D&DN is not for me... and that's OK

Over the course of this playtest, it has become increasingly obvious that this new edition of D&D is not the one for me. Much of the new direction seems like moving backwards to me, in terms of game design. Several of the new features made me say, "Why are they doing it this way? Fourth edition did it so much better." It is unlikely that I will purchase the books for the new edition (but hey, we never know for sure until it's released).

But that's OK.

I've been thinking about it some more recently, and I've come to realize that 4E suits my storytelling needs just fine. I don't need a new edition, but others might. There are plenty of people who wanted something that 4E couldn't easily offer, and maybe D&DN is for them. It would, after all, be pretty selfish for me to believe that EVERY edition of D&D should be tailored to my specific preferences, when there's already a version that almost is.

Here's the news that sparked this train of thought:

No Warlord? No Novacat. The warlord is easily, far and away my favorite class in any edition of D&D (to the point where I've ALMOST not played anything else), and they've axed it in a design move that I could never agree with. It is primarily for this reason that I'm confident that D&DN will not speak to me. That said, I know a lot of people had a problem with the warlord, and what it represented with relation to hit points. So now I have my edition with a warlord, and they will have theirs without it.

All of the other issues I have with the system boil down to a similar line of reasoning: Some game element or design philosophy present in 4E is reversed in D&DN, so it makes the game less appealing to me, but more appealing to others. So now I withdraw from attempting to persuade the designers to make the game as I want it, because clearly, this is not a game for me. It is, however, still D&D at its core, and the implications of that fact allow us as a community to embrace it, whether it's our game or not. There will be stories, quirks, flaws, and triumphs just as there has been in any version of the game, and these are the things that unite us, not the mechanics.

TLDR: I'm happy with 4E, and D&DN doesn't detract from that happiness. If a new edition of D&D can bring new players into the community, or bring back old players, then it's objectively a good thing, even if I never play it.

Standard Answer to all 5E rules questions: "Ask your DM."

I left slightly positive feedback last survey.

 Fear is the Mind Killer

 

So, there is an overwhelmingly positive response from:

People that see what they like in the playtest, test it, and report back,
People that aren't sure about the playtest, test it, and report back,
and the few people that don't like it, test it anyways, and report back.

Nope. No possibility for bias there!



So you are saying that playtesting doesn't work.  That those who dislike it won't report back anyway.  So it's a lost cause.   Instead they should listen to the people on these threads who are crying night and day about the game.

hmmm.  I think I'd prefer their more scientific approach.  If you care then answer the survey.   If you don't then stop complaining. 

My Blog which includes my Hobby Award Winning articles.

So you are saying that playtesting doesn't work.  That those who dislike it won't report back anyway.  So it's a lost cause.   Instead they should listen to the people on these threads who are crying night and day about the game.

hmmm.  I think I'd prefer their more scientific approach.  If you care then answer the survey.   If you don't then stop complaining. 

I don't want to DM for a game I don't like. I don't want to play a game I don't like. I have a limited amount of free time, and doing their research and testing for them, for free, is not high on my list of things I want to do. Not my fault they have not presented me at all with a game I find interesting enough to even try.

Playtesting has its uses; so do surveys. Neither, however, are absolutely unfallible and neither should be treated as such. Both should be used as part of a comprehensive, multi-part feedback loop that looks at several angles in ways to improve the product.

I didn't think I had to spell that out for you.

Or if you want, you can keep thinking that everybody that playtests it is giving it a completely unbiased, neutral look and the population doing the playtesting is comprimised of equal portions of the community that like different playstyles and may or may not like what is presented as D&DN currently.

Feel free, I don't really care.

Supporting an edition you like does not make you an edition warrior. Demanding that everybody else support your edition makes you an edition warrior.

Why do I like 13th Age? Because I like D&D: http://magbonch.wordpress.com/2013/10/16/first-impressions-13th-age/

AzoriusGuildmage- "I think that you simply spent so long playing it, especially in your formative years with the hobby, that you've long since rationalized or houseruled away its oddities, and set it in your mind as the standard for what is and isn't reasonable in an rpg."

