement from the past.



Phried has stated it multiple times loudly on these forums so maybe he felt he didn't need to again but to summarize: 

A strong dislike for the idea of the Pillars. His personal favourite systems (but not the group he DMs for), Eclipse Phase and Traveller (the campaigns of which he is a player in that I GM) allow players to all be relevant all the time without making everyone the same or contriving it through the way character generation works in those system. He sees no reason why D&D should not be doing it since it keeps everyone at the table involved all the time instead of being bored and becoming distracting.

Fiat giving DM more freedom being used an an excuse to do less work writing rules on the part of the publisher. Phried and I are both of the opinion that over reliance on Fiat gives the DM more work not less because a lack of definitive rules makes players constantly ask for permission instead of being able to assume they can always do whatever RAW says they can or can't. To DMs who favour consistency keeping track of past Fiat rulings is a chore. The fact that some classes can have clearly spelled out effects beyond damage and don't need to ask permission to preform actions (such as wizard and cleric spells) and other classes do not (fighters need to ask to have any effect other than I hit them, Rogues are totally dependant on it being reasonable for them to be able to hide in any given environment and often it wont be). He feels is is poor game design and any players who prefer this is practising poor consumerism because it set precedence for the designers to charge the same amount of money for a product with less meat on it that requires more work on DM part to use. He has never had a problem memorizing hundreds of rules for a half a dozen RPGs so he doesn't think that making it simpler is an issue. 


In my games players have always been Exceptional individuals, not Exceptions to the internal logic of the game world.
Seriously, how about stating what those issues are?



Yeah, I'm curious as to what issues were so major as to get him to rage quit. Not to mention that this is still phase 1 of the playtest so they haven't even taken playtester input into account yet for modifying the game.



OOooo, now I'm curious what ideas you gave that changed stuff.  (not sarcastic, I'm honestly curious)
They have had playtester feedback, by the way.  Restating that.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
From what I can tell, Phried doesn't like mechanical alignment, wants the PHb to clearly state that players shouldn't be jerks, wants DMs to be licensed, doesn't want to curb optimization, doesn't like Monte Cook, doesn't want open-ended spells or out-of-combat abilities, wants variable reach mechanics, thinks his fellow players might be jerks, wants to not penalize heavy armor, is wary of caster supremacy, hates gridless play, wants balance at each level.

And while I agree with many of his preferences, I see no evidence yet that Wizards isn't going to consinder them.  Heck, we haven't seen a second iteration of the playtest.  how can we know if concerns are being listened to?
From what I can tell, Phried doesn't like mechanical alignment, wants the PHb to clearly state that players shouldn't be jerks, wants DMs to be licensed, doesn't want to curb optimization, doesn't like Monte Cook, doesn't want open-ended spells or out-of-combat abilities, wants variable reach mechanics, thinks his fellow players might be jerks, wants to not penalize heavy armor, is wary of caster supremacy, hates gridless play, wants balance at each level.

And while I agree with many of his preferences, I see no evidence yet that Wizards isn't going to consinder them.  Heck, we haven't seen a second iteration of the playtest.  how can we know if concerns are being listened to?



I can vouch that at least a few of those were the subject of closed playtest feedback, and were responded to in subsequent material.  I'd rather not go into too much specifics, but it did happen.

Though I will say that the most amusing bit of feedback was when our group realized that they had accidentally made skeletons immune to Turn Undead...
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
It's obvious to me at this point that WotC is going to be completely unresponsive to changes I think need to be made to Next before it will be worth playing over my preferred editions and other RPGs in general. I know this because on some of the issues Mearls has flat out said he is doing it his way no matter what the feed back is, which to me sounds like he is trying to sink the brand. 



Wow, that seems awfully quick to make that sort of decision.  There are plenty of things I don't like, but this is the first round of public playetsting.  Naturally they cannot incorporate every bit of feedback they have, nor can they please everyone (despite their aparent desire to do so), but you should at least give them a chance to do so.  Based on how much has changed from what I played at DDXP, and the fact that some of the ideas initially proposed in earlier L&L articles are absent, it seems to me they are open to feedback.

Granted, I'm not sure specifically what feedback you offered that hasn't been incorporated is, perhaps you suggested that sharmind should be the only playable race, the game should have neither dungeons nor dragons, or there should be only two abilities: Awesomeness and Fiscal Responsibility.  In which case, I hope Mearls would refuse.

