# Playtesting?



## Ashrem Bayle (Aug 27, 2007)

So from the sounds of it, those who have accounts on DnDInsider, or are members of the RPGA,  have a shot at becoming a playtester. Do we know anything else?


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Aug 27, 2007)

*bump*
Oh come now. I can't be the only one looking for playtesting info.


----------



## BiggusGeekus (Aug 27, 2007)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> *bump*
> Oh come now. I can't be the only one looking for playtesting info.




Maybe we could playtest if we sent them donuts?


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Aug 27, 2007)

BiggusGeekus said:
			
		

> Maybe we could playtest if we sent them donuts?




All I need is an address baby!


----------



## mhensley (Aug 27, 2007)

How did they pick playtesters for 3e?


----------



## MacMathan (Aug 27, 2007)

bumped 'cause I gotta know how to get in on some playtest goodness.


----------



## Thaumaturge (Aug 27, 2007)

mhensley said:
			
		

> How did they pick playtesters for 3e?




I have friends who play tested 3e and they were selected through RPGA membership.  I'm hoping people who play tested 3e get preference to play test 4e, and I can ride their coattails.   That being said, I don't know if they picked people with more active memberships or if it was purely random.

Thaumaturge.


----------



## thundershot (Aug 27, 2007)

How DO you join the RPGA? I used to be a member back in the day (I even have Polyhedron magazines to prove it), but when Poly got rolled into Dungeon, I seem to have disappeared from it. I have no idea what my ID # is, and I can't find anything on the website to make heads or tails of it.



Chris


----------



## HeapThaumaturgist (Aug 27, 2007)

I know I would like to get in on the playtesting.  For 3E I could be patient because I was between game groups and generally not as active in the community.  This iteration I'm an even bigger gamer nerd than I have ever been and I'd love to get in on the playtesting.

I'm sure a lot of other people would, as well.

Which is why I say we decide, as a group, we get sorted by height and start from the top and move down, tallest to shortest.  I think this is the most fair and balanced method for choosing playtesters.

--fje (6'10")


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Aug 27, 2007)

I agree with Heap.

--PMP (7'23")


----------



## Vrecknidj (Aug 28, 2007)

If I had an inside way into playtesting, I'd use it.  I assume the same is true of others.  And, in some cases, it will probably work.  That should cover some small percentage of the people they're looking for.

After that, I wouldn't be surprised if they selected folks who have a lot of RPGA events listed as played, and maybe some people who are listed as Master Level or higher DMs.  But, honestly, they can probably get all the playtesters they need from people with RPGA numbers who have played and DMed in tons of events.

Dave


----------



## SteveC (Aug 28, 2007)

I just wanted to suggest that WotC take an approach to look at a pool of playtesters outside of the RPGA. I don't want to be too negative about the RPGA, because I've had some amazing game sessions in old Living City events, but, in general, there is a specific playstyle that I have seen in the games over the last few years.

It's not a bad playstyle, but it's also only one way to play D&D. I think to get a good sense of what's best for the game, it would be a good idea to seek playtesters with a wide variety of attitudes, backgrounds and experiences.

Just my $.02...

--Steve


----------



## hong (Aug 28, 2007)

SteveC said:
			
		

> I just wanted to suggest that WotC take an approach to look at a pool of playtesters outside of the RPGA. I don't want to be too negative about the RPGA, because I've had some amazing game sessions in old Living City events, but, in general, there is a specific playstyle that I have seen in the games over the last few years.
> 
> It's not a bad playstyle, but it's also only one way to play D&D. I think to get a good sense of what's best for the game, it would be a good idea to seek playtesters with a wide variety of attitudes, backgrounds and experiences.
> 
> ...



 I agree with this. I suspect that the heavily codified, formulaic nature of 3E was at least in some part influenced by the fact that RPGA members were a large proportion of the playtest pool. The need for a strong, uniform ruleset is greatest if you're playing in lots of games with people whom you don't know or barely know. If your group is stable, not so much.


----------



## Agamon (Aug 28, 2007)

They won't just pick RPGA members (which I don't think I am anymore), but D&DI members, too (which I am and didn't realize because I signed up to the WotC boards a few years ago but never really went there).

So they'll get feedback from more than just RPGA people (I agree, 100% RPGA playtest is not a good idea).


----------



## Scott_Rouse (Aug 28, 2007)

Right now donuts are pretty high on that list as are fly fishing trips to Argentina, Vintage Cars,  Seahawks Season Tickets, and getting the Monster Manual in the Oprah Book Club.

Really though as much as we like donuts bribes are not required. We are in the process of determining the selection criteria for play testers we''l keep you posted.


----------



## blargney the second (Aug 28, 2007)

Scott, will Canadians be eligible to playtest?  I started a thread about it the other day, and I'm still keen to find out!
-blarg


----------



## Quartz (Aug 28, 2007)

Scott, if you're looking for someone to have a critical think rather than a playtest (because I don't have a group), contact me and I can provide bona fides.


----------



## Piratecat (Aug 28, 2007)

Ha ha, I've stuck Oprah in a Model A and sent her to Argentina -- WITH DONUTS! I'm *in*, baby!


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Aug 28, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> Right now donuts are pretty high on that list as are fly fishing trips to Argentina, Vintage Cars,  Seahawks Season Tickets, and getting the Monster Manual in the Oprah Book Club.
> 
> Really though as much as we like donuts bribes are not required. We are in the process of determining the selection criteria for play testers we''l keep you posted.




Perhaps part of your criteria should be including people enthused enough about playtesting to start a thread about it.


----------



## The_Baldman (Aug 28, 2007)

blargney the second said:
			
		

> Scott, will Canadians be eligible to playtest?  I started a thread about it the other day, and I'm still keen to find out!
> -blarg





I know at least one Canadian group that should be in as I added him to my list when I turned them in yesterday. So I would be surprised if there is something preventing other canadian groups for getting in.

Dave


----------



## Scott_Rouse (Aug 28, 2007)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> Ha ha, I've stuck Oprah in a Model A and sent her to Argentina -- WITH DONUTS! I'm *in*, baby!




She better have Those Seahawks tickets or you're out PC


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Aug 28, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> She better have Those Seahawks tickets or you're out PC



I wouldn't get my hopes up that the donuts survived the trip.


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Aug 28, 2007)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> So from the sounds of it, those who have accounts on DnDInsider, or are members of the RPGA,  have a shot at becoming a playtester. Do we know anything else?




First rule of Play Test is, you don't talk about Play Test!


----------



## Scott_Rouse (Aug 28, 2007)

blargney the second said:
			
		

> Scott, will Canadians be eligible to playtest?  I started a thread about it the other day, and I'm still keen to find out!
> -blarg




We are not excluding Canadians (or other non-USA residents for that matter) as we discuss the plans. 

The only hitch I can foresee is because testers will be asked to sign a confidentiality agreement I am not sure how it would work with people outside the USA.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Aug 28, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> We are not excluding Canadians (or other non-USA residents for that matter) as we discuss the plans.
> 
> The only hitch I can foresee is because testers will be asked to sign a confidentiality agreement I am not sure how it would work with people outside the USA.





Scott, I've got a few questions if you've got the time to answer them:

1. How many playtesters do you guys plan to use?

2. How many must be in the RPGA?

3. Do you know when the application is going to be available? This week or "sometime in September"?

4. What format will the playtest documents be in? I'm wondering it will resemble the final product with art and some layout work, or if it'll be a stack of xeroxed napkins with scribbles on them. 

5. Will there be a supplied adventure or will you guys just send the rules and tell us to go to town on them.

6. Who should I send the check to, and/or provide sexual favors for, to insure I get in?


----------



## The_Baldman (Aug 28, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> She better have Those Seahawks tickets or you're out PC





Why would you want those ? You already got beat up by the Packers (again in fact after losing to them last year as well). So that means Tulach and Bulmahn should already be bugging ya. Though by DDXP everything will have been decided who owes a drink or three to who and I'll host the party again.

Dave


----------



## Master of the Game (Aug 28, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> We are in the process of determining the selection criteria for play testers we''l keep you posted.



Let me say that I believe being a former ENnies judge should feature high on the list of requirements.

What?  I got nothin'.


----------



## ozedge (Aug 28, 2007)

*playtesting*

I'm hoping international playtesters get a chance  

Being an Australian player it would def be cool and give the game that nice rounded testing


----------



## BlueBlackRed (Aug 29, 2007)

Hmm, I wonder other qualifications would be a plus?


----------



## mhensley (Aug 29, 2007)

BlueBlackRed said:
			
		

> Hmm, I wonder other qualifications would be a plus?




Well, I would guess-


RPGA member
DDI member
has a current D&D group that wants to playtest
has internet access
18 or older

Luckily, I have all of these qualities.


----------



## Ruavel (Aug 29, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> We are not excluding Canadians (or other non-USA residents for that matter) as we discuss the plans.
> 
> The only hitch I can foresee is because testers will be asked to sign a confidentiality agreement I am not sure how it would work with people outside the USA.




Easy.  

Send electronic copy of agreement to international playtester
International playtester *prints* agreement
International playtester *signs* agreement
International playtester *scans* signed pages
International playtester *emails* signed electronic copy
International playtester *posts* signed hardcopy to Wotc

 

I realise that's alot of effort on the part of the "International Playtester"...  

but I, for one, would be prepared to make that kind of sacrifice to be  an Australian 4E playtester...


----------



## Blessed Kitten (Aug 29, 2007)

I am not a lawyer, but I think the issue is not signing the NDA, so much as it is being able to enforce it across international boundaries.

Say you have someone in Sealand that signs the NDA and becomes a play tester. Say they then decide to break the NDA, what could Wizards do about it?

Which I guess raises the question, what is the penalty for breaking an NDA, generally?