So you are saying that playtesting doesn't work.  That those who dislike it won't report back anyway.  So it's a lost cause.   Instead they should listen to the people on these threads who are crying night and day about the game.

hmmm.  I think I'd prefer their more scientific approach.  If you care then answer the survey.   If you don't then stop complaining. 

I don't want to DM for a game I don't like. I don't want to play a game I don't like. I have a limited amount of free time, and doing their research and testing for them, for free, is not high on my list of things I want to do. Not my fault they have not presented me at all with a game I find interesting enough to even try.

Playtesting has its uses; so do surveys. Neither, however, are absolutely unfallible and neither should be treated as such. Both should be used as part of a comprehensive, multi-part feedback loop that looks at several angles in ways to improve the product.

I didn't think I had to spell that out for you.

Or if you want, you can keep thinking that everybody that playtests it is giving it a completely unbiased, neutral look and the population doing the playtesting is comprimised of equal portions of the community that like different playstyles and may or may not like what is presented as D&DN currently.

Feel free, I don't really care.



True.  But again why would you think that the pro-4e camp is underrepresented?  These boards do not indicate that they are overrun with 4e people.  Maybe thats because thats the current edition.   Maybe because tons of 1e/2e/3e people aren't even on here but are instead playing a retroclone or Pathfinder.   If anything I'd expect these playtests to be biased in favor of 4e not against.





My Blog which includes my Hobby Award Winning articles.

So, there is an overwhelmingly positive response from:

People that see what they like in the playtest, test it, and report back,
People that aren't sure about the playtest, test it, and report back,
and the few people that don't like it, test it anyways, and report back.

Nope. No possibility for bias there!



So you are saying that playtesting doesn't work.  That those who dislike it won't report back anyway.  So it's a lost cause.   Instead they should listen to the people on these threads who are crying night and day about the game.

hmmm.  I think I'd prefer their more scientific approach.  If you care then answer the survey.   If you don't then stop complaining. 



The above is kind of like my personal experience.

We stared with a nice group of playtesters and over time the people who diden't like what they saw stoped playtesting, seeing it as a lost couse not worth spending more time on.
 
In our group it are 6 people who refuse to spend any more time on DnD next seeig it as being un saveble at this point  and have stoped playtesting of the original group of 21.
so close to 30%
And for me as the playtest goes on I find more and more people that want to try it out.
And for me as the playtest goes on I find more and more people that want to try it out.



That's been my experience, too.
I have the exact opposite experience with player interest and the playtest. No one between DC and Baltimore has been interested for almost six months. Now we just read the updates and share observations, and many have stopped paying attention all together. It's largely detested, mocked, or pitied by the gamers and game devs I know around here. I'm frequently asked "Why do you even bother with it anymore?"

Of course, there is a very dense and well-connected gaming population here, so the community reflects some very eclectic tastes. If you have a particular preference or playstyle you can typically find someone who shares it to play with and there's not much interest in a "one-size-fits-all" game book. I know that's not necessarily the case for the rest of the world.

That said? As a statistician who's familiar with experimental design and surveys I can tell you this: the surveys that have existed until the most recent ones were completely useless. There was no meaningful data that could be taken from it. When political organizations conduct polls they generally have two types of surveys: one is for accurate information to be used for internal use only and the other contains simple loaded questions to indicate support for their cause. Guess which type we've mostly been seeing?

Having organized playtests for RPG products I can also tell you this: blanket participant approval means almost nothing to me it doesn't come with actual critical analysis. There was no mechanism until the most recent survey for the design team to actually recieve that sort of aggregate feedback. Sadly, as I indicated before, the people who are most willing and able to participate and give that sort of feedback likely dropped out of the playtest last year.

So, there is an overwhelmingly positive response from:

People that see what they like in the playtest, test it, and report back,
People that aren't sure about the playtest, test it, and report back,
and the few people that don't like it, test it anyways, and report back.

Nope. No possibility for bias there!