I love D&D more than I could ever love a human child.

From what I can tell, Phried doesn't like mechanical alignment, wants the PHb to clearly state that players shouldn't be jerks, wants DMs to be licensed, doesn't want to curb optimization, doesn't like Monte Cook, doesn't want open-ended spells or out-of-combat abilities, wants variable reach mechanics, thinks his fellow players might be jerks, wants to not penalize heavy armor, is wary of caster supremacy, hates gridless play, wants balance at each level.

And while I agree with many of his preferences, I see no evidence yet that Wizards isn't going to consinder them.  Heck, we haven't seen a second iteration of the playtest.  how can we know if concerns are being listened to?



Wrecan once again confirms he is one of the best posters on the board.  
In my games players have always been Exceptional individuals, not Exceptions to the internal logic of the game world.
Why do people think their rage-quit merits a whole thread?  What makes them think they loom so large in others' minds?
A host of rage-quits, general nerdrage, and ultimately, wallet-voting for Pathfinder resulted in the premature scrapping of 4e.  The message WotC has sent has been that they'll listen to you - if you're strident, irrational, loud, and, most importantly, buying someone elses' stuff instead of theres in largish numbers.

I'm sure Phried, intent on bringing about the eventual demise of 5e, is just following the script the haters used to kill 4e.  

 

 

 

Oops, looks like this request tried to create an infinite loop. We do not allow such things here. We are a professional website!

From what I can tell, Phried doesn't like mechanical alignment, wants the PHb to clearly state that players shouldn't be jerks, wants DMs to be licensed, doesn't want to curb optimization, doesn't like Monte Cook, doesn't want open-ended spells or out-of-combat abilities, wants variable reach mechanics, thinks his fellow players might be jerks, wants to not penalize heavy armor, is wary of caster supremacy, hates gridless play, wants balance at each level.

And while I agree with many of his preferences, I see no evidence yet that Wizards isn't going to consinder them.  Heck, we haven't seen a second iteration of the playtest.  how can we know if concerns are being listened to?



For some of us, this is not the first iteration of the playtest.
From what I can tell, Phried doesn't like mechanical alignment, wants the PHb to clearly state that players shouldn't be jerks, wants DMs to be licensed, doesn't want to curb optimization, doesn't like Monte Cook, doesn't want open-ended spells or out-of-combat abilities, wants variable reach mechanics, thinks his fellow players might be jerks, wants to not penalize heavy armor, is wary of caster supremacy, hates gridless play, wants balance at each level.

And while I agree with many of his preferences, I see no evidence yet that Wizards isn't going to consinder them.  Heck, we haven't seen a second iteration of the playtest.  how can we know if concerns are being listened to?

Dayum man, you did some homework there.

Wait, no open ended spells or out of combat abilities? That is like the main thing I want from D&DN, otherwise why leave 4e? Sure, maybe some houserules are in order, cuz (dis)advantage is just that awesome, but that's not too hard.
I guess I'm a hater of 4e but for me I buy what I like.  I even tried 4e so I can't say I didn't buy any of it.  It is a game.  Goodness folks.  Phried based upon your preferences as revealed by wrecan, if I was entirely mercenary about it I would be happy.  Because you would be pushing against what I like if you stayed.  So perhaps now that you are gone I can push in my direction with less opposition.  

For me I will stay until the books are published then I will decide if I like it enough to play.  I can see though that if the whole philosophy is bad in your eyes then perhaps you give up.  I mean monitoring these boards does take up some time.  I would though still probably check out the books when they come out just in case.

@Tony
I have no grand conspiracy to punish WOTC with my wallet.  I am going to "vote" with my wallet for what I like.  Same thing I do when I buy Mountain Dew instead of Mellow Yellow.  I just voted with my wallet.  I do buy a ton of stuff.  

@All
I think that if you think that all the prior editions are garbage and have nothing to offer then you may be disappointed in 5e.  If on the other hand you like some of the stuff in 4e and feel it deserves an equal seat at the table then you might find you like 5e.   

One thing to realize.  If somehow you managed to keep the game exactly how you want it to be and offer nothing to anyone else, the rest of us are not going to just stick around and play a game we dislike.  There are tons of options out there.  I would just buy a different game and play that or play one I already have.  The idea that you can somehow make people play a game is pretty silly no matter who says it - pro-4e or anti-4e.  I have no illusions that most of you if you hate 5e will play it.






