PDA

View Full Version : D&D 5e/Next Playtesting?



Oramac
2016-02-23, 01:39 PM
I'm not 100% sure this is the right place. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

How does everyone go about playtesting the content they create? Is there a specific format that is commonly followed?

Unrelated side question: What does [Peach] mean in a thread title?

Ninja_Prawn
2016-02-23, 01:44 PM
I've never seen a set formula for playtesting, though it'd be nice to have one.

Please Evaluate And Critique Honestly.

UristMcRandom
2016-02-23, 01:45 PM
I'm not 100% sure this is the right place. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

How does everyone go about playtesting the content they create? Is there a specific format that is commonly followed?

Unrelated side question: What does [Peach] mean in a thread title?

I apologize that I can't answer your main question, but I can assure you that this is probably the best place to ask it. Oh, and [PEACH] means "Please Examine And Critique Honestly".

Oramac
2016-02-23, 01:58 PM
Thanks for the info!

So for playtesting, does everyone just jump into a game and "wing it", I guess? Changing things as you go?

Ninja_Prawn
2016-02-23, 02:35 PM
Thanks for the info!

So for playtesting, does everyone just jump into a game and "wing it", I guess? Changing things as you go?

That's what I do though, as a scientist, I don't like it. Plus I don't have access to any IRL games, so the only playtesting I can do is in PbP, which is so damn slow...

RakiReborn
2016-02-23, 04:39 PM
I haven't playtested any of my homebrew material as of yet unfortunately, as it hasn't been possible yet. I am planning to get together with a some of friends in a couple of weeks to start that phase. I will DM small campains of about 2-3 levels each time, and focus on the levels 1-3, 7-9, 12-15 and 17-20. In those campains i will try to let my friends play in a party of 4 or 6, in which there is an even amount of homebrew and original content characters, so i can see how they are balanced against eachother. The characters will be made with point-buy system to keep the base stats even. If i see anything in the campain that needs toning down or up, i will tell them and evaluate with them, and possibly tone it down or up as we play.
As that is just my plan, i have no idea if it works or not, but maybe you can use some of it for your own means of playtesting.

WarrentheHero
2016-02-23, 09:04 PM
Most of my play testing is in the form of justbjumping jn and seeing how things go.

I did once test a class by creating a series of 'deadly' encounters for level 1 and whatever levels got subclass features or power spikes. Then I filled in the rest of a 4-PC squad using generic characters that filled combat roles. So if I'm testing a "fighter-like" class I'll make a party with a wizard, Cleric, and rogue. T
hen I'll run the encounters and see how they do. I look to see if they filled their desired role in combat, if they were to OP or UP, if their features synergizes, etc.

This approach doesn't cover the strength of a class as an adventuring day drags on though. It doesn't take into account short/long rest abilities. So I could test a class with a lot of short-recharge features and think it's balanced, but it may turn out to be weak as time goes on and they don't get a short rest. For example, a Warlock is amazing in a single combatbifbthey use all their spells. But then they suck after that ifntheybdont get a rest. Same for all spellcasters, really, but it also doesn't measure this like a Fighter's Action Surge.


Still, despite it's flaws, it can be used. Works best if you have others to playtest with/for you.

Steampunkette
2016-02-23, 10:48 PM
I start with a comparison test.

I roll up one of the New thing and one of the standard classes, depending on what the New thing is closest to, conceptually. I follow the same rules in both instances and, in fact, whenever possible I use the same stat spread and race.

I do not use Feats or Multiclassing in either case, because while a lot of players use them, they're not core gameplay.

Then I do a direct numbers comparison down the sheets, marking down places where one or the other has advantage over the other and evaluate the commonness of those situations based on the main types of encounters (Underground, indoors, over hazard, trap room, forest/swamp/jungle, hills/rocky/cliffs, snow/ice/tundra, open plain). Some of those (Underground and indoors) are far more common than others and are weighted as such.

That gives me a rough guess as to how close the two classes are.

For damage output I do an acid test.

I pit them against a series of pregenerated single target and AoE encounters that last 7 rounds before a winner is declared. During those seven rounds everyone is assumed to roll 8 on round 1 and move up to 15 on round seven. In special instances (classes which gain critical-affecting abilities) I include an 8th round in which everyone still standing rolls 20. All damage is automatically averaged.

I compare this data with already generated data from the other classes I've tested. Particularly eyeing the kill-rate in each encounter and how much damage the character has taken.

And, of course, I write everything down.

It's only science if you write it down!

Oramac
2016-02-24, 12:47 PM
Thanks for the tips, everyone!! Sounds like I have a few options, but it all boils down to playing it and seeing how it works, then changing it as needed.