So you are saying that playtesting doesn't work.  That those who dislike it won't report back anyway.  So it's a lost cause.   Instead they should listen to the people on these threads who are crying night and day about the game.

hmmm.  I think I'd prefer their more scientific approach.  If you care then answer the survey.   If you don't then stop complaining. 



The above is kind of like my personal experience.

We stared with a nice group of playtesters and over time the people who diden't like what they saw stoped playtesting, seeing it as a lost couse not worth spending more time on.
 
In our group it are 6 people who refuse to spend any more time on DnD next seeig it as being un saveble at this point  and have stoped playtesting of the original group of 21.
so close to 30%



I don't doubt that people who totally don't like the overall direction of the game might quit playtesting it.  I personally haven't playtested the recent packet myself but thats more a time issue.  

I don't doubt that people from all editions have stopped the playtest of 5e for one reason or another.  The question is what does that say about those that remain?   Does it mean they represent a group of players that are uniform in the preferences and that match what 5e is offering?  I'm not sure I'd go that far.  


My Blog which includes my Hobby Award Winning articles.

looking at the 4 posts above may the folowing be the case ?

Many 4th edition fans are losing intrest and abandoning the playtest.
On the other hand there are still playtesters joining the playtest replacing them, mainly atracted by people telling them the playtest is a more old school kind of game.
So the amount of active playtesters remains about the same.
But the feedback gets more positive as the people active in the playtest are more slanted toward one style of play.

If this is the case they are failing at the unifying the editions thing.  
 
So, there is an overwhelmingly positive response from:

People that see what they like in the playtest, test it, and report back,
People that aren't sure about the playtest, test it, and report back,
and the few people that don't like it, test it anyways, and report back.

Nope. No possibility for bias there!



So you are saying that playtesting doesn't work.  That those who dislike it won't report back anyway.  So it's a lost cause.   Instead they should listen to the people on these threads who are crying night and day about the game.

hmmm.  I think I'd prefer their more scientific approach.  If you care then answer the survey.   If you don't then stop complaining. 



WotC's approach isn't at all scientific. They're generally asking bad questions instead of probing for why people might like or dislike an element, even if they're overwhelmingly positive or negative. And they're testing people who have chosen to keep being tested without asking enough questions about them to figure out who keeps chosing to be tested and why.

This is called self-selecting bias. I've got product X which is wonderful for 20% of the population and causes the other 80% to break out in hives. In fact, because 80% of the population breaks out in hives, the product won't be able to make its expected numbers. As I test the product on anyone willing to stay in the testing program, fewer of the people who get hives want to stay in the testing. Those who don't break out into hives stay. And the people who find it wonderful keep recruiting people to join in.

Over time, I'm going to get likely to near 100% of my test population finding it wonderful and no one breaking out into hives. That doesn't mean my product is going to be a success. It means that all the people who liked it stayed in the testing phase and those who didn't left. And if the people who stay in can recruit people faster than those who left? It looks like the playtest is growing.

This is particularly true because the surveys aren't asking questions correctly. Here are five questions that should be asked near the end of every survey:
What editions of D&D have you played?
What is your favorite edition of D&D?
Where do you play D&DNext?(home, store, conventions, online with multiple coic)
What one element of D&DNext talked about in this survey best represents your favorite edition?
What one element of your favorite edition given the topics of this survey needs more representation?

Okay, so what have I done here? With the first two questions, I've broken up every playtester into testable segments - the people who have played AD&D who like AD&D still. The people who started with AD&D and like a different system. The people who have only played one edition for whatever reason. And I also know who changes their answers and who stays consistent.

I also know the following things:
Am I losing playtesters from specific groups over time even if the overall number of playtesters is growing? As an example - the players who started with AD&D and consider 4e their favorite edition(yes, we're out there) vs. the players who started with 3e or 4e and consider 4e their favorite edition - who is retaining more playtesters and/or growing.
Are the people who are overwhelmingly positive coming from specific groups or all editions as a whole?
Are there elements of D&DNext that are hitting a chord or people are disliking in every edition?
Which groups am I generally gaining from - convention players, home players. Do people change their preferences over time - if D&DNext is doing really well, I'd expect the number of people checking off convention or store to eventually check off home. Is there a particular group of Next testers that hold more playtesters or groups?

