D&D (2024) Class spell lists and pact magic are back!

[Maxperson]

that is your real answer for everything. You have never had anything else to say for four weeks, no matter what the topic was.

Never think about anything, never engage with anything, just say whatever pops into your mind and call it a fact because ‘WotC sell lots of product’, that is all the ‘proof’ you ever have for anything you say

Yep. Correlation does not equal causation. Selling well isn't proof that their surveys work.

 

[mamba]

Yep. Correlation does not equal causation. Selling well isn't proof that their surveys work.

I said that something like 20 pages back already, we just go in circles

This has been going for a month or so now, and not once was my issue addressed directly, ever, despite me asking for that repeatedly

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I think you all forget, that WotC people design the game and only want to know if they are fumbling. That method has proven very well for them.
Why should they suddenly change that?

*at least it seems to have proven well. (correlation and causation).
But there also is no evidence that it was just coincidence.

 

[mamba]

I think you all forget, that WotC people design the game and only want to know if they are fumbling.

That was basically my conclusion, they they do not really care whether they miss clear improvements as long as they do not miss any absolute duds.

That the playtest is there to avoid disaster, not to identify improvements. WotC couldn’t care less about missing a dozen improvements as long as no duds slipped through.

If you agree that this is the point and that is all it should do, then I guess there is nothing to debate, I just wished it aimed higher than that. At that point I am not interested in being part of it

 

[UngeheuerLich]

That was basically my conclusion, they they do not really care whether they miss clear improvements as long as they do not miss any absolute duds.

That the playtest is there to avoid disaster, not to identify improvements. WotC couldn’t care less about missing a dozen improvements as long as no duds slipped through.

If you agree that this is the point and that is all it should do, then I guess there is nothing to debate, I just wished it aimed higher than that. At that point I am not interested in being part of it

Also they would forgo a clear improvement if 20% absoluteley hate it. They'd rather have something noone hates.

 

[TwoSix]

That the playtest is there to avoid disaster, not to identify improvements. WotC couldn’t care less about missing a dozen improvements as long as no duds slipped through.

If you agree that this is the point and that is all it should do, then I guess there is nothing to debate, I just wished it aimed higher than that. At that point I am not interested in being part of it

Honestly, I thought that's been pretty obvious for a while, which is why I've only weakly participated in most playtest threads.

It's weird to be on the side that doesn't want new books, but it's not like I've really changed philosophically. I've always been pro-change and pro-novelty, and other than the possible exception of 3.5, this is the only new release that's been anti-change and anti-novelty, which is why it's lost my interest.

 

[mamba]

Also they would forgo a clear improvement if 20% absoluteley hate it. They'd rather have something noone hates.

yes, that too

 

[mamba]

Honestly, I thought that's been pretty obvious for a while, which is why I've only weakly participated in most playtest threads.

well, it is my first round of playtests, so it may have been obvious to some, but it was not obvious to me from the start. It is also not how I understood them when WotC was talking about them, but yeah, since I realized that I have basically not bothered with their survey any more

 

[UngeheuerLich]

yes, that too

I still hope they will include variant rules that some love and some hate in the DMG or a tasha like book.
Probably that is the right place for them. For the PHB going the safer route might be better.

 

[Cruentus]

I still hope they will include variant rules that some love and some hate in the DMG or a tasha like book.
Probably that is the right place for them. For the PHB going the safer route might be better.

If they do, I hope they do a better job of making those variant rules actually mesh with the core game. My biggest problem with the current DMG is the variant rules don't mesh well without breaking something else, or having carry down impacts. Plus, there is little explanation about what they're supposed to do or look like in actual play.

They talked a good game about modularity, and as far as I could tell, it isn't there at all. Whenever I tried to house rule something, or change a mechanic, it had unforeseen consequences.

With re: to the playtest, I realized after Next, that the game had already left the station, and wasn't travelling to a destination I liked (i.e. the game isn't targeted to me anymore, and that's fine, I'm old, and have been playing a long time). So I hopped off the ride, and feel a lot better playing earlier versions, or other games that are more enjoyable to me and my group.