Why the D&D Playtest Feels Rushed (Playtest 6 Review)

[@pgb8000]

Thanks for an interesting video. I agree that playtesting feels a bit rushed, and it is disappointing to see them row back on some of the more interesting ideas they had in earlier play tests. But I'm happy to accept the direction they are going in. I don't agree with your comments about pure profit motive driving the desire for backwards compatibility. I think it is much more complicated than that. You are part of the 'professional' D&d community, and you have to keep in mind your experience of the game is much different to the majority of casual players out there. We don't play multiple games each week. We are not yet getting bored with 5E. I DO care greatly that they might obsolete all the 5E books I have bought over the last few years, because I haven't really used them much yet. I am only half way though my second-ever 5E campaign. I'm definitely not bored with 5E yet, and not ready for it to all be chucked away for a new edition. I'm a supporter of a refresh of the rules, to straighten out all the quirks that years of play have shown up to need revision. So a version of 5E with improved rule wording and better balancing is exactly what I want. Not exciting, but makes the game better. I think the desire for backwards compatibility is largely based on survey results from casual players such as myself that we love 5E as it is, and are not ready to throw it away yet. If WoTC did this, I probably would not buy a 6th edition - why bother? I've got lots of mileage left in 5E.

[@EventyrGames]

I think you raise a very valid point - and the internet chatter I'm most exposed to is probably more 'hardcore' players or veterans, so my perception is likely skewed, as you say. That said, I still think they need more time to just do what they're saying they are attempting to do - make the rules clearer and better - and they're rushing it because of the need to have a 2024 release. And I think that for the overall longevity of the game, a more rigorous overhaul - even if it stayed near to the core 5E rules - would be better, but that's of course hard to say with any certainty. My gut feeling tells me they'll release something slightly better but still half-baked, and then just do the complete 6E revamp in 3-5 years instead. But who knows!

[@pgb8000]

@@EventyrGames I agree completely they are working to the Christmas 2024 deadline, which is causing rushing. To only have the first version of a revised Monk very recently was a big mistake. It was one of the main classes which needed careful revision and probably several iterations to get properly balanced. But, instead, it's the last one they release. We haven't seen most spells yet - and the changes to them could massively affect game balance and/or add lots of unintended effects which will only become apparent when the optimisers find things to exploit. This could mean several revisions of spells & spell wording are needed. And there will not be time for that if they have to start printing books in 6-8 months for release for the Christmas gifting market. I wish I could play more... but life doesn't allow it! Most of the players I play with fit into the casual gamers group, who have only come to 5E in the last 3-4 years with the massive expansion during covid times. WoTC is being very careful not to scare them away with a new game and a new rules set. I think this is sensible. The hardcore D&d crowd have lots of third party content to expand the 5E game with. I think this is a nice compromise.

[@EventyrGames]

I agree with everything there - and with small kids and a company to run, I'm lucky to play once every week, so I'm with you on that wanting to play more! 😅

[@EventyrGames]

Check out Wanderer's Guide to Enchanted Emporiums: www.kickstarter.com/projects/eventyrgames/wanderers-guide-to-enchanted-emporiums Sign up to be notified and make sure you don't miss out on early bird rewards!

[@grahamward7]

I think they didn’t want it to be a new edition, and realized partway through the playtest that the proposed changes were “new edition” changes. Seems like half the folks wanted no changes, half the folks wanted a new edition.

[@bradleyhurley6755]

It is rushed because it is for the Anniversary of D&D, but also at a time when the company is afraid to make major changes, but also needs to justify having a new edition.

[@kevinmcdunn8058]

I feel like the quantity and quality of playtest material coming out is significantly lower than what a single hobbyist with an unrelated full-time job could put out, which is mystifying to me. Is the D&D team really just one person with around five hours per week to work on content? It's confusing and kinda depressing.

[@bradleyhurley6755]

The problem is the next "version" of the game can't be drastically different from 5e because they want everyone to move to the new edition, but know that if they call it a new edition or make radical changes they are just going to split the player base, and their goal is to move the entire player base to online resources, so they don't have to worry about that problem any more since they can just remove the older content. There is also the failure that was 4e and as successful as D&D is right now, its a bad time for a new edition, But the anniversary is coming up and they want a new edition for that. They are also making some radical changes, and who knows how that is going to do. I think the playtest is being restricted, because they have a deadline of next year for the anniversary, and because they need to get people to the new edition and keep them from staying with the old edition. This largely means options need to be more powerful than previously, and they have to walk a thin line on trying fix things that were overpowerful, because people can still play the old edition.