 

My Blog which includes my Hobby Award Winning articles.

A host of rage-quits, general nerdrage, and ultimately, wallet-voting for Pathfinder resulted in the premature scrapping of 4e.  The message WotC has sent has been that they'll listen to you - if you're strident, irrational, loud, and, most importantly, buying someone elses' stuff instead of theres in largish numbers.


How dare Wizards listen to their customers!
From what I can tell, Phried doesn't like mechanical alignment, wants the PHb to clearly state that players shouldn't be jerks, wants DMs to be licensed, doesn't want to curb optimization, doesn't like Monte Cook, doesn't want open-ended spells or out-of-combat abilities, wants variable reach mechanics, thinks his fellow players might be jerks, wants to not penalize heavy armor, is wary of caster supremacy, hates gridless play, wants balance at each level.

And while I agree with many of his preferences, I see no evidence yet that Wizards isn't going to consinder them.  Heck, we haven't seen a second iteration of the playtest.  how can we know if concerns are being listened to?



hmm maybe i should also treated to quit so you would do a nice summery like that of my treads.
Phried only had 157 posts.
LOL.  Wrecan I must admit you have a succint way of putting it.  Yes how dare they listen to their customers.  

My Blog which includes my Hobby Award Winning articles.

@All
I think that if you think that all editions but your favorite are garbage and have nothing to offer then you may be disappointed in 5e.  If on the other hand you like some of the stuff in other editions and feel it deserves an equal seat at the table then you might find you like 5e.  


D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
Yeah, how dare Wizards not give me the instant self gratification I deserve as a radical fan!  Right, guys?

Now, I kind of agree on some of the OP's points, but whining about things and saying, "listen or I quit" will solve nothing.  But, judging on their post and the research via wrecan, this person does indeed want the game their own way... so much for modularity.

I swear, every fandom has insane segments with eXtreme amounts of emotionally driven angst when they aren't special snowflakes.  Seriously, it's just the past repeating itself...  Maybe this poster will grow up like I did.  I've come to enjoy 4th edition as a pretty fun game because I decided to research into it more and give it a bigger chance.  It's like how things were in 2008...  It saddens me how impatient and selfish people are.  People only think of themselves and not others...  My misanthropy is sometimes justified.


An undead spectre occasionally returning to remind the fandom of its grim existence.

 

 

Some good pointers for the fellow hobbyist!:

  • KEEP D&D ALIVE, END EDITION WARS!
  • RESPECT PEOPLES' PREFERENCES
  • JUST ENJOY THE GAME!
I have fewer posts than Phried, but I don't think I can match the flounce and I'm not going to try.

I do think it's silly to say someone won't listen to feedback when they haven't  had the opportunity to do so yet.  For those of us just in with the public playtest, it won't be time to argue that they aren't listening to feedback until we see at least the next iteration.

Having said that, I think part of the problem comes from the fact that there appear to be some people who are more concerned about keeping the things they don't like out of the game than including the things they do like.  (They appear to be primarily 4E fans, but that may be a product of my own biases.)  Nothing anyone does with Next is going to appease the excluders, because you can't include by exclusion and the primary goal for Next is to be inclusive.

Having said that, while I personally am not fond of 4E, I think it would be a good idea to make sure the 4E-derived aspects of Next are brought into the playtest sooner rather than later.
Jack Vance deserves your respect, it's Vancian, not "vancian." The goal for Next is to be inclusive; you can't include by exclusion.

Having said that, while I personally am not fond of 4E, I think it would be a good idea to make sure the 4E-derived aspects of Next are brought into the playtest sooner rather than later.


Agree on that - even if it is meant to be a "preview" of a future module. "Proof or it doesn't exist", you know - WotC as already in the past shown that they didn't feel compelled to publish promised products. If the game is really meant to be satisfying for all tables, all kinds of players, all styles, it must prove it as soon as possible.
The current packet is very specific in what kind of player tastes and styles it is adapted to - it may be only a public relation problem, but as it is what we have, it is what we "judge" our interest for the game on.
Same with articles, and so on - for instance, the last legend and lore about "bounded accuracy". It is not a bad idea, but if the game is built on this logic, what will they do to allow epic stories (you know, explore the fortress of Asmodeus, fight demon princes and so on) ? They probably already have worked on how to allow this style with the system - but if they don't give a bone to the "epic stories" players and convince them, said players will just think this game is not meant for them - and probably won't look back later.

