Its time to exempt (sub)race from the PHB +1 rule!

[The Big BZ]

DMing 7 complete strangers with a mix of people who say ‘Which one is the D20?’ and people who say ‘I read on a forum that Flanking is legal in AL now’ ain’t easy, PHB+1 makes it a little easier... It’s just fine how it is.

 

[Ath'kethin]

I rather enjoyed my time in a local AL game and I wish I could keep playing in it; it's held on the one evening every week that I just can't make it.

I have no reason to care/worry about the PH+1 rule, and none of the 30+ people I met playing in the AL games did either. In fact, almost nobody used any options outside the Player's Handbook in the first place, and I think the reason was touched on above: very low barrier for entry for new players. I fully support the idea.

 

[TiwazTyrsfist]

My understanding is that that is the POINT of the PHB+1 rule. That by separating sources, they avoid having to worry about broken power combos resulting from "Oh well, nobody thought to test this subclass with this race from a book from 6 years ago because we'd all forgotten about it" and getting a 5e Pun-pun.

Like I think there's already a specific example? One of the Genesai subraces would have had some abusive synergies with the Storm Sorcerer sub class or something like that? Maybe that's not it, but it was something involving Sword Coast Adventurers Guide and the Princes of the Apocalypse digital expansion material IIRC.

The point is, keeping the races in Volo's and the classes in Xanathar's SEPARATE in AL play is the specific point and intention of the PHB+1 rule to prevent unexpected game breaking combos.

Instead we should ask "Please, when you do a Player Splat like Volo or XGE, include BOTH new races and new classes, so we can play with all our new toys at once."

 

[Blue]

To change a rule, you need to know why it's exists in the first place.

A big part of the PHB+1 rule is to reduce barriers of entry of new AND returning players. D&D has a horrible reputation specifically among those who have left it in previous editions that you need 20 splatbooks to make a character that's on par with everyone else.

AL - open games at a store that don't require already having a home group - are a great place for new players to join the hobby.

To my mind, removing restrictions to the public and open set of events that is the easiest way to entice players to the game needs to be done in conjunction like adding them to the SRD so as to keep that barrier to entry low.

 

[Jester David]

Ah, I've actually seen it argued elsewhere that AL makes up the majority of 5e play (I don't think it does), so I was curious.

I doubt it.
Organised play was big during 3e, and remains a big part of Pathfinder, but it's not the norm.

It was commented by WotC staff that by their estimates 9 million people play D&D the tabletop game. There's around 2500 WPN stores that run AL. So even if an additional 50% of tables run AL at schools and libraries, that's still less than 4000 places running AL. And even if each has an average of a dozen players, that's roughly 45,000 people. Or 0.5% of D&D players. Even if we do something crazy and just arbitrarily say that that's the "regular players" and there's twice as many people who play irregularly, that still means 98.5% of D&D players don't do AL.

 

[CapnZapp]

We now have situation where Aasimar can't be Divine Souls or Celestial Warlocks, Shadar Kai can't be Shadow Magic Sorcerers or Hexblades, Water Genasi, Tritons, Lizardfolk, Sea Elves and Half Sea Elves can't become Storm Herald Barbarians of the Sea, and Tabaxi can't become Barbarians of the Tiger spirit, Hobgoblins can't become Warmages, ect... even the lore behind these races and these subclasses fight like hand in glove, peanut butter and jelly.

This is absurd. Look some people want to keep the PHB +1 rule, but met me half way and compromise, seperate races from that the way they have Gods, Backgrounds, Monsters (Summonable and Companions). This would not unbalanced the game, no race has abilities that are gake breaking in the slightest, nor with the potential to do so in combination with any subclass.

Lets make things make sense.

We JUST had this exact topic up for discussion.

Let it rest.

 

[Blue]

I do not play AL, but it seem as dumb rule overall.

It's all official D&D product.

Or you admit in advance that you cannot make 3 balanced books with game mechanics?

One of the reasons for the rule is to keep the barrier to entry to 5e low. AL is open, public games that FLGS advertise - you don't need to know someone already in a game to give it a try.

Earlier editions of D&D had the reputation that you needed every splat book to make an on-par character, something off-putting to many players who left the game. And for new players, it's the feel they don't have to buy a lot to be on an even keel with everyone.

So regardless if they want to "admit" they can't balance multiple books, the rule makes sense. And historically, can you point out any RPG by any publisher that didn't have unexpectedly powerful or weak combos leak through testing when they had multiple expansions from multiple authors? So maybe it's not bad for that purpose as well.

 

[Eltab]

OP:
You need to figure out how to finagle yourself a face-to-face meeting with the AL leadership, and make your case to the people who can make the change you desire.

 

[77IM]

One important factor people are missing about PHB+1+races or PHB+2 is that it would dramatically increase the playtesting combinations and quickly become unmanageable.

With PHB+1, when Wizards is developing and playtesting The Simbul's Guide to Spells, they only need to concern themselves with interactions between that book and the PHB.

With PHB+2, they'd need to consider and playtest the interactions between Simbul's and every single other book released for 5e.

With PHB+1+races, it's a bit better, but still increases the possibility of some nasty combo. I mean, shadar-kai shadow sorcerer seems reasonably balanced to me, but maybe when Mordenkainen's comes out, there will be some shadar-kai racial feat that is grossly overpowered when combined with shadow sorcerer. Sticking to PHB+1 just totally eliminates that sort of unexpected combo.

 

[Sunseeker]

One important factor people are missing about PHB+1+races or PHB+2 is that it would dramatically increase the playtesting combinations and quickly become unmanageable.

With PHB+1, when Wizards is developing and playtesting The Simbul's Guide to Spells, they only need to concern themselves with interactions between that book and the PHB.

With PHB+2, they'd need to consider and playtest the interactions between Simbul's and every single other book released for 5e.

With PHB+1+races, it's a bit better, but still increases the possibility of some nasty combo. I mean, shadar-kai shadow sorcerer seems reasonably balanced to me, but maybe when Mordenkainen's comes out, there will be some shadar-kai racial feat that is grossly overpowered when combined with shadow sorcerer. Sticking to PHB+1 just totally eliminates that sort of unexpected combo.

While I see what you're saying, I think that's a burden WOTC owes the playerbase to undertake themselves. They can't walk around acting like AL is the only way people are playing, or the only "official" way to play and therefore the only way that is going to get reviewed while continuing to shell out splat that may be unbalancing in more open-material games.

I mean, I know WOTC isn't interested in supporting certain aspects of the game...but it would be rather bad form for them to say "oh we hadn't considered how insane that combination is because AL is the only legal way to play the game". I mean that's something the guys who make MTG can say. But not D&D.