Finally, they need to stop asking inane questions that make it painful to answer a section. As an example, if I don't like how Wizards are doing in D&DNext on a survey about Wizards, I probably don't want to answer 50 questions about Wizards in D&DNext. I want to answer about 5. Don't ask me about every single spell at that point, just ask me short and specific questions.
looking at the 4 posts above may the folowing be the case ?

Many 4th edition fans are losing intrest and abandoning the playtest.
On the other hand there are still playtesters joining the playtest replacing them, mainly atracted by people telling them the playtest is a more old school kind of game.
So the amount of active playtesters remains about the same.
But the feedback gets more positive as the people active in the playtest are more slanted toward one style of play.

If this is the case they are failing at the unifying the editions thing.  
 



This goes back to my post about philosophy.   It's easy to include mechanics from every editon.  They've done that in spades.   It's hard to capture the philosophy of every edition in the same game.   Very hard.   And I believe they've decided to make the 1e/2e simple rules DM empowered philosophy their prime directive.   They will of course layer on extra things and make subclasses.   But the overall tenor of the game will still be a particular philosophy.   Will 4e people intentionally be able to steer the game more their way?  Sure.   But the game no longer endorses some of their fundamental principles as universal truths.   Because to do so they would have to simultaneously reject the fundamental principles coming from other editions.

 

My Blog which includes my Hobby Award Winning articles.


I still think you should try and support DDN by at least buying the core books and giving it a good run before deciding one way or the other.



Nah. I am only going to put any money into this edition if I like the final result. A few playtest packets ago, I liked what I was seeing. If they fix the imbalance that is presently in the game, I will probably like it again. I like the aesthetic direction! But I won't pay for something as imbalanced as this.
looking at the 4 posts above may the folowing be the case ?

Many 4th edition fans are losing intrest and abandoning the playtest.
On the other hand there are still playtesters joining the playtest replacing them, mainly atracted by people telling them the playtest is a more old school kind of game.
So the amount of active playtesters remains about the same.
But the feedback gets more positive as the people active in the playtest are more slanted toward one style of play.

If this is the case they are failing at the unifying the editions thing.  
 



This goes back to my post about philosophy.   It's easy to include mechanics from every editon.  They've done that in spades.   It's hard to capture the philosophy of every edition in the same game.   Very hard.   And I believe they've decided to make the 1e/2e simple rules DM empowered philosophy their prime directive.   They will of course layer on extra things and make subclasses.   But the overall tenor of the game will still be a particular philosophy.   Will 4e people intentionally be able to steer the game more their way?  Sure.   But the game no longer endorses some of their fundamental principles as universal truths.   Because to do so they would have to simultaneously reject the fundamental principles coming from other editions.

 



It's truly a pity hm? Or I suppose it would if you cared about 4E in some meaningful way.

It's truly a pity hm? Or I suppose it would if you cared about 4E in some meaningful way.



I didn't mean to make it sound like I thought it was a pity.  I may like or dislike various 4e mechanics but I truly do hate the philosophy of 4e with a white hot passion.   I don't really like the philosophy of 3e either.  I was able with the mechanics of 3e to bend the game back to a 2e philosopy somewhat when I played it.   With 4e, I couldn't bend it.   Now that was a feature in some ways especially if you are of the 4e philosopy.  It was a very tight game no doubt.  

I think 5e while being of the 1e/2e philosophy (with some notable exceptions of course it's not a 100% match) will be more maleable than most editions.   It still won't make 4e people that think the rest of D&D was garbage happy.  I think a lot of 4e players though are not so intolerant and they may be just fine once all the stuff is released.   



 

My Blog which includes my Hobby Award Winning articles.


It's truly a pity hm? Or I suppose it would if you cared about 4E in some meaningful way.