(my personal problem is that I haven't seen a L&L article that made me feel like the game would fit my interests, and the package... well. )

This said, there are many 4E things in the package - just very well disguised so 4E-allergics do not have the "immediate rejection reaction". Problem is they din't care about preventing this "immediate rejection reaction" from many 4E players by disguising the rest... Like "fighters have nothing" rather than "fighters have a few styles/maneuvers to play with" - reactions would have been less agressive, and both from pro and anti 4E.

Anyway - we need to see modularity as soon as possible. It is the selling point of DDn, after all.

Remember Tunnel Seventeen !
@All
I think that if you think that all editions but your favorite are garbage and have nothing to offer then you may be disappointed in 5e.  If on the other hand you like some of the stuff in other editions and feel it deserves an equal seat at the table then you might find you like 5e.  





Your correction is entirely valid but I was addressing the OP who seems to be pro-4e so I addressed it directly to him.  

What's funny is that I'm pretty sure if 5e doesn't work out that I won't be playing D&D at all.  I'll play a houseruled retroclone.   For me no edition is garbage if someone is playing it and enjoying it.   The edition just isn't for me.  I don't need to eradicate strawberry cake from the universe even if I prefer chocolate.

I agree with the previous posters comments about inclusion/exclusion.  If you are all about exclusion then I'd say you should exclude yourself because WOTC is a business and make as many customers happy as they can is a good idea.



 

My Blog which includes my Hobby Award Winning articles.

I know this because on some of the issues Mearls has flat out said he is doing it his way no matter what the feed back is, which to me sounds like he is trying to sink the brand. 



I bolded the important bit here. Do you really think that Mike Mearls is intentionally trying to sink the brand? Let me put this another way... Do you really think that Mike Mearls is trying to destroy the product that he is the manager of which would certainly get him fired from his job?

This is crazy talk, pure and simple.

Go ahead and rage-quit if that's what you want, but don't make ridiculous (and borderline slanderous) statements about other people.

Bye!
When did Cartman start posting on the forums?
I know this because on some of the issues Mearls has flat out said he is doing it his way no matter what the feed back is, which to me sounds like he is trying to sink the brand. 



I bolded the important bit here. Do you really think that Mike Mearls is intentionally trying to sink the brand? Let me put this another way... Do you really think that Mike Mearls is trying to destroy the product that he is the manager of which would certainly get him fired from his job?

This is crazy talk, pure and simple.

Go ahead and rage-quit if that's what you want, but don't make ridiculous (and borderline slanderous) statements about other people.

Bye!



Its not slanderous if he has explicitedly stated that he will not listen to the Fighter and Wizard related feedback and will do what he wants with them. The fact a lot of the negative feedback since the start of the closed testing has been about these onlys shows he does not care.
In my games players have always been Exceptional individuals, not Exceptions to the internal logic of the game world.
I know this because on some of the issues Mearls has flat out said he is doing it his way no matter what the feed back is, which to me sounds like he is trying to sink the brand. 



I bolded the important bit here. Do you really think that Mike Mearls is intentionally trying to sink the brand? Let me put this another way... Do you really think that Mike Mearls is trying to destroy the product that he is the manager of which would certainly get him fired from his job?

This is crazy talk, pure and simple.

Go ahead and rage-quit if that's what you want, but don't make ridiculous (and borderline slanderous) statements about other people.

Bye!



Its not slanderous if he has explicitedly stated that he will not listen to the Fighter and Wizard related feedback and will do what he wants with them. The fact a lot of the negative feedback since the start of the closed testing has been about these onlys shows he does not care.



...what?

Source please, or stop trolling.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
When did Cartman start posting on the forums?



It's not quite Cartman.  I'm waiting for the "Buuuuut, Moooooom!!!  MMMMOOOOMMM!" to be used in a response.  

An undead spectre occasionally returning to remind the fandom of its grim existence.

 

 

Some good pointers for the fellow hobbyist!:

  • KEEP D&D ALIVE, END EDITION WARS!
  • RESPECT PEOPLES' PREFERENCES
  • JUST ENJOY THE GAME!
I know this because on some of the issues Mearls has flat out said he is doing it his way no matter what the feed back is, which to me sounds like he is trying to sink the brand. 



