Best way to Playtest a class

[Llama513]

As someone who is getting deeper into home-brewing, I am curious as to what the best ways to play test a class, and an archetype are?

[Ninja_Prawn]

As someone who is getting deeper into home-brewing, I am curious as to what the best ways to play test a class, and an archetype are?

Ideally, you want to see it in play at a selection of levels (1, 3, 5 and 11 are probably the most important), alongside a similar class if one exists, across enough encounters to eliminate dice swing as a factor. It's also important to give the playtesting party 'standard days' of 6-8 encounters with two short rests.

That's a lot of work, obviously, but you might be able to offset it my having multiple groups running at the same time and then pooling their experience.

Generally I only playtest stuff in combat situations, as they tend to be the easiest thing to break.

[hymer]

Ideally, you want to see it in play at a selection of levels (1, 3, 5 and 11 are probably the most important), alongside a similar class if one exists, across enough encounters to eliminate dice swing as a factor. It's also important to give the playtesting party 'standard days' of 6-8 encounters with two short rests.

That's a lot of work, obviously, but you might be able to offset it my having multiple groups running at the same time and then pooling their experience.

Generally I only playtest stuff in combat situations, as they tend to be the easiest thing to break.

This makes sense, except I think you ought to establish a baseline or control group, and then compare the experimental results to that. So if you're making a fighter subclass (damage/combat utility), run the encounters with a Battlemaster and her/his group, and then with the experimental subclass and her/his group. Then see how they compare.

[Ninja_Prawn]

This makes sense, except I think you ought to establish a baseline or control group, and then compare the experimental results to that. So if you're making a fighter subclass (damage/combat utility), run the encounters with a Battlemaster and her/his group, and then with the experimental subclass and her/his group. Then see how they compare.

That'd be nice. The issue is you're always trying to balance thoroughness with time constraints. Unless you've got a massive pool of playtesters, you're never going to achieve anything truly scientific.

If I'm testing a DPR class, I'll tend to run it alongside a traditional warlock and if neither seriously outshines the other over a long period, I call it good.

[Foxhound438]

That's a lot of work, obviously, but you might be able to offset it my having multiple groups running at the same time and then pooling their experience.


more than just speeding the process, having a few people testing gives more varied perspectives- maybe one person thinks it's fine because the fluff is cool, but another feels that the abilities step on the toes of their own favorite existing class.

[MrStabby]

Also be up-front about how you expect it to play and how well it should do different things. If you build a control class and your testers treat it as a DPR class then they will probably come back saying it is crap.

Casters are kind of difficult to test. Spells kind of look balanced - given that they are already options in the PHB for existing classes. But if you take the best concentration spells, stick them on a casting class with Con proficiency and heavy armour then they do get a big boost.

Selecting spells each day is also very powerful. You have to look at not only individual spells but also the portfolio as a whole. This is pretty difficult to test. In some ways the learned spells structure is even worse as on one test character you are never going to know all the spells.


My advice is to put as much weight on the thinking and the calculation as you can. Testing is needed and is more important than calculations but it takes so much longer. Getting things as close as possible before testing will save you time.


Finally make sure you tackle diversity in encounters. Hordes, single big targets, casters, melee are all important. Equally important is the terrain - open ground, forest, indoors, day, night...

Finally do your best to be objective. if all your testers come back saying that a feature is too powerful it probably is a bit too powerful. Reevaluate it. Don't just think you have successfully offset it against some other weakness or that the testers are misjudging it (they might be, but if a lot of feedback says the same thing trust it, at least at first).