----------



## Olaf the Stout (Aug 29, 2007)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> I wouldn't get my hopes up that the donuts survived the trip.




That gets my LOL moment of the day!   

Olaf the Stout


----------



## Ruavel (Aug 29, 2007)

Blessed Kitten said:
			
		

> I am not a lawyer, but I think the issue is not signing the NDA, so much as it is being able to enforce it across international boundaries.
> ...
> Which I guess raises the question, what is the penalty for breaking an NDA, generally?




I would speculate that the penalty would depend on whatever is stipulated in the NDA itself. It could be something as simple as being removed from the playtesting process, or it could leave the offender open to litigation, if the breach were significant enough ("Look everyone. I posted the playtest documentation on my website").

My experience with NDAs is restricted to ones between employer & employee, where a breach results in anything from informal reprimand to dismissal (no saving throw  ).

but you raise a very interesting point.  One can certainly see why the WotC/Hasbro lawyers might balk at the idea of including overseas playtesters...

...but the game is popular all around the world, and the broader the cross section of testers, the better the product is likely to be.

I guess it poses something of a conundrum and explains why Scott Rouse was "not sure how it would work with people outside the USA".

_edit: spelling mistakes, expansion & clarification_


----------



## Scott_Rouse (Aug 29, 2007)

> 1. How many playtesters do you guys plan to use?




Many, I don't know a total though



> 2. How many must be in the RPGA?




Half? Not sure yet.



> 3. Do you know when the application is going to be available? This week or "sometime in September"?




Sometime in September



> 4. What format will the playtest documents be in? I'm wondering it will resemble the final product with art and some layout work, or if it'll be a stack of xeroxed napkins with scribbles on them.




Word documents and spreadsheets with drawings from the preschoolers in our building.



> 5. Will there be a supplied adventure or will you guys just send the rules and tell us to go to town on them.




Under discussion, could be series of encounters or a full adventure



> 6. Who should I send the check to, and/or provide sexual favors for, to insure I get in?



   Cash man, Cash :\


----------



## Baron Opal (Aug 29, 2007)

Hey, hey! Why go fly fishing in _Washington_ when you could have an all-expense paid weekend to..._*Oregon!!!*_ You, yes YOU could have the excitement of fishing the exotic _Willamette Valley!_ What devoted fisher could ask for more?!?!

... what?


----------



## Quartz (Aug 29, 2007)

Blessed Kitten said:
			
		

> I am not a lawyer, but I think the issue is not signing the NDA, so much as it is being able to enforce it across international boundaries.




IIRC - it's in a Dragon article somewhere - there was a group in South America - Argentina or Brazil - who were playtesters for 3E and got excluded from the rest of the playtest for breaking the NDA.


----------



## Tharen the Damned (Aug 29, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> We are not excluding Canadians (or other non-USA residents for that matter) as we discuss the plans.
> 
> The only hitch I can foresee is because testers will be asked to sign a confidentiality agreement I am not sure how it would work with people outside the USA.




Playtester prints NDA Document out and sends it via Mail or Fax to WoC.

This method worked fine with me and my group for our playtests with Green Ronin.


----------



## Piratecat (Aug 29, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> Word documents and spreadsheets with drawings from the preschoolers in our building.



Okay, that would be awesome.

It would be interesting to see the form of the playtest documents. In 3e, we didn't get electronic copies; everything was printed (with instructions not to scan, although the quantity of pages discouraged that anyways). Technology nowadays allows watermarking of a person's actual name, of course, although it can be defeated by someone stubborn enough. 

When we got a "do not copy" Pixar script at work, I was impressed by how robust the anti-copy and anti-scanning tech was.



> Cash man, Cash :\



Quick, everyone! First person to dress up like Johnny Cash wins!


----------



## BlackMoria (Aug 29, 2007)

Well, I hope maybe having all sorts of playtest experience will give me a leg up on the rest of you mugs, since our group did all the playtest for Malhavoc Press.  

Well, it can't hurt to mention that.

**koff, koff** <slips Scott a crisp $100 bill>


----------



## Master of the Game (Aug 29, 2007)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> Quick, everyone! First person to dress up like Johnny Cash wins!








Darn you Joaquin Phoenix!  You don't even play DnD :fist:


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (Aug 29, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> Word documents and spreadsheets with drawings from the preschoolers in our building.




...I so hope you're serious.

That would be awesome.

Brad


----------



## ozedge (Aug 29, 2007)

Ruavel said:
			
		

> I would speculate that the penalty would depend on whatever is stipulated in the NDA itself. It could be something as simple as being removed from the playtesting process, or it could leave the offender open to litigation, if the breach were significant enough ("Look everyone. I posted the playtest documentation on my website").
> 
> My experience with NDAs is restricted to ones between employer & employee, where a breach results in anything from informal reprimand to dismissal (no saving throw  ).
> 
> ...




well as a result of the free trade agreement between OZ and the US... copyright infringement is enforceable between our countries (i beleive) so hopefully this makes it easier for someone like me to be accepted as a playtester


----------



## Ruavel (Aug 29, 2007)

ozedge said:
			
		

> well as a result of the free trade agreement between OZ and the US... copyright infringement is enforceable between our countries (i beleive) so hopefully this makes it easier for someone like me to be accepted as a playtester



well I'll keep my fingers crossed that at least one of us gets to be the Perth Playtesting Rep...


----------



## mhensley (Aug 29, 2007)

Hmmm... if applications for playtesting go out sometime in September, then I'm guessing actual playtesting will probably start in December and last through February.  Not a lot of time for playtesting is there?


----------



## Vrecknidj (Aug 29, 2007)

Suppose I apply for and am accepted as play tester.  How will I actually go about the process of doing the testing?  Will all the members of my normal D&D group be included?    I'm sure they'd all sign NDAs, but I'm just not sure I get how this all works.  I mean, would they all have to apply on their own?  Does the application process specify an entire gaming group?

Otherwise, I'd imagine that many of the more rural players might not be included simply because there aren't enough members in their geographical region for them to form large enough groups (and consistently enough) to actually get any serious testing accomplished.

Dave


----------



## The_Baldman (Aug 29, 2007)

mhensley said:
			
		

> Hmmm... if applications for playtesting go out sometime in September, then I'm guessing actual playtesting will probably start in December and last through February.  Not a lot of time for playtesting is there?





No I think the materials go out the the chosen playtest lead in September not applications. By September my understanding is people are already picked and it's a done deal. 

Dave C


----------



## Charwoman Gene (Aug 29, 2007)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> When we got a "do not copy" Pixar script at work, I was impressed by how robust the anti-copy and anti-scanning tech was.




Pixar is doing a movie about SLEEP!  *spoilers*


----------



## mhensley (Aug 29, 2007)

wavester said:
			
		

> No I think the materials go out the the chosen playtest lead in September not applications. By September my understanding is people are already picked and it's a done deal.




No, Scott said that the application for playtesters would be made available "Sometime in September".


----------



## BlackMoria (Aug 29, 2007)

> Suppose I apply for and am accepted as play tester. How will I actually go about the process of doing the testing? Will all the members of my normal D&D group be included? I'm sure they'd all sign NDAs, but I'm just not sure I get how this all works. I mean, would they all have to apply on their own? Does the application process specify an entire gaming group?




Usually, there is a playtest lead.  This is the person who will be the single point of contact between the designer and the playtest group, as the designer doesn't want to deal with tons of playtesters.

All materials go to the playtest lead.  The playtest lead disseminates the material, collects the material resulting from the playtest results, complies a playtest report and returns it to the designer.  The playtest lead is also responsible to ensure the playtest is conducted according to what the designer wants feedback on.  He is also responsible for any material sent to him.

To answer your questions specifically, you in essence 'volunteer your group' and indicate the playtest lead (most likely yourself). If accepted for the playtest, you will need to identify all members of your group.  The designer sends the playtest lead the NDAs.  You are responsible to distribute and collect and forward the NDA back to the designer.  

The designer sends you material, with instructions as to what they want tested (it can be general or very specific the material they want playtested).  You distribute the material, ensure the playtest is conducted in a timely fashion in a manner that best answers the requirements of the playtest.  You compile the results, write a playtest report and forward the results back the designer.  You may or may not need to return the playtest material.  If not, you may need to certify that the playtest material has been destroyed by doing so and making a declaration to that effect.  The designer will usually give you direction on what to do with material after the playtest.

Don't for a moment think that playtesting is getting the material in advance of the rest of the public and indulging yourselves.  It is a lot of work for the playtest lead and your 'end of playtest' report needs to be well written and address what the designer asked of you.  Your group needs to be able to work to deadlines (sometimes they can be tight) as well.

NDAs - they are a sacred convenant.  As playtest lead, you in essence are going 'to wear it' if someone in your group breaks the NDA.  As playtest lead, you are in essence, the guaranteur that the NDA will be abided by as you are 'the face' for your group.  Breaking a NDA by even one person in your group will result in your group being blacklisted from the playtest (and any future ones), possible legal issues and possibly getting a bad reputation with the d20 designer community (these guys know one another and talk to each other).  

That is my experience.  WOTC may conduct the playtest differently than I outlined.

Good luck.


----------



## blargney the second (Aug 29, 2007)

Nice summary, BlackMoria!


----------



## The_Baldman (Aug 29, 2007)

mhensley said:
			
		

> No, Scott said that the application for playtesters would be made available "Sometime in September".





Tomatoe tomato my friend. My expectation is to have the materials in my hands and working on playtests in September. So maybe there is two waves or maybe I have been told wrong. 

Dave C


----------



## HeapThaumaturgist (Aug 29, 2007)

>.>

I certainly hope signups aren't over because I never got a chance to sign up.  And my group has done playtesting before.

--fje


----------



## Vrecknidj (Aug 30, 2007)

Thank you, BlackMoria, for the very detailed post.  You've answered my questions.


