D&D (2024) Dungeons and Dragons future? Ray Winninger gives a nod to Mike Shea's proposed changes.

[Micah Sweet]

Obligatory "Corporations exist to make money" and "Capitalism is why you have products to enjoy."

True, but doesn't make it not a cash grab.

 

[Parmandur]

What? Where do you get 1 out of 4 humans don’t have feats?

Level 1-3, 4% of Pcs have Feats. 20% of characters are Humans, but thst might have been from a different breakdown. So, soory, one out of five Humans at lowevel are Variants.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Ok.
View attachment 257910

Maybe you should play at more fun tables.

We got pretty raucous at Shadowrun last night, what with our Troll Face vamping IRL and our two adepts (self included) miming matrix dodges. And we weren't even in person.

 

[Parmandur]

Baffling.

Do you...play sober....?

 

[Scribe]

True, but doesn't make it not a cash grab.

No, you are right.

Some however defend that as a virtuous act.

 

[Jer]

Ok, that reads as "cash grab" to me. Thank you, I get it now.

I don't actually see consolidating the rules into one place, making changes to make the game easier to explain/learn/teach, and updating the rules in certain areas (such as races) to be more in line with what the majority of their player base seems to want to be a worthless endeavor. Especially if they do actually keep it backwards compatible so you only have to buy it if you want to. That feels like the opposite of a cash grab to me and more of a "we need to put out a new printing of our game anyway, so why not consolidate and clarify it before we do that".

 

[Charlaquin]

"Including Tasha's free classes boosts" and "being 5e backward compatible" are... not compatible. Unless those free boosts are in the DMG under a paragraph labelled as optional.

Tasha’s free class boosts are entirely compatible with 5e, as evidenced by them being in 5e. Including them as the default would make the revised rules power crept but it wouldn’t make them incompatible with 5e.

 

[darjr]

A cash grab wouldn’t be a change to a cash cow, which the PHB appears to be. Not normally anyway.

If anything they are taking a risk.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Do you...play sober....?

I am constantly bewildered that people play this game 'sober' (not in the 'not-drunk sense, but in the 'completely serious, we are dour men enjoying a stiff brandy and a cigar and laughter shall be confined to harrumphs' sense).

If you're going to get together with your friends to play make believe, I say own it.

 

[Charlaquin]

I tend to view Steady Aim as a patch the designers used to ensure sneak attack is being granted as often as the designers meant for it to be used in combat. If there was better guidance in the PHB about the expected frequency of sneak attack damage I don't think it would have ever come up.

In my games it's not an upgrade because rogues already are hiding and sniping in almost every encounter round they choose to without the patch.

Yeah, Steady Aim seems unnecessary to me with how I run stealth in combat, but the way I’ve heard a lot of folks say they run it, I can see why Steady Aim would be needed in those groups.