I downvoted some of these because they expect a canonical answer to a question that is by design not supposed to have one.

I think some of these questions are missing the point of a playtest. This is playtest material that is changing the core rules. The playtest rules and the old rules aren’t supposed to fit together neatly. You’re supposed to take the rules we already have, and the new playtest rules, and mash them together as best you can, then provide feedback about what worked and what didn’t. There isn't supposed to be a canonical answer to how these rules interact. You’re supposed to figure out what you think the answer is supposed to be, then report back to Wizards of the Coast with what you found.

So when a question asks,

The playtest rules contradict the core rules, what do?

The answer is:

Pick a ruling, playtest it, write down how it worked out, report those findings to Wizards, and let them know you were initially confused by the contradiction and that it needs to be addressed in future playtest materials and the final product.

I downvoted some of these because they are trivial and lack research.

I recently asked, What did we learn during the D&D Next playtest that should inform how we approach the One D&D playtest?. In her answer, doppelgreener writes:

By far our primary issue was “read this text back to me” style questions: someone indicates new material and asks us to explain it. Crucially the question describes no actual problem understanding the text. Such a question is essentially just an invitation to copy+paste/rephrase the material. These questions are answered, frequently self-answered, exactly that way.

Two of the questions we've had so far were obviously this sort of question (the two that were self answered), and I could see on some of the others where someone would downvote for this reason.

As for answers, I actually upvoted most (but not all) of them, the voting pattern on one-dnd-playtest answers seems much less unusual to me than what we saw on the questions, so I don't feel there is much there that needs explaining.

I downvoted some of these because they expect a canonical answer to a question that is by design not supposed to have one.

I think some of these questions are missing the point of a playtest. This is playtest material that is changing the core rules. The playtest rules and the old rules aren’t supposed to fit together neatly. You’re supposed to take the rules we already have, and the new playtest rules, and mash them together as best you can, then provide feedback about what worked and what didn’t. There isn't supposed to be a canonical answer to how these rules interact. You’re supposed to figure out what you think the answer is supposed to be, then report back to Wizards of the Coast with what you found.

So when a question asks,

The playtest rules contradict the core rules, what do?

The answer is:

Pick a ruling, playtest it, write down how it worked out, report those findings to Wizards, and let them know you were initially confused by the contradiction and that it needs to be addressed in future playtest materials and the final product.

I downvoted some of these because they are trivial and lack research.

I recently asked, What did we learn during the D&D Next playtest that should inform how we approach the One D&D playtest?. In her answer, doppelgreener writes:

By far our primary issue was “read this text back to me” style questions: someone indicates new material and asks us to explain it. Crucially the question describes no actual problem understanding the text. Such a question is essentially just an invitation to copy+paste/rephrase the material. These questions are answered, frequently self-answered, exactly that way.

Two of the questions we've had so far were obviously this sort of question (the two that were self answered), and I could see on some of the others where someone would downvote for this reason.

As for answers, I actually upvoted most (but not all) of them. The voting pattern on one-dnd-playtest answers seems much less unusual to me than what we saw on the questions, so I don't feel there is much there that needs explaining.

I downvoted some of these because they expect a canonical answer to a question that is by design not supposed to have one.

I think some of these questions are missing the point of a playtest. This is playtest material that is changing the core rules. The playtest rules and the old rules aren’t supposed to fit together neatly. You’re supposed to take the rules we already have, and the new playtest rules, and mash them together as best you can, then provide feedback about what worked and what didn’t. There isn't supposed to be a canonical answer to how these rules interact. You’re supposed to figure out what you think the answer is supposed to be, then report back to Wizards of the Coast with what you found.

So when a question asks,

The playtest rules contradict the core rules, what do?

The answer is:

Pick a ruling, playtest it, write down how it worked out, report those findings to Wizards, and let them know you were initially confused by the contradiction and that it needs to be addressed in future playtest materials and the final product.

I downvoted some of these because they are trivial and lack research.

I recently asked, What did we learn during the D&D Next playtest that should inform how we approach the One D&D playtest?. In her answer, doppelgreener writes:

By far our primary issue was “read this text back to me” style questions: someone indicates new material and asks us to explain it. Crucially the question describes no actual problem understanding the text. Such a question is essentially just an invitation to copy+paste/rephrase the material. These questions are answered, frequently self-answered, exactly that way.

Two of the questions we've had so far were obviously this sort of question (the two that were self answered), and I could see on some of the others where someone would downvote for this reason.

I downvoted some of these because they expect a canonical answer to a question that is by design not supposed to have one.

I think some of these questions are missing the point of a playtest. This is playtest material that is changing the core rules. The playtest rules and the old rules aren’t supposed to fit together neatly. You’re supposed to take the rules we already have, and the new playtest rules, and mash them together as best you can, then provide feedback about what worked and what didn’t. There isn't supposed to be a canonical answer to how these rules interact. You’re supposed to figure out what you think the answer is supposed to be, then report back to Wizards of the Coast with what you found.

So when a question asks,

The playtest rules contradict the core rules, what do?

The answer is:

Pick a ruling, playtest it, write down how it worked out, report those findings to Wizards, and let them know you were initially confused by the contradiction and that it needs to be addressed in future playtest materials and the final product.

I downvoted some of these because they are trivial and lack research.

I recently asked, What did we learn during the D&D Next playtest that should inform how we approach the One D&D playtest?. In her answer, doppelgreener writes:

By far our primary issue was “read this text back to me” style questions: someone indicates new material and asks us to explain it. Crucially the question describes no actual problem understanding the text. Such a question is essentially just an invitation to copy+paste/rephrase the material. These questions are answered, frequently self-answered, exactly that way.

Two of the questions we've had so far were obviously this sort of question (the two that were self answered), and I could see on some of the others where someone would downvote for this reason.

As for answers, I actually upvoted most (but not all) of them, the voting pattern on one-dnd-playtest answers seems much less unusual to me than what we saw on the questions, so I don't feel there is much there that needs explaining.