			
				BlackMoria said:
			
		

> Don't for a moment think that playtesting is getting the material in advance of the rest of the public and indulging yourselves.  It is a lot of work for the playtest lead and your 'end of playtest' report needs to be well written and address what the designer asked of you.  Your group needs to be able to work to deadlines (sometimes they can be tight) as well.
> 
> NDAs - they are a sacred convenant.  As playtest lead, you in essence are going 'to wear it' if someone in your group breaks the NDA.  As playtest lead, you are in essence, the guaranteur that the NDA will be abided by as you are 'the face' for your group.  Breaking a NDA by even one person in your group will result in your group being blacklisted from the playtest (and any future ones), possible legal issues and possibly getting a bad reputation with the d20 designer community (these guys know one another and talk to each other).



I'm already under NDA as an editor for Knowledge Arcana, so I'm aware of its nature.  And, I understand the expectations involved with a group.  Fortunately, I have 100% confidence in my players.


> Good luck.



Indeed.  Thanks.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Aug 31, 2007)

Logan Bonner's blog said:
			
		

> *We're in a crunch trying to get classes spiffed up and entered into a database. We need to get our playtest packets together*, and we're developing the classes rapidly. I've been in the rogue, ranger, and cleric meetings this week, and I think they're all on pretty solid ground.




Awesome.

And according to Chris Thomasson, Logan is a big iTunes fan.

So Mr. Bonner,
To what address should I send the iTunes gift certificate?


----------



## Ruavel (Aug 31, 2007)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> So Mr. Bonner,
> To what address should I send the iTunes gift certificate?




*watches over Ashrem's shoulder for the address.*


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 4, 2007)

Anybody heard anything new?


----------



## BlackMoria (Sep 4, 2007)

No.  I've been checking DnDinsider, blogs and ENWorld for some sort of information on the playtest and so far, no joy on any further information.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 4, 2007)

Same here.

I certainly hope this effort pays off. At this point, I'd be awfully disappointed if I didn't get in.


----------



## Ruavel (Sep 4, 2007)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> Same here.
> 
> I certainly hope this effort pays off. At this point, I'd be awfully disappointed if I didn't get in.



Likewise... but I'm not holding my breath.   I don't have alot of playtest experience, and I'm not sure WotC will necessarily take my current design studies into account when considering any application I make.

Nonetheless, I'll keep waiting & hoping. You never know. I might get lucky.  

Anyway, I would imagine that a call would go out soon.  Especially if they're hoping to have the playtests run and reported on with enough time to address any serious issues before sending the PHB off to print.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 4, 2007)

I'm trying not to get my hopes up, but I've got a playtest group primed and ready.
And now we wait...


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (Sep 4, 2007)

I talked with my group about it, and they're into it.  Now, just one of us has to get in as a playtester...

Brad


----------



## BlackMoria (Sep 4, 2007)

This is actually a bit dated but it is from Dave Noonan's blog so I would put it here for the rest of the eager beavers.



> Dave Noonan wrote:
> 
> This morning, I'm working on playtest material for a future iteration of the playtest. I'm going to work those groups pretty hard, I can tell you that. To repeat our answer to the "How do I playtest?" question:
> 
> ...




So, basically, keep checking out DnDInsider for the official proclaimation.

Let the waiting resume....

<cue crickets>


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 4, 2007)

Thanks for the update!


----------



## F4NBOY (Sep 4, 2007)

Hey I have a gaming group just with girls, and myself as the DM. Since I believe WOTC is caring even more now about bringing more girls to D&D, I think my group would be an excellent playtesting opportunity for D&D 4E!
The girls even sent a picture to see if they would fit the WOTC's standards   









So, are we in?


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 4, 2007)

I suspect some of the WOTC guys would require the undergo a proper inspection. And as it just so happens, I'm willing to volunteer to playtest them as well.


----------



## Christian (Sep 4, 2007)

F4NBOY said:
			
		

> Hey I have a gaming group just with girls, and myself as the DM. Since I believe WOTC is caring even more now about bringing more girls to D&D, I think my group would be an excellent playtesting opportunity for D&D 4E!
> The girls even sent a picture to see if they would fit the WOTC's standards
> 
> 
> ...




I dunno, but I can well imagine the complaints you're going to get from them when they find out that 'playtest' has nothing to do with the magazine Hugh Hefner publishes ...


----------



## HeapThaumaturgist (Sep 4, 2007)

I see a pen and some paper.

To the right.

No, more right.

More right still.

See?  There, on the table.

Character sheet?

--fje


----------



## mhensley (Sep 6, 2007)

latest from David Noonan on playtesting-



> Playtesting: Playtest packets are coming together. I worked a bit yesterday with our Legal folks on the logistics for the NDAs. Suffice it to say that just as in previous playtests, mum's the word from the testers. They don't even admit that they are playtesters. We R&D guys can talk more of course, and we intend to.
> 
> I know a lot of folks are waiting for their chance to contribute. It's coming soon, but any estimate I give could be off by +/- two days. So no promises. If you want to be eligible to contribute, assemble a group of six (DM and five players) people who are cool with NDAs and are reliable enough to show up at your table and participate meaningfully.




http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=910060


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 6, 2007)

I'm ready to roll!
Sure hope I get picked...


----------



## BlackMoria (Sep 6, 2007)

As am I.


----------



## mhensley (Sep 6, 2007)

> They don't even admit that they are playtesters.




The first rule of Playtesting is, you do not talk about Playtesting.


----------



## BlackMoria (Sep 6, 2007)

True.

Which means if Ashrem Bayle or myself suddenly and abruptly go silent on this thread and on 4E discussion threads in general, then one of us 'is golden'.   

LOL.  Really, our chances are small at best.  They are going to get 'thousands' of applications.


----------



## HeapThaumaturgist (Sep 6, 2007)

I'm sure they'll get thousands of applicants.  All of them will be D&D aficionados and probably most of them will be perfectly acceptable as playtesters.  

How, then, shall we create a fair and balanced system to choose playtesters?

We'll go by height and start with tallest first, of course.  Simple!  Elegant!  Egalitarian!

(Alternately they could divy people up by U.S. State, alphabetically.  Thinking about it, that would work well too.)

--fje


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 6, 2007)

BlackMoria said:
			
		

> True.
> 
> Which means if Ashrem Bayle or myself suddenly and abruptly go silent on this thread and on 4E discussion threads in general, then one of us 'is golden'.



 



> LOL.  Really, our chances are small at best.  They are going to get 'thousands' of applications.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 10, 2007)

WOTC's got to get on the ball with this if they want some quality results from the test. 
Maybe we'll see something today, being Monday and all.

EDIT - If the application goes up at WOTC, somebody please let us know here. I can't get to WOTC's main website because of my work filter.


----------



## RandomCitizenX (Sep 10, 2007)

I'm wondering if they will be anything which excludes you from beig included in the playtest. Like running a fan site or working for another company or something along those lines.


----------



## Morrus (Sep 10, 2007)

RandomCitizenX said:
			
		

> I'm wondering if they will be anything which excludes you from beig included in the playtest. Like running a fan site or working for another company or something along those lines.




I would be _amazed _ if that wasn't the case.


----------



## Morrus (Sep 10, 2007)

HeapThaumaturgist said:
			
		

> (Alternately they could divy people up by U.S. State, alphabetically.




Not _deperately_ keen on that idea...


----------



## FickleGM (Sep 10, 2007)

RandomCitizenX said:
			
		

> I'm wondering if they will be anything which excludes you from beig included in the playtest. Like running a fan site or working for another company or something along those lines.



 I'm more concerned with age requirements, since I have some under-18 players that I would like to use in playtesting.  I don't know how NDAs work with minors...


----------



## Renshai (Sep 10, 2007)

I'm hoping the fact that our group was chosen as Playtest Group of the Month back during the 3E playtest, that we have a leg up, so to speak.


----------



## BlackMoria (Sep 10, 2007)

> Ashrem Bayle wrote:
> If the application goes up at WOTC, somebody please let us know here. I can't get to WOTC's main website because of my work filter.




I've got your back, as the saying goes.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 10, 2007)

BlackMoria said:
			
		

> I've got your back, as the saying goes.




Thanks!


----------



## Ruavel (Sep 10, 2007)

Morrus said:
			
		

> Not _deperately_ keen on that idea...



Me either..!


----------



## HeapThaumaturgist (Sep 10, 2007)

Ruavel said:
			
		

> Me either..!




Well after every single person in the continental U.S. that wanted in was let in, we'd move to countries starting with A.

Though I'm thinking height-based would be more egalitarian.

>.>

(They need to open the gates, already!)

--fje


----------



## mhensley (Sep 10, 2007)

the latest word from David Noonan's blog-



> In all seriousness, I bet an announcement goes up this week. (It better; I keep thinking of more ways to keep this set of testers busy.)




http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=910060


----------



## BlackMoria (Sep 10, 2007)

Well, I put this out for what it is worth.

I just checkout the podcast (Episode 15) that was posted on 7 September and here is some more information gleaned on the playtest.

- They will not draw names (good news, so the idea of a random selection of playtesters is out)

- playtest is still 'a couple a weeks away' (I don't know when the podcast was actually recorded but it was posted on 7 September.  Speculation by myself is that about a week from recording to being posted. Given that, I think we looking next week before an announcement.  Fingers crossed that it is this week though)

*Edit:  Confirmed by Dave Noonan blog post today - hopefully sometime this week!!*

- a page will go up on DnDInsider announcing the playtest

- have your 'group' in place and ready (there was no mention of the group size in the podcast but I think I saw something that they would like 5 players + DM (the default group size for 4E) in a blog somewhere)


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 10, 2007)

Thanks for the update!