I bolded the important bit here. Do you really think that Mike Mearls is intentionally trying to sink the brand? Let me put this another way... Do you really think that Mike Mearls is trying to destroy the product that he is the manager of which would certainly get him fired from his job?

This is crazy talk, pure and simple.

Go ahead and rage-quit if that's what you want, but don't make ridiculous (and borderline slanderous) statements about other people.

Bye!



Its not slanderous if he has explicitedly stated that he will not listen to the Fighter and Wizard related feedback and will do what he wants with them. The fact a lot of the negative feedback since the start of the closed testing has been about these onlys shows he does not care.



...what?

Source please, or stop trolling.



Angsty, defensive nerd rage is his source, it seems. 

An undead spectre occasionally returning to remind the fandom of its grim existence.

 

 

Some good pointers for the fellow hobbyist!:

  • KEEP D&D ALIVE, END EDITION WARS!
  • RESPECT PEOPLES' PREFERENCES
  • JUST ENJOY THE GAME!
I know this because on some of the issues Mearls has flat out said he is doing it his way no matter what the feed back is, which to me sounds like he is trying to sink the brand. 



I bolded the important bit here. Do you really think that Mike Mearls is intentionally trying to sink the brand? Let me put this another way... Do you really think that Mike Mearls is trying to destroy the product that he is the manager of which would certainly get him fired from his job?

This is crazy talk, pure and simple.

Go ahead and rage-quit if that's what you want, but don't make ridiculous (and borderline slanderous) statements about other people.

Bye!



Its not slanderous if he has explicitedly stated that he will not listen to the Fighter and Wizard related feedback and will do what he wants with them. The fact a lot of the negative feedback since the start of the closed testing has been about these onlys shows he does not care.



...what?

Source please, or stop trolling.



Community chats. I don't know if those are stored anywhere but thats where I heard it. 
In my games players have always been Exceptional individuals, not Exceptions to the internal logic of the game world.
A host of rage-quits, general nerdrage, and ultimately, wallet-voting for Pathfinder resulted in the premature scrapping of 4e.  The message WotC has sent has been that they'll listen to you - if you're strident, irrational, loud, and, most importantly, buying someone elses' stuff instead of theres in largish numbers.

I'm sure Phried, intent on bringing about the eventual demise of 5e, is just following the script the haters used to kill 4e.  

 


Has anyone Hulk-Raged about it yet? That will be interesting to see....
"If it's not a conjuration, how did the wizard con·jure/ˈkänjər/Verb 1. Make (something) appear unexpectedly or seemingly from nowhere as if by magic. it?" -anon "Why don't you read fire·ball / fī(-ə)r-ˌbȯl/ and see if you can find the key word con.jure /'kən-ˈju̇r/ anywhere in it." -Maxperson
Rumor mill/public opinion and a full fledged source are too different things.  If you're taking an issue of National Enquirer and presenting it as a scientific journal, you'll be mocked.  Still, you have my attention and I too declare "citation needed".  I will happily believe concrete proof if it's given.

An undead spectre occasionally returning to remind the fandom of its grim existence.

 

 

Some good pointers for the fellow hobbyist!:

  • KEEP D&D ALIVE, END EDITION WARS!
  • RESPECT PEOPLES' PREFERENCES
  • JUST ENJOY THE GAME!
That proof can't be given, since it's not actually true.  I mean, I can disprove it directly by my firsthand experience in the closed playtest.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
That proof can't be given, since it's not actually true.  I mean, I can disprove it directly by my firsthand experience in the closed playtest.



Citation needed then. Any documents you care to share?
In my games players have always been Exceptional individuals, not Exceptions to the internal logic of the game world.
That proof can't be given, since it's not actually true.  I mean, I can disprove it directly by my firsthand experience in the closed playtest.



That's because they're spouting anger filled opinions masqueraded as facts.

An undead spectre occasionally returning to remind the fandom of its grim existence.

 

 

Some good pointers for the fellow hobbyist!:

  • KEEP D&D ALIVE, END EDITION WARS!
  • RESPECT PEOPLES' PREFERENCES
  • JUST ENJOY THE GAME!
You can't actually disprove anything. You can only prove that he said something different to you at the closed playtest. The burden of proof is always on the accuser. If they don't provide proof that Mearls has said anything accused of in this thread, then we can dismiss their(irrelevant at this stage anyway) nerdrage.
Sign In to post comments