D&D (2024) Do you plan to adopt D&D5.5One2024Redux?

[MichaelSomething]

Which makes 5e incredibly ironic since virtually everything (barring minions) that people claimed was bad in 4e became part of 5e and suddenly became good.

Due to bounded accuracy, lower level monster could essentially be minions.

 

[Lanefan]

When I say universally bad, I mean it- universally bad for everyone, the hobby in general, D&D in particular. That the very existence of 4e casts a shadow over reality!

Does that give me a 5% bonus on my Hide in Shadows?

 

[James Gasik]

Does that give me a 5% bonus on my Hide in Shadows?

No, because you can't use Hide in Shadows in darkness.

 

[vecna00]

Generally, yes, I will implement the new rules. If I run across something I don't like, I'll just use the 2014 version.

I did the same when 3.5 came out.

 

[Maxperson]

What do you mean mystically? That's a supernaturally charged word. Are psychologists mystics because they can affect the inner workings of your mind?

What about commercials?

What about the deception skill?

The problem is that for a lot of people, grabbing them simply cannot do the things you wrote up. A save can't model those people because a saving throw implies that they could fail, and they can't. If those people still have to save and can be affected, it's a form of mind control which is supernatural.

 

[MuhVerisimilitude]

The problem is that for a lot of people, grabbing them simply cannot do the things you wrote up. A save can't model those people because a saving throw implies that they could fail, and they can't. If those people still have to save and can be affected, it's a form of mind control which is supernatural.

I don't understand what you mean when you say that the saves cannot model it? What do you mean with "it"? And what do you mean when you say they cannot fail?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Which makes 5e incredibly ironic since virtually everything (barring minions) that people claimed was bad in 4e became part of 5e and suddenly became good.

Yeah. But that had actually a reason. Even though some implementations are worse, they are embedded in mkre traditional rules and don't feel as different as 4e rules.
I am rely looking forward to 5.5.
We will get damage on a miss back. Which is great. I loved that in 4e.

 

[Maxperson]

I don't understand what you mean when you say that the saves cannot model it? What do you mean with "it"? And what do you mean when you say they cannot fail?

If someone isn't the kind of person to feel fear from a mundane ability like the one you describe, then that person cannot be made to fear it short of magic. There's no way short of magic to explain why such an individual would feel that fear.

There's no way to model folks who wouldn't feel fear from your ability since everyone, even those who should be immune to a mundane ability like that, has to make a saving throw.

 

[CapnZapp]

I think 55% here is a good indicator WotC will do fine.

Just wanted to clarify to people reading the poll that 55% here probably means 90% in real life. Yes, a disproportionate number of people responding will be the ones having a need to express some dissatisfaction with the 2024 update one way or the other.

 

[CapnZapp]

Sorry. Didn’t mean to be patronizing. Wasn’t my intention.

But as someone who played both with and without the CB, I find declarations that it was “impossible “ to play 4e without the CB to be very overblown.

And to add to the list of things that I have no problem with people not liking 4e for:

1. Presentation. Yup that’s a biggie. That includes the stuff mentioned before like terminology but also stuff like the adventure delve format. As well as loads of other elements.

2. Publication pace. Yikes.

3. Marketing. Yeah this was just bad.

4. Proliferation of interrupt effects which ground the game to a halt in play.

5. Proliferation of damage types which makes the game overly complicated.

6. Spectacular levels of bloat. We probably didn’t need something like forty distinct classes in what, three years?

7. Shockingly poorly written adventures. Goes back to presentation.

That would be most of my list.

I played plenty of 4E and while the core combat loop was fun, almost everything else about the game was not.

To me, 4th Edition shares a lot of design ideas with Pathfinder 2E.

Both place an inordinate focus on the core combat loop (specifically to "balance" it) at the expense of pretty much everything else.

This leads to adventures having to become strings of combat set pieces, with much less focus on the story that connects them.

A 4E adventure and a PF2 adventure is immediately recognizable as specifically just that, a 4E adventure and a PF2 adventure, respectively.

Even though WotC would have denied it, and I'm pretty sure Paizo still would, the fact of the matter is that these adventures aren't really D&D adventures like OD&D, AD&D, 3E and 5E adventures are.

And that is the ultimate source of the failure of these games. They just sacrifice too much of the core D&D experience in order to achieve "balance".

Yes, I know 3E balance was traumatizing to most of us, but 4E and PF2 represents an overcorrection that ultimately dooms both games.

5E is a much better path forward, even though we can argue where and when WotC oversimplified their D&D game: the basic core "values" of the D&D adventure remains intact.

This cannot be said about 4E or PF2.