----------



## JDragon (Sep 10, 2007)

Well add me to the list of the people ready to get his group signed up.

JD


----------



## mhensley (Sep 10, 2007)

From Chris Perkin's blog-



> On the subject of playtest packages, David Noonan is leading the effort to get a playtest package ready to send to outsiders. We're also close to figuring out how many playtest groups will receive this package, as well as what information we want to get back from playtesters (and the format in which we want to receive that information). When we've settled all that, we'll be posting something on D&D Insider with the particulars.




http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=906394


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 10, 2007)

Thanks for the scoops mhensley!

Hopefully we'll hear something this week at least.


----------



## helium3 (Sep 10, 2007)

The DM for one of my two groups told us yesterday that he's been told he'll be getting a chance to playtest in the next couple of weeks. Mind you, he actually works at WoTC so I think they're still in the "only employees of WoTC and friends and family of designers" phase of playtesting.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 10, 2007)

helium3 said:
			
		

> The DM for one of my two groups told us yesterday that he's been told he'll be getting a chance to playtest in the next couple of weeks. Mind you, he actually works at WoTC so I think they're still in the "only employees of WoTC and friends and family of designers" phase of playtesting.




hehe
He's already broke his NDA.


----------



## helium3 (Sep 10, 2007)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> hehe
> He's already broke his NDA.




An NDA that prevents you from even saying "I'm playtesting" sounds like a rather far-fetched legal document. Maybe if 4th edition hadn't been announced yet I could understand something like that.

Personally, I'm a little concerned that the new edition is only nine months away and they're still only playtesting in-house. Good software takes a long time to develop and if they're still hammering out the basic rule-set they're going to have a tough time polishing up all these electronic tools in time for the big release next summer.


----------



## Morrus (Sep 10, 2007)

helium3 said:
			
		

> An NDA that prevents you from even saying "I'm playtesting" sounds like a rather far-fetched legal document. Maybe if 4th edition hadn't been announced yet I could understand something like that.




Far-fetched as it may sound, it's real.  That's what the NDA's gonna say.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 10, 2007)

Morrus said:
			
		

> Far-fetched as it may sound, it's real.  That's what the NDA's gonna say.





Yup.



			
				mhensley said:
			
		

> The first rule of Playtesting is, you do not talk about Playtesting.


----------



## FickleGM (Sep 10, 2007)

helium3 said:
			
		

> An NDA that prevents you from even saying "I'm playtesting" sounds like a rather far-fetched legal document. Maybe if 4th edition hadn't been announced yet I could understand something like that.
> 
> Personally, I'm a little concerned that the new edition is only nine months away and they're still only playtesting in-house. Good software takes a long time to develop and if they're still hammering out the basic rule-set they're going to have a tough time polishing up all these electronic tools in time for the big release next summer.



 Remember the playtesters are going to become valued (I hope) members of the team that will be responsible for the game that we play.  If they talk about it, they are opening the door for some possible "bad things":

1) Letting game mechanics out of the bag that competitors may steal.

2) Open themselves to bribes, in order to somehow sabotage the playtesting of the game.

3) Making false claims that could come back to bite WotC (things could change between playtest and publication, so a claim made one day could become false by the next).

Basically, saying anything about playtesting (including being a playtester) could risk compromising one's integrity.


----------



## helium3 (Sep 10, 2007)

FickleGM said:
			
		

> Remember the playtesters are going to become valued (I hope) members of the team that will be responsible for the game that we play.  If they talk about it, they are opening the door for some possible "bad things":
> 
> 1) Letting game mechanics out of the bag that competitors may steal.
> 
> ...




Yeah, except that buzz generated by your playtesters is one of the best ways to engage in viral marketing (blech I hate that word) to amp up interest in your product before it releases.


----------



## F4NBOY (Sep 10, 2007)

mhensley said:
			
		

> The first rule of Playtesting is, you do not talk about Playtesting.




The second rule of Playtesting is, you do not talk about Playtesting.


----------



## HeapThaumaturgist (Sep 10, 2007)

The 4E playtesters are Soylent Green!

--fje


----------



## Jer (Sep 10, 2007)

FickleGM said:
			
		

> Remember the playtesters are going to become valued (I hope) members of the team that will be responsible for the game that we play.  If they talk about it, they are opening the door for some possible "bad things":




These bad things aren't exactly convincing to me overall.



			
				FickleGM said:
			
		

> 1) Letting game mechanics out of the bag that competitors may steal.




Eh.  They're going to be releasing the system as OGL - competitors are going to have access to it in a few months anyway.  The worst case scenario is that someone quickly publishes a ruleset and claims that Wizards "stole" it from them, but that would be hard to prove - especially if they're now using version control inside Wizards (as they say in the podcasts) since that will time/date stamp everything they do and at least provide evidence for an argument that it was leaked from Wizards own material.



			
				FickleGM said:
			
		

> 2) Open themselves to bribes, in order to somehow sabotage the playtesting of the game.




Again, eh - there are very, very few people in the roleplaying industry who would like to see D&D sabotaged.  Most folks realize that as D&D goes, so goes the industry.  When D&D was seeing bad times in the 90s, the RPG market was tanking.  When Wizards revitalized D&D, the RPG market rode high.  D&D helps keep game stores in business, which keeps smaller game companies afloat.

Also, if bribing a few loudmouthed playtesters to lie on their playtest reports can seriously impact the quality of your finished game, you've got bigger problems with your playtests.



			
				FickleGM said:
			
		

> 3) Making false claims that could come back to bite WotC (things could change between playtest and publication, so a claim made one day could become false by the next).




This one is believable, but only inasmuch as it gives a good reason for requiring playtesters to keep their traps shut about the rules that they're playtesting - not the fact that they're playtesters at all.  Of course any NDA you sign will tell you to keep quiet about the specifics of what you're working on, but few of them require that you not admit to working on the thing at all.

I suspect that the major reason for a "don't even tell people you're a playtester" clause would actually be to protect the playtesters from harassment.  By telling people you're a playtester, you open yourself up to lots of people begging to see the document, denouncing you as a liar and demanding that you "prove it", asking you to confirm/deny rumors, trying to get you to play "Twenty Questions" (like "Just say yes or no - are there gnomes in the playtest document?"), etc.  The more harassment that your playtesters have to go through, the more likely they are to just snap and blurt out something to make the harrassers go away.  You minimize that threat by just instructing the playtesters that part of their duties as playtesters is to not tell people that they're a playtester.  That way you don't have to "punish" them for making boneheaded mistakes in judgement on the Internet.  (And Lord knows, making boneheaded mistakes in judgement on the Internet can often be a punishment unto itself).


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (Sep 10, 2007)

If possible, playtest materials should be FedExed to the players in a box that opens like a suitcase, and have lights that shine out when opened.

Brad


----------



## FickleGM (Sep 10, 2007)

Jer and helium3 - I don't disagree, I was just picking three things off the top of my head that I was told regarding the few NDAs that I've had to sign.  I also don't think that the risk is very high for any of them, but I'm not a corporate lawyer. 

I would be surprised if silly minutae that we (the non-lawyers amongst us ) wouldn't even consider is being protected from by NDAs.


----------



## helium3 (Sep 10, 2007)

FickleGM said:
			
		

> Jer and helium3 - I don't disagree, I was just picking three things off the top of my head that I was told regarding the few NDAs that I've had to sign.  I also don't think that the risk is very high for any of them, but I'm not a corporate lawyer.
> 
> I would be surprised if silly minutae that we (the non-lawyers amongst us ) wouldn't even consider is being protected from by NDAs.




Weird. You've actually seen an NDA that demands you not even admit you signed the NDA in the first place?

I used to work for a very small tech startup and we had a couple of discussions on the whole NDA thing when we started looking for investors. The impression I got from our lawyer was that they're extremely hard to enforce legally and really only useful once someone has actually let the cat out of the bag and needs to be sued. Usually in the case of patent infringement and the like.

So when I see people saying with a straight face that WoTC is going to magically use an NDA to hold signers to a standard that companies in the "real world" don't, I start to wonder if people really know what they're doing. It just feeds into the only legitimate criticism of the whole 4E "thing" that I've seen backed up with any sort of rational argument that points to real world data, namely that the whole thing has come off as rather amateur, like the team in charge of 4E doesn't really know what they're doing. Mind you, I'm not talking about development of the system, i'm talking about the marketing and PR campaign.


----------



## Morrus (Sep 10, 2007)

helium3 said:
			
		

> Weird. You've actually seen an NDA that demands you not even admit you signed the NDA in the first place?
> 
> I used to work for a very small tech startup and we had a couple of discussions on the whole NDA thing when we started looking for investors. The impression I got from our lawyer was that they're extremely hard to enforce legally and really only useful once someone has actually let the cat out of the bag and needs to be sued. Usually in the case of patent infringement and the like.
> 
> So when I see people saying with a straight face that WoTC is going to magically use an NDA to hold signers to a standard that companies in the "real world" don't, I start to wonder if people really know what they're doing. It just feeds into the only legitimate criticism of the whole 4E "thing" that I've seen backed up with any sort of rational argument that points to real world data, namely that the whole thing has come off as rather amateur, like the team in charge of 4E doesn't really know what they're doing. Mind you, I'm not talking about development of the system, i'm talking about the marketing and PR campaign.




I think you're missing the point.  Sure, WotC is unlikely to take legal action against a playtester except in really extreme cases.  An agreement isn't only defined by its legal penalties though; by siging that, playtesters are agreeing to it.  Most of them will feel (rightly) obliged to adhere to those conditions; some of those that don't may be intimidated into meeting them.  

Most agreements tend to be kept to.  The legal side of it is a backup; documents aren't drafted with the intention of enforcing them: enforcement is the last resort of an agreement.  

