I really wish they had released the classes differently. As it is, if we want to fully playtest everything, we would have to run a Bard, a Ranger, and a Rogue from level 1-20 in about a month. And we couldn't even test most of the feats. Then we would have to do it all over again 3 more times for the other class categories. By the time we finish, we might find that our first impressions of an Expert class were wrong once we see the whole picture. Running even one game to level 20 in a couple years is a daunting tasks. No one can reasonably hope to provide really good feedback.
I think it would have been much better to release all of the classes, with one subclass each, with just the information for Tier 1. A lot more people could run a party of 3-5 characters of their choosing up to fifth level in the time given. You could even do it solo. Then the next round of playtesting could give us Tier 2 for all of the classes, and so on. Let us build them up a little at a time, and commit to seeing our characters through all stages of play.
That way we could actually see how they are all balanced as a whole. Right now we don't know if Rogues are bad, because we don't know what Fighters and Wizards look like. If we had a few levels of all the classes available, they would all be covered to some degree at someone's table. We could actually use them in context.
I will be asking for this in my survey feedback, but I doubt it will change anything at this point. So that means I need to try to work with what I've got. I really want this playtest to succeed. It's a rare opportunity, and for a game I love.
So how do you all plan to actually test this material? Do you have groups willing to speed run a campaign? Are you going to try to do some hypothetical encounters solo? I'm at a total loss.
Right now we don't know if Rogues are bad, because we don't know what Fighters and Wizards look like
Balance is not the concern at this stage. They want to know 'does this feel fun/satisfying'. Releasing a full class is important to understand the larger picture. They don't care if the bard feels appropriately balanced against a wizard. They want to know 'hey, does the reaction bardic inspiration feel more satisfying than the bonus action inspiration?'
A full release of a single class paints a better picture than just a couple levels of every class. There will be additional iterations at later stages, once all classes are out, where balance might be a bit larger of a concern.
I really wish they had released the classes differently. As it is, if we want to fully playtest everything, we would have to run a Bard, a Ranger, and a Rogue from level 1-20 in about a month. And we couldn't even test most of the feats. Then we would have to do it all over again 3 more times for the other class categories. By the time we finish, we might find that our first impressions of an Expert class were wrong once we see the whole picture. Running even one game to level 20 in a couple years is a daunting tasks. No one can reasonably hope to provide really good feedback.
I think it would have been much better to release all of the classes, with one subclass each, with just the information for Tier 1. A lot more people could run a party of 3-5 characters of their choosing up to fifth level in the time given. You could even do it solo. Then the next round of playtesting could give us Tier 2 for all of the classes, and so on. Let us build them up a little at a time, and commit to seeing our characters through all stages of play.
That way we could actually see how they are all balanced as a whole. Right now we don't know if Rogues are bad, because we don't know what Fighters and Wizards look like. If we had a few levels of all the classes available, they would all be covered to some degree at someone's table. We could actually use them in context.
I will be asking for this in my survey feedback, but I doubt it will change anything at this point. So that means I need to try to work with what I've got. I really want this playtest to succeed. It's a rare opportunity, and for a game I love.
So how do you all plan to actually test this material? Do you have groups willing to speed run a campaign? Are you going to try to do some hypothetical encounters solo? I'm at a total loss.
Ideally? Everyone involved will explore a small section and shear numbers will do the rest for the Devs.
I think trying to test everything is probably not something one person can do. I have been focusing on playing a couple games, mostly building a character from level 1 to 20 and then playing that character at 3, 7, 11, 14, and 18 to get a feel for everything. I am not going to really test the epic boons, mostly because I never really play at level 20 anyway and am not really interested in that. So my answer to that portion of the survey will likely be Not enough info or something along those lines or just what my impression of them was. But pick a character or 2 and play in a few one shots at each tier. Test the things you are concerned with. Try to break it even in some cases.
The rogue was the easiest for me to test because of the lack of decision points when leveling. I didn't have to think about spells I could just focus on skills and feats and the feel of the game. People may find it weird but I felt one of the best 4th level feats for the rogue was Charger. I got damage out of it, and extra movement on a BONUS action if I wanted it. Was surprised how good it felt on a thief rogue. I looked at skulker and athlete originally, but their bonuses were too similar to the thief subclass so I skipped them.
Thanks for the thoughtful replies. I keep looking at the document and trying to mentally organize everything and plan and it's a bit overwhelming. There is so much in one release. I wanted to try some builds on paper, so I think I'll start there with this advice. I might roll my way through LMoP just to see how the first five levels work even if I can't get any other volunteers this time around.
