D&D (2024) 1/2 in, half out

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

To all these, I will try to explain.

A large majority of players (especially newer or younger ones) just look up stuff online. They will read on Reddit about a cool combo or build, and then just "use" it. A majority of the stuff posted in the very near future will all be new stuff. Once one player shows another, then that is what will be used.

Tasha's is the perfect example to this. I have not heard nor read about a table using the old "racial ASIs" since it came out. Noppe, everyone just puts +1 and +2 in an ability of their choice. Their character is stronger this way, and that's what players want. Do you think 5.5 will nerf anything? No, they won't. It will make everything a bit stronger or the same. So anything new or stronger will get used. It will be picked up by one, then a hundred, then a thousand, and it will not matter if a few players or a DM want to stick to the old books. They will be irrelevant.

OK.

Why would players care about the monster book you use, or which DM's book (if any)? That choice is essentially invisible to them.

 

[Kurotowa]

Why would players care about the monster book you use, or which DM's book (if any)? That choice is essentially invisible to them.

The least optional and most player facing part of the DMG is the magic items section. And Crawford's said they're going to be making changes to that. So that, at least, may apply some pressure from the player side to update.

But more likely, the DMG'14 is just not a very good book. So if the DMG'24 has more and better DM tools, with a better layout and presentation, why wouldn't you switch?

 

[Warpiglet-7]

The question I was asking which parts are YOU going to adopt:

I got several answers and a couple nobody will adopt part of it only.

I am a partial adopter, I presume, unless it is all that and a bag of chips. I do agree most games groups will probably go all in or maybe not even realize there is an update.

But I don’t think that is anywhere near 100% combined.

 

[Zaukrie]

PHB for sure. Likely MM, but hard to say

 

[kigmatzomat]

My group doesn't upgrade mid-campaign unless the base system has flaws. The 3e campaign ran from the summer 3e came out to the summer 4e came out.

We'll see what happens with the 5e game. There's a non-zero chance we run a different game system next campaign, which might carry us until 6e comes out.

 

[Charlaquin]

I’ll probably use most, if not all of it. So far the only thing I’m a bit hesitant about is Bastions,

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

The least optional and most player facing part of the DMG is the magic items section. And Crawford's said they're going to be making changes to that. So that, at least, may apply some pressure from the player side to update.

We are in very different games, I guess.

I have never encountered a player with an expectation that magic items would work a given way -- in fact, I rarely give out stock magic items at all. So me using Tales of the Valiant's Players Guide (which includes ToV's magic items, most of which are from the CC SRD) wouldn't even register with my players, and certainly wouldn't be something they'd "demand," as per the original argument.

And the original argument (not by you) was that players would also insist on the DM using the WotC 2024 Monster Manual, which I cannot possibly imagine a scenario where the players would notice or care whether the monsters had slightly different numbers or a few variant abilities.

I agree that there will be many players who will want their groups to use the 2024 PHB. I remain skeptical that most of them would know or care which books the DM uses, as long as it's compatible, which all the 5E books should more or less be.

 

[Clint_L]

I run through DnDBeyond, so I'll buy all the books for cheap, probably toggle most of the stuff on, and let my players decide which versions of classes they want to use, and so on.

On a personal level, I am most looking forward to seeing if they actually make the DMG a useful guide for the first time in the game's history. And all the new art in the MM.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I have been thinking about the upcoming game maybe a little more realistically.

When 3.5 came out we simply did not see the need. I was not even tempted. At first with 5e I felt the same. Worse, I did not like many proposed changes to classes we are anticipating.

Then I gave it some more thought.

I really think I will get the DMG. That said, in recent weeks a closer inspection of the 5e DMG leaves me realizing I was looking though a fair amount of its value. Its organization and layout did not grab me as I would hope. I actively dislike mordenkainen’s guide…but have come to embrace Tasha’s…

My plan until I see more is to get the DMG and any adventure anthologies.

So my question: if you are going to pick and choose what to incorporate from 5.5, what will it be and why?

Based on what I've seen the bad changes have all been buried by downvotes. I plan to tell my players "no old style moon druids, great weapon masters/sharpshooters/crossbow experts and a couple of spells take nerfs. Also multiclasses get subclasses at level 3 Otherwise you do you."

DM side I plan to wait and see.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I'm going to buy the books and if I am still running my Theros campaign at that point I will decide whether or not to change any characters over to the new builds. Some will stay with their 5E14 builds, some might be fine moving to 5E24. Either way is going to be fine. Considering that all my games have houserules throughout them, any new 5E24 rules could just become additional "house rules" to the game and I would never bother being all dogmatic about "what version" of the game we're playing. To me that's a waste of time trying to put a label on it.