It's called "risk reduction".  WotC isn't stupid; they know that leaks will occur (heck, I'd be amazed if they haven't strategised to factor that in - even , to an extent, intend to use it), but it reduces the percentage.  That's not "amateur"; that's competence.  

Heck, think WotC's are acting amateur if you like - I've no shares in the company.  But I'm pretty impressed with the level of awareness, anticipation and so forth they've generated; and I guarantee that it's all strategised to the nth degree.  Their publicity is working _perfectly_; and it's going to sell a LOT of PHBs, MMs and DMGs.

Crap, even their as-yet-nonexistent legal documents are generating conversation.  Well done, WotC!


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Sep 10, 2007)

Here is a question that some of my gaming buddies want answered regarding playteting - will the Digital Game Table be available for playtesting?  If a group is assembled that is virtual - but otherwise acceptable - will they be given equal consideration?  Can we playtest 4E and beta test the DI all at the same time?


----------



## FickleGM (Sep 10, 2007)

helium3 said:
			
		

> Weird. You've actually seen an NDA that demands you not even admit you signed the NDA in the first place?
> 
> I used to work for a very small tech startup and we had a couple of discussions on the whole NDA thing when we started looking for investors. The impression I got from our lawyer was that they're extremely hard to enforce legally and really only useful once someone has actually let the cat out of the bag and needs to be sued. Usually in the case of patent infringement and the like.
> 
> So when I see people saying with a straight face that WoTC is going to magically use an NDA to hold signers to a standard that companies in the "real world" don't, I start to wonder if people really know what they're doing. It just feeds into the only legitimate criticism of the whole 4E "thing" that I've seen backed up with any sort of rational argument that points to real world data, namely that the whole thing has come off as rather amateur, like the team in charge of 4E doesn't really know what they're doing. Mind you, I'm not talking about development of the system, i'm talking about the marketing and PR campaign.




Yes, but in all fairness, that was a secretive project (and IT-based, not RPG related).  This is a different case, since it is now very well-known, but I was just giving my thoughts on possible "why's".  Also, as Morrus said, it isn't likely to be enforced except in extreme circumstances (similar to noncompete clauses with employment contracts).  Heck, I've broken a noncompete clause, with no penalties, because I'm a tiny little fish in the industry.  If, instead of just joining another company in a different state, I had written some ground-breaking software, then perhaps my noncompete clause would have been called into question.


----------



## Kaffis (Sep 11, 2007)

helium3 said:
			
		

> Weird. You've actually seen an NDA that demands you not even admit you signed the NDA in the first place?




Yes. Every NDA for a videogame beta I've ever seen, for about a dozen. It doesn't surprise me in the least that playtests would follow a similar model.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 11, 2007)

So RPGA members are selected huh? Maybe they'll do the Insider selection soon.


----------



## Nikosandros (Sep 11, 2007)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> So RPGA members are selected huh? Maybe they'll do the Insider selection soon.



I wonder what do they mean about joining D&D Insider to "enter the pool".


----------



## helium3 (Sep 11, 2007)

Morrus said:
			
		

> I think you're missing the point.  Sure, WotC is unlikely to take legal action against a playtester except in really extreme cases.  An agreement isn't only defined by its legal penalties though; by siging that, playtesters are agreeing to it.  Most of them will feel (rightly) obliged to adhere to those conditions; some of those that don't may be intimidated into meeting them.
> 
> Most agreements tend to be kept to.  The legal side of it is a backup; documents aren't drafted with the intention of enforcing them: enforcement is the last resort of an agreement.
> 
> ...




Look. I'm not missing the point here. I'm not arguing that there shouldn't be NDA's or that we should all know every detail of 4ED before it's being released. All I'm saying is that an NDA that demands that people not even divulge that they've signed it or been given the opportunity to playtest just seems excessively secretive to me, particularly in light of the product being covered by the NDA. Such a provision certainly made more sense when 4ED was not public knowledge.

As for the amateur comment, what I'm specifically referring to (since really, it's the only 4ED event so far) is the announcement presentation at GenCon. I was seriously underwhelmed by it's level of polish. IMO, it had about as much excitement as my parish priest's Sunday sermon. Neither of the presenters sounded excited and in fact sounded downright nervous and the actual video looked slapped together in Powerpoint. I guess I just expected more from an announcement this important. I'm not too keen on the cryptic posts to R&D's blogs either.


----------



## BlackMoria (Sep 11, 2007)

> I wonder what do they mean about joining D&D Insider to "enter the pool".




Most likely meaning is that when they announce the playtest on DnDInsider, the applicants must have 

1)  signed up for DnDInsider 

2)  have a group ready.

These applicants are the 'pool' from which WOTC will select from.


----------



## F4NBOY (Sep 11, 2007)

Or maybe they are seeting up a swimming pool in the next D&D Experience so everyone can refresh themselves.


----------



## Contrarian (Sep 11, 2007)

FickleGM said:
			
		

> I'm more concerned with age requirements, since I have some under-18 players that I would like to use in playtesting.  I don't know how NDAs work with minors...




I often wonder to myself "Do WOTC staffers ever try playing this game with 12-year olds?" (I also wonder if they ever play with anybody who isn't a WOTC employee, but that's a separate rant.) I remember when a 10-year could teach himself D&D, but that doesn't seem to be a concern anymore.

WOTC is part of Hasbro. Hasbro must have _some_ sort of market research set-up to test toys and games with kids.  WOTC needs to drag some kids into the lab for a "learn to play D&D" test, and see how their game plays in a room that isn't full of experienced D&D fans.


----------



## Stalker0 (Sep 11, 2007)

Here's my question, I signed up on the wotc's forums a while back, and I think I can see all of the DDI stuff right now (until it becomes pay of course). So am I eligible?


----------



## Nikosandros (Sep 11, 2007)

F4NBOY said:
			
		

> Or maybe they are seeting up a swimming pool in the next D&D Experience so everyone can refresh themselves.



Oh... I though that D&D Insider members could have betted on whether bard gnomes will be included in the PHB.


----------



## Nikosandros (Sep 11, 2007)

BlackMoria said:
			
		

> Most likely meaning is that when they announce the playtest on DnDInsider, the applicants must have
> 
> 1)  signed up for DnDInsider
> 
> ...



Yes, but it's unclear if there will be an application to fill or if instead WotC will chose participants directly.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 11, 2007)

Contrarian said:
			
		

> I often wonder to myself "Do WOTC staffers ever try playing this game with 12-year olds?" (I also wonder if they ever play with anybody who isn't a WOTC employee, but that's a separate rant.) I remember when a 10-year could teach himself D&D, but that doesn't seem to be a concern anymore.
> 
> WOTC is part of Hasbro. Hasbro must have _some_ sort of market research set-up to test toys and games with kids.  WOTC needs to drag some kids into the lab for a "learn to play D&D" test, and see how their game plays in a room that isn't full of experienced D&D fans.




If they do that, we need to go back to "D&D" and "AD&D". I'm all for a simpler game existing for younger players, but I like my games with more detail than most 10 year olds can digest.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 11, 2007)

Nikosandros said:
			
		

> Yes, but it's unclear if there will be an application to fill or if instead WotC will chose participants directly.




The developers have said numerous times that there will be an application to fill out.


----------



## BlackMoria (Sep 11, 2007)

> Stalker0 wrote:
> 
> Here's my question, I signed up on the wotc's forums a while back, and I think I can see all of the DDI stuff right now (until it becomes pay of course). So am I eligible?




Yes, you meet the DnDInsider requirement.  It has been stated that if you were already a member of the WOTC forums prior to the DnDInsider, you are already a member of DnDInsider (at least until it changes to a 'pay a fee' model).


----------



## blargney the second (Sep 11, 2007)

F4NBOY said:
			
		

> Or maybe they are seeting up a swimming pool in the next D&D Experience so everyone can refresh themselves.



Uh oh. I think the water's turning purple around Hong...
-blarg


----------



## Psion (Sep 11, 2007)

Master of the Game said:
			
		

> Let me say that I believe being a former ENnies judge should feature high on the list of requirements.




My name* is Psion and I endorse this message. 

*- And DDI username (*coff*).


----------



## hong (Sep 11, 2007)

blargney the second said:
			
		

> Uh oh. I think the water's turning purple around Hong...
> -blarg



 Purple?


----------



## Wormwood (Sep 11, 2007)

hong said:
			
		

> Purple?




Yep. Purple or Blue 

Maybe you didn't get that rumor over in Austria.


----------



## JDragon (Sep 11, 2007)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> So RPGA members are selected huh? Maybe they'll do the Insider selection soon.




I think I missed something, when was their an indication that playtesters have been selected from the RPGA for 4e? Link or something.

Thanks 

JD


----------



## BlackMoria (Sep 11, 2007)

> JDragon wrote:
> 
> I think I missed something, when was their an indication that playtesters have been selected from the RPGA for 4e? Link or something.





RPGA Playtest Link


----------



## JDragon (Sep 11, 2007)

BlackMoria said:
			
		

> RPGA Playtest Link





Thanks, guess I was still asleep earlier.

JD


----------



## hong (Sep 12, 2007)

Wormwood said:
			
		

> Yep. Purple or Blue
> 
> Maybe you didn't get that rumor over in Austria.



 I'm, like, so behind the times. I even think that Queen makes good music.


----------



## Ruavel (Sep 12, 2007)

hong said:
			
		

> I'm, like, so behind the times. I even think that Queen makes good music.



Who...?   

anyway, getting back to the topic at hand, hopefully the application process (whatever it may be) will commence for the non-RPGA playtesters soon.  Even if it's just to put hopefuls, like me, out of their misery...

with one group done, it can't be too far off now...


----------



## Remathilis (Sep 12, 2007)

hong said:
			
		

> I'm, like, so behind the times. I even think that Queen makes good music.




