D&D (2024) First playtest thread! One D&D Character Origins.

[Bill Zebub]

As a Boomer, the last couple pages of this thread make me understand why “Ok, Boomer” is a thing.

Stereotypes are…interesting.

 

[Knight_Marshal]

I disagree with their handling of mixed race characters. We do not need them to officially tell us we can take a Drow and say its half Drow and half Dwarf. We can do that already.

What we need is rules to mix and match racial features so that mechanically our character will be half Drow and Dwarf.

 

[Haplo781]

I disagree with their handling of mixed race characters. We do not need them to officially tell us we can take a Drow and say its half Drow and half Dwarf. We can do that already.

What we need is rules to mix and match racial features so that mechanically our character will be half Drow and Dwarf.

I mean some people can't wrap their heads around the idea that what it says on the sheet isn't 100% identical with the narrative.

 

[Cadence]

I mean some people can't wrap their heads around the idea that what it says on the sheet isn't 100% identical with the narrative.

It feels like when it's something easy to do that getting more than 50% would be nice.

 

[Medic]

I don't fully agree, but this basically makes my point for me: if the numbers matter that little, then why are we using the numbers to differentiate? Why not let us have the ability to make them better match our concepts (where they will have the most notable effect) and save differences in race to interesting abilities that other races won't have access to?

I disagree with this a great deal. ASIs matter, especially in a game where there are very limited options for improvement. Plus, saying that they're just "fluff" and non-essentially is really a great argument as to why we don't need to attach them to race anymore. The only real effect they have is largely pushing people who want to play certain classes towards certain races so that they can get the most out of them. Why not detach them, put them into characterful backgrounds (or even custom ones) while making race something that has a bunch of interesting consequences that supplements your class choice rather than deciding it?

You are aware that I have been explicitly in favor of decoupling ability improvements from race this entire time, yes?

I disagree. Those powers have a ton of utility and could be useful both in and out of combat. Each of those spells are useful to have on their own detached from class. Compare this to getting stat boosts that run counter to my class: putting them into dump stats will likely have little effect on my character.

We're going to have to disagree on this. Learning spells that I can cast once a day (or more often with spell slots), more than a few of which are either situational or keyed to mental ability scores that I likely will not be investing in, is less appealing to my Barbarian than the orc's improved survivability and trait that allows them to get into melee faster.

 

[TwoSix]

I mean some people can't wrap their heads around the idea that what it says on the sheet isn't 100% identical with the narrative.

I certainly agree that any support the books give to reskinning is great. I can understand why WotC is reticent to allow for specific rules that allow swaps of racial abilities; essentially, that forces them to balance each racial trait individually (or create a race feature template) rather than balance the race as the gestalt of all its features. At that point, they could simply merge race and background together into a single pool of features.

Not saying that isn't a perfectly viable path to pursue, but that might be a bridge too far in a "backwards compatible" revision.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I mean some people can't wrap their heads around the idea that what it says on the sheet isn't 100% identical with the narrative.

I pretty much dismiss any argument that fits the pattern “people other than me can’t handle X”.

 

[dave2008]

I think we will see exactly that, but it does bring up an interesting quandary in terms of compatibility. If the new core Rogues get an additional feature to compensate for the loss of doubling sneak attack dice, what happens to a 2014 Rogue playing under the 2024 core? Here are the choices as I see them

1. Drop the new weapon only crit rule
2. Keep the new weapon only crit rule as a general reduction in power to non-weapon damage with no exceptions
3. Keep the new weapon only crit rule as a general reduction in power but allow new subclasses to provide an exception
4. Keep the new weapon only crit rule as a genera reduction in power, but allow core class features to provide an exception and provide a conversion doc to allow 2014 core classes to take advantage of that exception

Or
5. Keep the new weapon only crit rule as a general reduction in power to non-weapon damage with no exceptions and don't care about how or why someone would use a 2014 rogue in a 2024 game.

I personally think it is such a small issue that it will be ignored.

 

[TwoSix]

I pretty much dismiss any argument that fits the pattern “people other than me can’t handle X”.

I wouldn't really says it's a "can't handle" argument; it's more that a lot of people don't like reskinning as an aesthetic. The general argument is that concepts in the game don't feel as "real" if they don't carry a certain mechanical weight.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I wouldn't really says it's a "can't handle" argument; it's more that a lot of people don't like reskinning as an aesthetic. The general argument is that concepts in the game don't feel as "real" if they don't carry a certain mechanical weight.

I would agree with that. Reskinning feels cheap and lazy to me. I'm sure other people like it though, and good for them.