If you do try to cram the whole 1-20 into your games, you're going to skew your data. Spellcasters will get a buff that other characters won't get, for example, because you're going to be leveling them up in the middle of their adventuring day, giving them more spell slots.
If you do try to cram the whole 1-20 into your games, you're going to skew your data. Spellcasters will get a buff that other characters won't get, for example, because you're going to be leveling them up in the middle of their adventuring day, giving them more spell slots.
Yeah, if for some reason you were brave enough to try it (and had lots of time on your hands), you would have to take that into account. You couldn't level up characters in the middle of an adventuring day. You'd have to run it more like a montage of a whole adventuring career. Or one really crazy Mega Dungeon that is 20 floors deep and each one takes at least a day to finish, with 5-6 encounters per floor. There would have to be a variety of problems to solve, and a 'boss fight' at the end of each floor. So you'd at least spend one adventuring day expending resources each level. It would be wild, but could be fun?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I really wish they had released the classes differently. As it is, if we want to fully playtest everything, we would have to run a Bard, a Ranger, and a Rogue from level 1-20 in about a month. And we couldn't even test most of the feats. Then we would have to do it all over again 3 more times for the other class categories. By the time we finish, we might find that our first impressions of an Expert class were wrong once we see the whole picture. Running even one game to level 20 in a couple years is a daunting tasks. No one can reasonably hope to provide really good feedback.
I think it would have been much better to release all of the classes, with one subclass each, with just the information for Tier 1. A lot more people could run a party of 3-5 characters of their choosing up to fifth level in the time given. You could even do it solo. Then the next round of playtesting could give us Tier 2 for all of the classes, and so on. Let us build them up a little at a time, and commit to seeing our characters through all stages of play.
That way we could actually see how they are all balanced as a whole. Right now we don't know if Rogues are bad, because we don't know what Fighters and Wizards look like. If we had a few levels of all the classes available, they would all be covered to some degree at someone's table. We could actually use them in context.
I will be asking for this in my survey feedback, but I doubt it will change anything at this point. So that means I need to try to work with what I've got. I really want this playtest to succeed. It's a rare opportunity, and for a game I love.
So how do you all plan to actually test this material? Do you have groups willing to speed run a campaign? Are you going to try to do some hypothetical encounters solo? I'm at a total loss.
Balance is not the concern at this stage. They want to know 'does this feel fun/satisfying'. Releasing a full class is important to understand the larger picture. They don't care if the bard feels appropriately balanced against a wizard. They want to know 'hey, does the reaction bardic inspiration feel more satisfying than the bonus action inspiration?'
A full release of a single class paints a better picture than just a couple levels of every class. There will be additional iterations at later stages, once all classes are out, where balance might be a bit larger of a concern.
Ideally? Everyone involved will explore a small section and shear numbers will do the rest for the Devs.
I think trying to test everything is probably not something one person can do. I have been focusing on playing a couple games, mostly building a character from level 1 to 20 and then playing that character at 3, 7, 11, 14, and 18 to get a feel for everything. I am not going to really test the epic boons, mostly because I never really play at level 20 anyway and am not really interested in that. So my answer to that portion of the survey will likely be Not enough info or something along those lines or just what my impression of them was. But pick a character or 2 and play in a few one shots at each tier. Test the things you are concerned with. Try to break it even in some cases.
The rogue was the easiest for me to test because of the lack of decision points when leveling. I didn't have to think about spells I could just focus on skills and feats and the feel of the game. People may find it weird but I felt one of the best 4th level feats for the rogue was Charger. I got damage out of it, and extra movement on a BONUS action if I wanted it. Was surprised how good it felt on a thief rogue. I looked at skulker and athlete originally, but their bonuses were too similar to the thief subclass so I skipped them.
Thanks for the thoughtful replies. I keep looking at the document and trying to mentally organize everything and plan and it's a bit overwhelming. There is so much in one release. I wanted to try some builds on paper, so I think I'll start there with this advice. I might roll my way through LMoP just to see how the first five levels work even if I can't get any other volunteers this time around.
If you do try to cram the whole 1-20 into your games, you're going to skew your data. Spellcasters will get a buff that other characters won't get, for example, because you're going to be leveling them up in the middle of their adventuring day, giving them more spell slots.
Yeah, if for some reason you were brave enough to try it (and had lots of time on your hands), you would have to take that into account. You couldn't level up characters in the middle of an adventuring day. You'd have to run it more like a montage of a whole adventuring career. Or one really crazy Mega Dungeon that is 20 floors deep and each one takes at least a day to finish, with 5-6 encounters per floor. There would have to be a variety of problems to solve, and a 'boss fight' at the end of each floor. So you'd at least spend one adventuring day expending resources each level. It would be wild, but could be fun?