Queen DID make good music. Freddie Mercury was more talented in his left toe than most bands today are...

Back on Topic. High, my DnDI name is Remathilis. I have a group. I want to Playtest. WotC, lets rock!


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 12, 2007)

So today maybe? *fingers crossed*


----------



## Renshai (Sep 12, 2007)

Hopefully, Ash. (btw this is Todd from Against the Shadow  )


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 12, 2007)

Renshai said:
			
		

> Hopefully, Ash. (btw this is Todd from Against the Shadow  )




Hi! How goes the site? I need to swing by there.


----------



## Renshai (Sep 12, 2007)

Wouldn't know, I passed it over to Nif this last month.  It was time to move on. 

Sorry about the thread hijack! Back to playtesting news!


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 12, 2007)

Renshai said:
			
		

> Wouldn't know, I passed it over to Nif this last month.  It was time to move on.
> 
> Sorry about the thread hijack! Back to playtesting news!




I know the feeling. I still love Midnight to death, but I've got so much other stuff going on I can't focus on it like I'd want.

But yeah, playtesting would be awesome.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 13, 2007)

*sigh*
Maybe today?


----------



## MrFilthyIke (Sep 13, 2007)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> *sigh*
> Maybe today?




Did you remember to say pretty please?


----------



## helium3 (Sep 13, 2007)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> *sigh*
> Maybe today?




Don't forget that anyone that's playtesting is under an NDA that does not allow them to disclose that they are playtesting. If that one post hadn't gone up stating that playtester selection via the RPGA had been completed, no one would even know.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 14, 2007)

Well, it's the end of the week and still nothing. I've got my fingers crossed that it'll be today, but I haven't got my hopes up.


----------



## Ruavel (Sep 14, 2007)

helium3 said:
			
		

> Don't forget that anyone that's playtesting is under an NDA that does not allow them to disclose that they are playtesting. If that one post hadn't gone up stating that playtester selection via the RPGA had been completed, no one would even know.



True... but hopefully WotC will make an announcement pretty promptly once the selections have been finalised.  Even if it's just through someone's blog.


----------



## D'karr (Sep 16, 2007)

Well, the news of playtesting seems to keep getting worse and worse.  It would be nice if there was one answer to how playtesting groups will be selected instead of different stories everytime somebody answers the question. 

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=207368


----------



## Nikosandros (Sep 16, 2007)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> The developers have said numerous times that there will be an application to fill out.



This has just been contradicted... the selection will be random.


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Sep 16, 2007)

Nikosandros said:
			
		

> This has just been contradicted... the selection will be random.




Cite?


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Sep 16, 2007)

D'karr said:
			
		

> Well, the news of playtesting seems to keep getting worse and worse.  It would be nice if there was one answer to how playtesting groups will be selected instead of different stories everytime somebody answers the question.
> 
> http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=207368




That quote applies to D&D Insider, not 4E.


----------



## D'karr (Sep 16, 2007)

Kid Charlemagne said:
			
		

> That quote applies to D&D Insider, not 4E.



Read the actual thread.  The comment by Didier Monin applies to Insider.  The following two comments are about 4th Edition Playtesting.


----------



## Nikosandros (Sep 16, 2007)

Kid Charlemagne said:
			
		

> Cite?



Here.


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Sep 16, 2007)

Ah, I had missed those posts!  Thanks!


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 17, 2007)

So it looks like they've decided to go random after all. 
I guess the only thing to do now is cross my fingers and hope for the best.


----------



## Wormwood (Sep 17, 2007)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> So it looks like they've decided to go random after all.
> I guess the only thing to do now is cross my fingers and hope for the best.




Random across all board members, or random among the really vocal, high-post count posters?

It would be a shame for groups like mine to be excluded because we rarely participate in the Wizards boards.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 17, 2007)

Wormwood said:
			
		

> Random across all board members, or random among the really vocal, high-post count posters?
> 
> It would be a shame for groups like mine to be excluded because we rarely participate in the Wizards boards.




No idea.

Mysterious are the ways of Wizards.


----------



## mhensley (Sep 17, 2007)

90% of the playtesters will end up being bots that set up sham accounts to spam viagra.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 17, 2007)

mhensley said:
			
		

> 90% of the playtesters will end up being bots that set up sham accounts to spam viagra.




 

I do hope that the selection isn't truly 100% random or else the results will be of about that caliber.


----------



## mhensley (Sep 17, 2007)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> I do hope that the selection isn't truly 100% random or else the results will be of about that caliber.




How could it be anything other than an almost completely random selection?  When you sign up for an account, they only ask you-

1. your birthdate
2. your timezone
3. what wotc games you play

They know your age, your very general location, and if you like D&D.  So they will probably do a query of their users something like this-

Age >= 18 and
Timezone = Eastern, Central, Mountain, or Pacific and
Games Played = D&D

They'll pick a number of those accounts randomly and send them an email asking if they would like to playtest and if they have a group to do it with.  Those that answer yes will get an NDA to sign.  After the signed NDA is received back, they will send them a playtest packet.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 17, 2007)

mhensley said:
			
		

> How could it be anything other than an almost completely random selection?  When you sign up for an account, they only ask you-
> 
> 1. your birthdate
> 2. your timezone
> ...




Or they could spend an hour going through threads and picking posters who seem like good candidates.
They could start with the "playtesting" thread on the "4e Rules" board where people have already stated they've got groups ready and willing to test.


----------



## BlackMoria (Sep 17, 2007)

Sounds like a last minute change in methodology.

A random playtest runs counter to what David Noonan stated in his blog - namely, sign up for DnD Insider, get a group together, and watch DnD Insider for the playtest announcement.

I don't believe David Noonan was deliberately trying to mislead us on that comment, which means somebody has made a last minute change in selection methodology.

That sucks.


----------



## Nikosandros (Sep 17, 2007)

mhensley said:
			
		

> Timezone = Eastern, Central, Mountain, or Pacific



Was it ever stated that playtesting would be restricted to US residents?


----------



## Chris_Nightwing (Sep 17, 2007)

I would hate to see a random selection method. This game is supposed to kick ass, and thus I of course want the BEST possible people to playtest it. Both critical and fanboyish, so long as they have a great deal of experience, intelligence and willingness to be critical at the right level. The best playtesters will be people who've published, or put something out there for the community, who've played a wealth of different games and are familiar with different genres of fantasy literature, film and such, and who can show they are able to put the time and commitment into the testing, rather than just playing through a game with the new rules and reporting back now and then.

From my point of view, I'd like to think there was a screening process. Even if it was a week long popularity contest on their fora, with each prospective candidate getting a chance to sell themselves. I WANT to have the chance to sell myself and my group to WotC, I really think I can offer something, and I know that almost everyone wants to playtest, but again, it should be the BEST people that do it, for the sake of the game. Even if that's not me!


----------



## Nikosandros (Sep 17, 2007)

Actually I think that it would be good to have a diverse sample of people doing the playrtesting... the game has to work also for the casual gamer and not only for the hardcore "professional".


----------



## DonTadow (Sep 17, 2007)

Ruavel said:
			
		

> Who...?
> 
> anyway, getting back to the topic at hand, hopefully the application process (whatever it may be) will commence for the non-RPGA playtesters soon.  Even if it's just to put hopefuls, like me, out of their misery...
> 
> with one group done, it can't be too far off now...



I hope so too. Is the RPGA really the people who should have been playtesting this thing first. I usually see rpg modules as the most undungeons and dragons things about the game.  Straight hack and slashes with no real substance to the stories.  Can't wait for the real players to get a crack at it.


----------



## Wormwood (Sep 17, 2007)

Nikosandros said:
			
		

> Actually I think that it would be good to have a diverse sample of people doing the playrtesting... the game has to work also for the casual gamer and not only for the hardcore "professional".




Honestly, being a prolific forum poster doesn't automatically translate into being part of a good playtest group.


----------



## D'karr (Sep 17, 2007)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> I hope so too. Is the RPGA really the people who should have been playtesting this thing first. I usually see rpg modules as the most undungeons and dragons things about the game.  Straight hack and slashes with no real substance to the stories.  Can't wait for the real players to get a crack at it.




Oh...  Wow...  There must be some Elite Gamemasters testing with the "real" players too.   :\


----------



## Nikosandros (Sep 17, 2007)

Wormwood said:
			
		

> Honestly, being a prolific forum poster doesn't automatically translate into being part of a good playtest group.



I never stated anything like that...


----------



## Wormwood (Sep 17, 2007)

Nikosandros said:
			
		

> I never stated anything like that...




Actually, I was agreeing with you---but my post ended up addressing a post prior to yours.

Sorry if I was unclear.


----------



## The_Baldman (Sep 17, 2007)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> I hope so too. Is the RPGA really the people who should have been playtesting this thing first. I usually see rpg modules as the most undungeons and dragons things about the game.  Straight hack and slashes with no real substance to the stories.  Can't wait for the real players to get a crack at it.




Ya nothing like eliteism amongst gamers in a hobby. LOL. The RPGA will do just fine testing the rules of the game. Have no fear. We did a good job with 3.0, 3.5, and we'll do it again with 4.0

Dave C
RPGA Stooge (aka note a 'real player')


----------



## helium3 (Sep 17, 2007)

BlackMoria said:
			
		

> Sounds like a last minute change in methodology.
> 
> A random playtest runs counter to what David Noonan stated in his blog - namely, sign up for DnD Insider, get a group together, and watch DnD Insider for the playtest announcement.
> 
> ...




Once could argue that perhaps they've realized that they have a lot more work to do before the R&D department births it's newest creation. Thus, they don't have a lot of time to comb through endless posts and applications to find the perfect playtesters.


----------



## Piratecat (Sep 17, 2007)

Let's put a stop to the RPGA/non-RPGA bickering. No matter which side of that fence you're on, you're a gamer -- just like the people on the _other_ side of the fence.