I didn't mean to make it sound like I thought it was a pity.  I may like or dislike various 4e mechanics but I truly do hate the philosophy of 4e with a white hot passion.   I don't really like the philosophy of 3e either.  I was able with the mechanics of 3e to bend the game back to a 2e philosopy somewhat when I played it.   With 4e, I couldn't bend it.   Now that was a feature in some ways especially if you are of the 4e philosopy.  It was a very tight game no doubt.  

I think 5e while being of the 1e/2e philosophy (with some notable exceptions of course it's not a 100% match) will be more maleable than most editions.   It still won't make 4e people that think the rest of D&D was garbage happy.  I think a lot of 4e players though are not so intolerant and they may be just fine once all the stuff is released.   



 



Which is a funny little hypocracy, you won't bend or have anything to do with it, but you'll condemn those 4E players that you believe are "intolerant" of the new edition, while at the same time if it was more like 4E you'd be in the exact same position.
You know what's really funny.   Mearls is tweeting in the last day that they have an incredibly large playtest group and that the group is overwhelming positive about the current direction.   

I guess those on these various threads who can see nothing good are in the distinct minority.



There are a few groups that matter; the play testers, forum posters and everyone else.  I have a distinct feeling that 'everyone else' outnumbers the other two combined by a lot.  There's most likely a sizable chunk of Paizo, grognards and 4th fans who aren't partaking in the play test.

How long DDN lasts, and how many releases are unleashed each year, will be a strong indicator of how well DDN does.  Overall, I think it will start out pretty successful but the elephant in the room- paizo and disgruntled 4th fans (like me) could derail DDN's success. 
....It is unlikely that I will purchase the books for the new edition (but hey, we never know for sure until it's released).

But that's OK.

I've been thinking about it some more recently, and I've come to realize that 4E suits my storytelling needs just fine.....




Read the OP again and just wanted to say, kudos indeed on an honest and measured opinion.

I just hope D&DN catches your interest as it develops but if it doesn't, 4E is a perfectly good system to carry on playing, just like those editions that came before it. I'm running both 4E and D&DN games at the moment and I can honestly say they do feel quite different in practise but can be used to weave the same stories and to engage the players.



Emirikol - thinking about your philosophy statements here I arrived at the conclusion that all D&D editions had the same guiding philosophy but that their design ethos was varied. This is particularly true of 4E, where the dev team seem to have deliberately tried to shake up the system mechanically to be able to provide a guiding set of design principles that could work across all classes (rather than attempt the tricky balancing act of comparing different classes with disparate mechanics that 3E and D&DN seem to struggle a little with). Would you mind if I asked what it is about 4E's philosophy that you are so vehemently opposed to? What 4E ethic really gets your goat?


Sorry to ask - I'm just trying to understand the distinctions made in this discussion while I'm thinking about my own relationship with the various editions  
"They call me Wraith for I hate the living..." "Play the game, not the ruleset" In April this year, a real force for good was lost to this community - Wrecan, whichever plane your soul now wanders I hope the journey you are now on is as interesting as the writings you shared with this community. Rest in peace. I am Blue/Green
I am Blue/Green
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.


How long DDN lasts, and how many releases are unleashed each year, will be a strong indicator of how well DDN does.  Overall, I think it will start out pretty successful but the elephant in the room- paizo and disgruntled 4th fans (like me) could derail DDN's success. 



I certainly hope you aren't right, Hunterian - while I appreciate that D&DN will not (and could never) appeal to all flavours of D&D players (let alone the RPG masses) I really want to see a vibrant and vital D&D edition. With our player base fractures across editions like it is it really weakens the support we get as a whole for our chosen hobby.

Like it or lump it, a popular D&D (of any edition) will help drive production of supporting products and items that fans of any edition could potentially use. That could be settings, adventures, minis, maps, terrain and anything that supports the overall experience. For a similar reason, I really want to see Paizo do well too (even though I prefer 4E to PF).

