1st review of players handbook

[CyberThread]

http://www.actsofgeek.com/2014/08/rpg-review-dd-players-handbook/


I won't ruin it for folks, or tell you what the results were.

[HylianKnight]

So not a review of the system, just the book itself.

[Tholomyes]

Review of the book, and it seems largely focused on aesthetics. 3/4ths of the review metrics were aesthetic based. Cool. It'll be a pretty book.

[Noldo]

You did notice from pictures that druid appears to get Natural Spell at 18th level?

[pwykersotz]

I'm loving the Druid picture. But yeah, the review has no substance.

[oxybe]

i'm kinda amazed the OP didn't actually put the game review parts in his post

Part 1 (http://www.actsofgeek.com/2014/08/game-the-game-5th-edition-players-handbook-preview-part-1/) - The reviewer tries to remake his 1st ed Tiefling with some degree of success and gives us a step by step rundown of his thought process during this undertaking, as well as pointing out some things of interest.

Part 2 (http://www.actsofgeek.com/2014/08/game-the-game-5th-edition-players-handbook-preview-part-2/) - Same reviewer as part 1, gives us a quick summary of his thoughts after a play session (which i'm guessing is probably going to be part 3 or 4, if such things will eventually exist) and then a rundown of the Combat chapter, as well as his comments on some things found within.

[Theodoxus]

I'm quite pleased he mentioned in the second review of gameplay, that it's essentially a variant for 3rd Ed. As that's how I'm going to use it. Not sure which class type I'm going to use - 3rd's BAB/Skill/Saves or 5th's proficiencies... I suppose it depends on what is presented for conversion purposes.

Still a little sad there's no going back to segmented combat rounds with spell and weapon speeds. That was always my most favorite way of doing rounds - but that's a huge conversion endeavor I don't want to partake in, and trying to convince my players to use that would be problematic.

Well, still two weeks away from my own book... this is going to feel like 10 years. ;)

[rlc]

i'm kinda amazed the OP didn't actually put the game review parts in his post

Part 1 (http://www.actsofgeek.com/2014/08/game-the-game-5th-edition-players-handbook-preview-part-1/) - The reviewer tries to remake his 1st ed Tiefling with some degree of success and gives us a step by step rundown of his thought process during this undertaking, as well as pointing out some things of interest.

Part 2 (http://www.actsofgeek.com/2014/08/game-the-game-5th-edition-players-handbook-preview-part-2/) - Same reviewer as part 1, gives us a quick summary of his thoughts after a play session (which i'm guessing is probably going to be part 3 or 4, if such things will eventually exist) and then a rundown of the Combat chapter, as well as his comments on some things found within.
Yes, thank you. This is how you make a post about an article, not just, "Here it is. I'm not saying anything about it except for here it is!" I'm not assuming that everyone else is in the same boat as I am and doesn't have tons to read an entire article right now, but I definitely prefer some kind of commentary if you're going to bother posting something. I can read the actual article on my own, but then again, I could probably find it on my own if I'm really interested, too.

End rant.

[da_chicken]

I'm quite pleased he mentioned in the second review of gameplay, that it's essentially a variant for 3rd Ed.

He doesn't seem to care for 3e. An improved 3e is what I want.

The overall theme seems to be, "It's the same but it's different," but he can't decide if that's good or bad? Maybe he never read D&D Basic so everything is new? Was he expecting another major overhaul like 4e after WotC decided that wasn't what people wanted? :smallconfused:

I keep wanting to ask him what he means because he doesn't explain himself in depth very well. It reads like first impressions, not a review.

[Lycoris]

It reads like first impressions, not a review.

That might be because it is a first impressions, considering they title the articles as previews :smallwink: (excluding the book review, which is more about the layout and art of the book, and less the rules contents). That said, I agree that I would have liked to have seen a bit more opinion in the articles, but I'll assume judgment is being reserved until they have had more time to go through the book from end to end.

That said, there's some useful information in the article for people who can't wait till release day (what looks to be the full list of backgrounds, as well as a variant background in the form of the Gladiator).

EDIT: Of course, if you aren't dumb like me, you'd know that backgrounds were already revealed by WotC :smallredface:. Gladiator is still new AFAIK.

[oxybe]

Part 3 (http://www.actsofgeek.com/2014/08/game-the-game-5th-edition-players-handbook-part-3/)- Where the p/reviewer doesn't understand the logic behind the XP chart numbers, which seems to indicate that the dev's intended purpose of levels 1&2 are not described well enough. Interesting thing he notes: there are monsters in the PHB, like "That Dire Wolf" (which is included in the article).