----------



## blargney the second (Sep 17, 2007)

There is no fence, Neo. 
-blarg


----------



## KarinsDad (Sep 17, 2007)

There are probably 250,000+ DND groups out there, ~75 of which get to playtest.

Keep your fingers crossed boys, but the odds are against us all.


----------



## BlackMoria (Sep 17, 2007)

Actually, the pool will be DnD Insider members (RPGA members have already been selected), which is probably far smaller.  But point taken - the odds are long odds indeed.


----------



## Nikosandros (Sep 18, 2007)

Wormwood said:
			
		

> Actually, I was agreeing with you---but my post ended up addressing a post prior to yours.
> 
> Sorry if I was unclear.



Gotcha.


----------



## DonTadow (Sep 19, 2007)

wavester said:
			
		

> Ya nothing like eliteism amongst gamers in a hobby. LOL. The RPGA will do just fine testing the rules of the game. Have no fear. We did a good job with 3.0, 3.5, and we'll do it again with 4.0
> 
> Dave C
> RPGA Stooge (aka note a 'real player')



No elitism, but the RPGA isn't dungeons and dragons. It's an altered group form of the game that poorly imitiates a massive online game and is not the "natural" way that most people play.  There's not a campaign I've seen that runs like an RPG module. Considering that it is not the natural use of the product, it seems like such a bad idea to have it tested there first.  

I"m not stepping on a soap box, i'm stating fax. Most d and d games are played around a table among friends with a dm who runs his own story and feeds off the players. RPGA are set paths with real player interaction to the story and encounters.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart (Sep 19, 2007)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> No elitism, but the RPGA isn't dungeons and dragons. It's an altered group form of the game that poorly imitiates a massive online game and is not the "natural" way that most people play.  There's not a campaign I've seen that runs like an RPG module. Considering that it is not the natural use of the product, it seems like such a bad idea to have it tested there first.
> 
> I"m not stepping on a soap box, i'm stating fax. Most d and d games are played around a table among friends with a dm who runs his own story and feeds off the players. RPGA are set paths with real player interaction to the story and encounters.



What?  Almost every game I played in of D&D has followed the same basic formula, RPGA games included:

The DM comes up with an adventure, preparing the plot, writing up encounters, drawing up maps, figuring out what would happen.  The players would then show up for the session and try to get to the end of the adventure(getting to the end of the maze and killing the ancient mummy who ruled it, solving the murders in town, etc).

Sometimes our DM would purchase an adventure prewritten for him (Temple of Elemental Evil, Against the Giants, etc) or he'd write his own adventure in the same style as those.  He'd follow what the author wrote except he'd make some changes now and then when the PCs went "off the track".  My first DM used to come to each session with a 40 page written adventure that he wrote up in class last week.

Almost all of the original 1st edition adventures were created specifically to showcase what D&D is all about in a convention environment.


----------



## Piratecat (Sep 19, 2007)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> No elitism, but the RPGA isn't dungeons and dragons. It's an altered group form of the game that poorly imitiates a massive online game and is not the "natural" way that most people play.  There's not a campaign I've seen that runs like an RPG module. Considering that it is not the natural use of the product, it seems like such a bad idea to have it tested there first.
> 
> I"m not stepping on a soap box, i'm stating fax. Most d and d games are played around a table among friends with a dm who runs his own story and feeds off the players. RPGA are set paths with real player interaction to the story and encounters.



I'd really like to respond to this in detail -- and I'll admit to some bias, as I've played or run more than 300 RPGA games that were definintely D&D -- but Don, you probably missed my warning a few posts above. I'd like the RPGA/non-RPGA sidetrack in this thread to cease, please.  Artificial delineations aren't helping anyone.

That means keep the thread on topic.

Thanks. Holler with questions.


----------



## sidonunspa (Sep 19, 2007)

Edited because I hadn’t noticed the RPGA/Non-RPGA off topic-topic thread was closed

Sorry about that...  

No now back to the bad news that we will not get a chance to apply for play test.

They really should have done some research on the play testers and picked a few groups though some kind of application process.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 19, 2007)

So anyway... (thanks PKitty).... I've had a bad week. Some playtesting news would be most welcome, even it just to put my mind at ease that the selection is finished.


----------



## JDragon (Sep 19, 2007)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> So anyway... (thanks PKitty).... I've had a bad week. Some playtesting news would be most welcome, even it just to put my mind at ease that the selection is finished.




Bummer that your week has sucked.  Hope it gets better soon.

Just wanted to throw my agreement in that I wish they would just get what ever they are going to do done, so I can move on.

JD


----------



## F4NBOY (Sep 19, 2007)

http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=13836337&postcount=24



			
				Dave Noonan said:
			
		

> Playtesting: We're sending out emails to DDI/message board members today asking whether they'd like to participate in a playtest wave that starts this week. If you get one, I hope you can do it. This game lives or dies at the table, and more insight into more tables equals a better game


----------



## JDragon (Sep 19, 2007)

Thanks for the heads up.

JD


----------



## sidonunspa (Sep 19, 2007)

JDragon said:
			
		

> Thanks for the heads up.
> 
> JD





ya S.T.B.U.

Sucks to be Us


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 19, 2007)

I'm crossing my fingers and remaining hopeful.


----------



## Darkwolf71 (Sep 19, 2007)

sidonunspa said:
			
		

> ya S.T.B.U.
> 
> Sucks to be Us



*Madly scrambles to check inbox*
Nope... 

Bah. What are the odds anyway, 1 in... tens of thousands. >.<

Oh well, days not over yet. It could happen.


----------



## Chris_Nightwing (Sep 19, 2007)

Not hopeful here in the UK 

Should have done more than just compliment Dave's music taste..


----------



## JDragon (Sep 19, 2007)

Darkwolf71 said:
			
		

> *Madly scrambles to check inbox*
> Nope...
> 
> Bah. What are the odds anyway, 1 in... tens of thousands. >.<
> ...





Yeah I did the same, and then sent an email to my group telling them to keep their eyes open and check their Spam folders.

Now we wait.

How long do you all think it will take to get the selection process completed?

JD


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 19, 2007)

JDragon said:
			
		

> Yeah I did the same, and then sent an email to my group telling them to keep their eyes open and check their Spam folders.
> 
> Now we wait.
> 
> ...




If it's just random I can't see the initial wave of emails taking more than a few hours. Figure a day or two to get responses and to send out more emails as needed. 

They should be totally finished by Friday at the latest.

EDIT:

Being totally random, I can't see much good coming out of this. Nobody will turn down the chance to see 4e early. Many will lie if necessary, telling WOTC what they want to hear to get in, and then never do anything productive with the information.

I really hope they give folks of threads like these a second look.


----------



## F4NBOY (Sep 19, 2007)

Do you think it's like a lottery?
I'll turn on my account-creating-bot right now!


----------



## Darkwolf71 (Sep 19, 2007)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> If it's just random I can't see the initial wave of emails taking more than a few hours. Figure a day or two to get responses and to send out more emails as needed.
> 
> They should be totally finished by Friday at the latest.



Likely a safe assumption.


			
				Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> EDIT:
> 
> Being totally random, I can't see much good coming out of this. Nobody will turn down the chance to see 4e early. Many will lie if necessary, telling WOTC what they want to hear to get in, and then never do anything productive with the information.
> 
> I really hope they give folks of threads like these a second look.



I can't believe they decided on a random process. My group would love to get ahold of this and put it through the ringer. If there was an actual application, I'm certain we would be in. This... just stinks.


----------



## mhensley (Sep 19, 2007)

Sigh... no mail for me.


----------



## mhensley (Sep 19, 2007)

It seems like their site is being hammered right now.  I wonder why?


----------



## BlackMoria (Sep 19, 2007)

As a precaution, check your DnD Insider private mail associated with your profile.  They may put the mail messages there.

Zilch for me so far...


----------



## mhensley (Sep 19, 2007)

BlackMoria said:
			
		

> As a precaution, check your DnD Insider private mail associated with your profile.  They may put the mail messages there.
> 
> Zilch for me so far...




I can't even get to the site right now.


----------



## BlackMoria (Sep 19, 2007)

It might be at your end or somewhere in between you and the Wizard's site because I been to the site several time in the last few minutes and there is no delay at all for me accessing the site or their forums.


----------



## Darkwolf71 (Sep 19, 2007)

I'm getting in fine as well, for all the good it does. No message there either.


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (Sep 19, 2007)

Darkwolf71 said:
			
		

> I can't believe they decided on a random process. My group would love to get ahold of this and put it through the ringer. If there was an actual application, I'm certain we would be in. This... just stinks.




I can see how they might want playtesters from across the spectrum, and not just experienced gamers who can jump up and down on things to break them.  Though, of course, those are going to be valuable.

Brad


----------



## FunkBGR (Sep 19, 2007)

I've notified my group. Good luck everyone!


----------



## Darkwolf71 (Sep 19, 2007)

cignus_pfaccari said:
			
		

> I can see how they might want playtesters from across the spectrum, and not just experienced gamers who can jump up and down on things to break them.  Though, of course, those are going to be valuable.
> 
> Brad



I can see that.
However, they could easily have screened for more or less experience at a whim. Randomness, IMHO will just decrease the overall quality of testing base. (Not to mention leave most of us out in the cold.)


----------



## Zebediah Magus (Sep 19, 2007)

It would be a great excuse to reassemble my group, but I just can't see it happening.

Good luck everyone.


----------



## The_Baldman (Sep 19, 2007)

Darkwolf71 said:
			
		

> I can see that.
> However, they could easily have screened for more or less experience at a whim. Randomness, IMHO will just decrease the overall quality of testing base. (Not to mention leave most of us out in the cold.)





and please realize (most seem to keep forgetting) that the RPGA already has a batch of groups that are handpicked and done. So they probably already have the spectrum they wanted taken care of and now are sprinkling in the random assortment on top of that for good measure. They are not idiots (though I am depending on the day).