For me, having a D&D weakened by 5 inequal editions (and their amendments) doesn't push the hobby or the D&D brand as a whole. But if a single edition had most of our playerbase, there would be enough potential money in the pot to drive products, advertising, and other stuff to drag more players into the fold. The competition posed by Paizo in particular could well enhance this effect, while competing for the playerbase.

I want more stuff ergo I want D&D to be successful ergo I want one edition to appeal to the masses (become dominant).

Call me optimistic but there you have it.

If the 4E fans (myself among them) and the Paizo apologists decide to shun D&DN because it isn't D20 or that it doesn't follow 4E's ethos then we could collectively shoot ourselves as a whole. I like 4E but I feel like it lets me down at times. I could have stayed on 2E or moved to PF. Instead I jumped in and supported 4E and I've had some great materials out of that. Now, I'm not saying "BY EET COZ IT IZ DEE AN' DEE U FOOL" but I am saying that if a large sector of the D&D fanbase decide to pooh-pooh the idea of next because it doesn't meet all of their needs that we could all lose out.

I'll move to Next - I prefer the flexibility it gives me as a DM but I understand that much of the stuff that made 4E great has so far been absent. Just remember that at it's core D&DN is the same game we've always played and that it's far from complete yet. Hold hope, submit feedback and get the game we all deserve.

......Yep, I took my optimism pills this morning  
"They call me Wraith for I hate the living..." "Play the game, not the ruleset" In April this year, a real force for good was lost to this community - Wrecan, whichever plane your soul now wanders I hope the journey you are now on is as interesting as the writings you shared with this community. Rest in peace. I am Blue/Green
I am Blue/Green
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I've been giving alot of thought to whether or not wotc will be able to ever garner my intrest or financial support for one of their products again. Most can tell by the tone of my posts I am no wotc loyalist and a pre wotc D&D player and fan. I don't like D&D Next thus far. But the answer is still yes.
    Despite my general dislike of the company and it's practices:  Here's the principle that I cannot deny- they have my support as a player and fan because of their reprints of the TSR editions of the game. In fact I have spent a couple of 100 on the reprints of those products in the last year and visit D&D classics .com for the pdf's I want as well. They have made me and alot of other fans like me very happy by allowing us to purchase new copies of what we love.  Of course I want more in dead tree format.
    They have united us ( TSR fans) under their company banner rather than under the D&D Next game. No not all fans are happy- especially the 4e fans, and rightly so I'd say. However, thanks to wotc I don't even have to buy or play D&D Next but can still be an avid player of AD&D, buy their products, and be supported - this is a new concept. So to wotc - for once, good job and thanks.
If I choose I never have to play this game, I can just soldier on and enjoy myself. I hope that they continue to expand the production of the pdf's and even write the new adventures in the AD&D format- that would be cool.
   Now as for so called "modern game design"  I'll play Pathfinder and wait ,watch, and see. I'm not in ther market for a 3e. retroclone. I have one that works well for that system.
I feel the same way as the OP.  For my group and my D&D needs, we like 4E just fine.  That doesn't mean I have anything against D&DN.  I'm usually one to try the next edition and see what it has to offer.  This will be the first time I haven't picked up the next edition of D&D (and I've played them all). 

I discussed it with my group and mentioned the playtest.  They weren't interested.  It also comes down to budget with us.  Being that we have families and bills, we just didn't want to make the investment in another edition.  Considering the amount of books they tend to publish for D&D, it can be a pricey hobby.  My group loves 4E, loves the way it plays, they understand it, and we already have the resources for it.  So we decided to stick with 4E.

I do hope DDN is a success though.  Even though I may never purchase a new edition of D&D, I'd like to see the game succeed.  There are plenty of new players who could pick up in my stead and enjoy it. 

Personally, 4E is my favorite edition so far.  It's not without it's flaws, but I love it.  So if we stick to 4E from here on out, I'm happy.  I just hope DDN brings new blood to the hobby and gets more people interested in D&D.        

......Yep, I took my optimism pills this morning  


egads it gives me the shudders...

  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

You know what's really funny.   Mearls is tweeting in the last day that they have an incredibly large playtest group and that the group is overwhelming positive about the current direction.   