Dave C


----------



## HeapThaumaturgist (Sep 19, 2007)

Awesome.  I'll check my email tomorrow and if there's nothing in there I can safely ignore 4E until some time next year when I'll get a chance to pick it up.

--fje


----------



## Remathilis (Sep 19, 2007)

damn, my forum e-mail for WotC was an old account. I don't know if I got an invite or not. 

Looks like I lose.


----------



## Darkwolf71 (Sep 19, 2007)

wavester said:
			
		

> and please realize (most seem to keep forgetting) that the RPGA already has a batch of groups that are handpicked and done. So they probably already have the spectrum they wanted taken care of and now are sprinkling in the random assortment on top of that for good measure. They are not idiots (though I am depending on the day).
> 
> Dave C



Handpicked? Do we know that? I remember seeing mention that the RPGA selection was finished, but nothing on how it was done. As far as I know it could have been random as well. (And being a quality player is not a prereq for joining.  )


----------



## Nifft (Sep 19, 2007)

My group's too small and disorganized ("busy") to playtest. 

Oh well, -- N


----------



## D'karr (Sep 19, 2007)

Darkwolf71 said:
			
		

> Handpicked? Do we know that? I remember seeing mention that the RPGA selection was finished, but nothing on how it was done. As far as I know it could have been random as well. (And being a quality player is not a prereq for joining.  )




Yes, we know that.  And it would be nice if people layed off the player quality of RPGA members.  The same could be said of forum membership.


----------



## Festivus (Sep 19, 2007)

I should hope the selected RPGA members based upon how much they play / GM.  I would likely be a great tester for their digital tabletop given my career background, and that I presently run online games.  Tabletop however, I have only been playing 3.5 edition for two years and don't feel qualified to tell you what is presently broken (though I have my gripes).

I just hope they don't template their message off one of those 419 scams... my spam blocker won't let it through:

REQUEST FOR URGENT BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP

FIRST, I MUST SOLICIT YOUR STRICTEST CONFIDENCE IN THIS TRANSACTION.  THIS IS BY VIRTUE OF ITS NATURE AS BEING UTTERLY CONFIDENTIAL AND 'TOP SECRET'.  I AM SURE AND HAVE CONFIDENCE OF YOUR ABILITY AND RELIABILITY TO PROSECUTE A TRANSACTION OF THIS GREAT MAGNITUDE INVOLVING A PENDING TRANSACTION REQUIRING MAXIIMUM CONFIDENCE.

WE ARE TOP OFFICIAL OF THE WIZARDS OF THE COAST DEVELOPMENT TEAM WHO ARE INTERESTED IN YOUR OPINIONS OF FOURTH EDITION WHICH ARE PRESENTLY IN DEVELOPMENT IN NIGERIA.  IN ORDER TO COMMENCE THIS BUSINESS WE SOLICIT YOUR ASSISTANCE TO ENABLE US TO TRANSFER INTO YOUR EMAIL ACCOUNT THE SAID FOURTH EDITION.

YOURS FAITHFULLY,

DR CLEMENT OKON


----------



## Dragonblade (Sep 19, 2007)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> Let's put a stop to the RPGA/non-RPGA bickering. No matter which side of that fence you're on, you're a gamer -- just like the people on the _other_ side of the fence.




Thats all fine and good, but why is their grass always greener?? Must be the fertilizer or something....


----------



## Majoru Oakheart (Sep 19, 2007)

Darkwolf71 said:
			
		

> Handpicked? Do we know that? I remember seeing mention that the RPGA selection was finished, but nothing on how it was done. As far as I know it could have been random as well. (And being a quality player is not a prereq for joining.  )



I was assured by RPGA HQ that all of them were handpicked.  I just got the impression that the number picked wasn't very high.  I was told they picked people they thought would be best for the job.

Unfortunately, without any formal application process before the "handpicking", it means that the people hand picked were those that RPGA HQ knew already.  My guess is: The Circle, Campaign Staff of Xed'rik Expeditions, some people that RPGA HQ knew due to them being volunteers at conventions and helping out on projects, and a select number of recommendations from Circle members and XE Campaign staff (a decent number of whom were Triad members).


----------



## Darkwolf71 (Sep 19, 2007)

D'karr said:
			
		

> Yes, we know that.  And it would be nice if people layed off the player quality of RPGA members.  The same could be said of forum membership.



Back off, bro. I didn't say RPGA members sucked, only that membership was no guarantee of quality. Yes, there IS a difference.

And providing some form of factual linkage would be oh-so-much-more-effective than just stating 'we know'.


----------



## helium3 (Sep 19, 2007)

I'm surprised that there's not more comment on Nooooonan's posting that the random DDI invites to playtest just went out.

I wish I'd known they were going to go out via email, as I might have checked my profile and realized that the email I had listed was a dead one from 2003. D'OH!!!


----------



## Ruavel (Sep 20, 2007)

Nifft said:
			
		

> My group's too small and disorganized ("busy") to playtest.



I think my group's too "outside the USA"...


----------



## DonTadow (Sep 20, 2007)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> I'd really like to respond to this in detail -- and I'll admit to some bias, as I've played or run more than 300 RPGA games that were definintely D&D -- but Don, you probably missed my warning a few posts above. I'd like the RPGA/non-RPGA sidetrack in this thread to cease, please.  Artificial delineations aren't helping anyone.
> 
> That means keep the thread on topic.
> 
> Thanks. Holler with questions.



Moving to a side discussion then unless criticizing organizations run by moderators is completely  banned?


----------



## Chris_Nightwing (Sep 20, 2007)

Well I don't think I made teh cut. Aw


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 20, 2007)

Same. 

Oh well. Time to go back to my original plan of playing GURPS until 4e arrives.


----------



## The_Baldman (Sep 20, 2007)

Dragonblade said:
			
		

> Thats all fine and good, but why is their grass always greener?? Must be the fertilizer or something....




because being part of the RPGA and being involved in their various campaigns and projects does get your more visibility with the powers that be. Your name becomes known as well as your skills. I joined the RPGA in 2000 a schmoo nobody that played a home game in 2.0 and ya that was about it. Now I run all their events at large shows (DDXP, Origins, Gencon), ran one of their campaigns for a few years, have multiple members of Wotc staff's phone numbers plugged into my phone and talk to them usually a few times a week and a few times a day at certain times of the year. So ya the RPGA has been awesome for me being a lot more involved with the hobby I love and getting to personally know and call friends a lot of people who make the hobby I love so much fun. It's not everybody's cup of tea but it's a great start at taking the game we love to the next level.

So for the guy wanting proof if I say something it's true. I always cannot go into great detail about things but when I said the RPGA handpicked all it's groups you can take that to the bank. Chris Tulach (RPGA Content Manager) has confirmed as much (and another person who started out in the RPGA ranks and now works for Wotc - along with at least a half-dozen more between Wotc and Paizo). I also agree that membership in the RPGA is not any kind of guarantee about the quality of player in any fashion. A random selection of RPGA members would be about the same as a random selection of non-RPGA players (maybe giving a slight edge to RPGA players as usually if you sign-up for the RPGA you play D&D a lot). Now what the RPGA does allow you to do is select from within that group a known type and quantity of players to meet what goal you have for the playtest. The RPGA makes those names picked to be known players by the Wotc staff as well. So if they want 10% powergaming junkie monkey's they can ask somebody they personally know to pick out X number of groups that fall into that category and the RPGA can make it happen. No manner of web surveys and questions can determine that from a random unknown group of players such as this list of the DDI membership. It can help narrow things down but in the end you don't know if you're getting a power gaming monkey supreme or a wanna-be splat book cowpoke. 

Dave C


----------



## Henry (Sep 20, 2007)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> Moving to a side discussion then unless criticizing organizations run by moderators is completely  banned?



_*
No, but as PCat says, verbal shooting matches insulting other gamers is off-limits. Also, it's better form to email moderators or Admins when you have further questions. (Kev said "holla with questions," but what he really meant was, "email if you have questions about moderator decisions," but it gets tiring saying it the same way every time. )

So, if you have questions about what was said, if it's unclear, email him, me, or one of the other mods at the e-mail addresses given in Meta forum. Thanks.*_


----------



## HeinorNY (Sep 20, 2007)

http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=13847110&postcount=25

"Chris Tulach (Grand High Mogul of the Steppes and RPGA honcho) and I were sharing a chuckle over barbecue yesterday. Some DDI folks say they wish the playtest selection process wasn't so random. And some RPGA members say they wish the playtest selection process was more random so everyone would get a chance. Turns out we can't win.

We have different dude-pickin' techniques for different kinds of playtests. Heck, sometimes it feels like we reinvent the wheel with each playtest push. There's a method to our madness, although I realize that's cold comfort to someone who's refreshing their mailbox every 30 seconds, waiting for an email that may not come. One thing that bears repeating: We're not saying you can't playtest. We're just saying "not yet."


----------



## FickleGM (Sep 20, 2007)

Well, I have reassessed my situation and if by some amazing luck I get an email, I will be declining.  I hope that there are others who will do likewise, so that more committed people get to playtest 4e.


----------



## Tequila Sunrise (Sep 21, 2007)

*Sigh*

It looks like I missed the boat. The story of my life. So how exactly are/were we supposed to sign up to playtest? I've been keeping an eye on the D&D welcome page for the past couple of weeks, but apparently they hid the playtest info somewhere.


----------



## JDragon (Sep 22, 2007)

There was no sign up form.

IT appears they randomly have sent out invites to D&DI / Forum members to the email account attached to the username.  I belive that was Wednesday.

JD


----------