I guess those on these various threads who can see nothing good are in the distinct minority.



There are a few groups that matter; the play testers, forum posters and everyone else.  I have a distinct feeling that 'everyone else' outnumbers the other two combined by a lot.  There's most likely a sizable chunk of Paizo, grognards and 4th fans who aren't partaking in the play test.

How long DDN lasts, and how many releases are unleashed each year, will be a strong indicator of how well DDN does.  Overall, I think it will start out pretty successful but the elephant in the room- paizo and disgruntled 4th fans (like me) could derail DDN's success. 



I am sure everyone else is a much larger group than the play testers, but I was shocked to see the 120,000 registered play tester number quoted in Forbes today.  I would also guess that they are likely using a lot of information from the surveys if they feel they have a large enough group to make the responses meaningful.

www.forbes.com/sites/davidewalt/2013/05/...
The 
D&D Next playtest has over 120,000 registered playtesters as of its first anniversary. “We’ve all been just blown away by the response and by the level of participation,” says Mearls.


Considering that there are at least a few in most groups that are likely following along unofficially using others play test packets, it makes you wonder how many people have played at least one session of the play test rules.  I expect that D&D next will have a very successful launch.


Considering that there are at least a few in most groups that are likely following along unofficially using others play test packets, it makes you wonder how many people have played at least one session of the play test rules.  I expect that D&D next will have a very successful launch.



The 120,000 registered only indicates the upper limit of participation. Now think about how many people are registered to vote versus how many people actually participate in an election. The people I know who aren't playing anymore still count as registered playtesters.

What we need is data on how many people who downloaded each packet and how many of them responded to the survey (and which sections they opted in/out of).
I'm registered - none of my players are.

I'm not convinced 120000 is necessarily the upper limit.
There are also some people who ahve registered multiple times in order to vote multiple times.

Steely_Dan mentioned that he (or a friend?) was doing just that.
That is twice the size +20k of the Paizo playtest.

 Fear is the Mind Killer

 

Considering that there are at least a few in most groups that are likely following along unofficially using others play test packets, it makes you wonder how many people have played at least one session of the play test rules.  I expect that D&D next will have a very successful launch.



For debate's sake, let's assume that the number of people who have actually played a game of DDNext is exactly 120,000. Now, let's also assume that everyone of those people liked playing DDNext playtest-version, and was willing to buy a PHB as well. 

If everyone who played in the DDNext playtest both signed up AND wants to buy the PHB, that would still be half as much as what 4ed garnered in its first year of release.

www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?254...
  

"Ah, the age-old conundrum. Defenders of a game are too blind to see it's broken, and critics are too idiotic to see that it isn't." - Brian McCormick

    Despite my general dislike of the company and it's practices:  Here's the principle that I cannot deny- they have my support as a player and fan because of their reprints of the TSR editions of the game. In fact I have spent a couple of 100 on the reprints of those products in the last year and visit D&D classics .com for the pdf's I want as well. They have made me and alot of other fans like me very happy by allowing us to purchase new copies of what we love.  Of course I want more in dead tree format.



Thats true for me.  In the last year I have spent more on the new ADnD books then I have on 4e, and I am looking at the Unearthed Arcana and the 2e books as well.  ;)

Member of the Axis of Awesome

Show
Homogenising: Making vanilla in 31 different colours
 Once WoTC announced the PDFs as a gesture of good faith I decided to buy the D&DN core rules regardless. I'll also go and buy some AD&D adventures just trying to make my mind up for what one.
 Rather than whine on an internet forum vote with thy wallet.
 

 Fear is the Mind Killer

 

Our group has been playing 5E and when we finish up they are like good game.  I liked how they did "at wills".  Then they're like when are we playing 2E again.  Let's play mutants and masterminds for the more customizable games and pathfinder for the monty haul games.  Then someone says, "Hey what's this new setting that Monte Cook is working on".  Then it goes, "at-wills are cool, but that's not really dnd".
Sign In to post comments