D&D (2024) The timing of the playtest

[Krachek]

This is, really my point. I don't want to buy the books, now -- had they waited a week, I would have had the new warm fuzzies over Spelljammer that I was looking forward to (since April/whenever). It's not there now, because there is a new/uynpredictable/shiny just up ahead.

Being "compatible" is fine, but it's not enough to get me to buy. If there's going to be a new/current version of something my interest in the previous one becomes that of a historian, not a player. I don't want to mix-and-match between alternate versions; that invites a particular form of system mastery that favour older players and those with more money, which I don't like. I would love it if everything in Tasha's, Xanathar's MotM etc. all remained "current" but at this point I can't expect it to -- and they're core books. The impetus for keeping settings, etc. in canon as it were is by definition less.

Then don’t buy it!
Aside the new phb and core books, all other new material will be roughly compatible with the current edition. There will be some glitch but overall you can stick to the current books and keep shopping new material once in a while.

but surely new classes will be more cool, and just a thin line over actual classes but I guess you can live with that.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I would love for this to be true. I haven't seen the 2024 release yet, though, and I expect there will be new ideas emerging from the playtest.

I get what you're saying regarding the edition shift feeling "more real" - it really did that to me, as well, in spite of us all knowing full well that there was going to be 50th Anniversary Core books, and that they'd have changes.

The OneD&D announcement somehow managed to make me feel like the changes would be both bigger than I expected, and somehow smaller than I expected. (I think I may have been imagining TWO scenarios, which this looks like it will fit somewhere between!)

At any rate, I am 95% sure that the upcoming books will work absolutely fine with the new core. Mostly because I don't expect them to have a lot of class or subclass options (which I think will be the most changed by the revision).

There IS ONE THING I'd like to see (and I feel that I have evidence to support the theory that they're at least THINKING about this Redesigned layout of Monster Statblocks. The CONTENT is one thing, the LAYOUT is another. I think it's time for a change. MPMotM may be the beginning of the new design philosophy, but it's quite possible that the statblock will change design before we see the 50AE MM.

But you'd still be able to run those monsters, absolutely. You'll still be able to run 2014 monsters, even if they're slightly off design-wise.

 

[CleverNickName]

I imagine we've already seen 90% of the revised edition, in the more recent books like Tasha's Cauldron of Everything and Fizban's Treasury of Dragons.

 

[Parmandur]

Mostly because I don't expect them to have a lot of class or subclass options

Yeah, we only have one entire Subclass for all of 2022 (Lunar Sorcerer in Dragonlance), and they only tested 4 for 2023.

 

[Parmandur]

I imagine we've already seen 90% of the revised edition, in the more recent books like Tasha's Cauldron of Everything and Fizban's Treasury of Dragons.

The real big question is if they are restructuring the Classes. I doubt it is a coincidence that testing one Class a month would bring us to the end of the stated time frame for the playtest.

 

[Kobold Stew]

I get what you're saying regarding the edition shift feeling "more real" - it really did that to me, as well, in spite of us all knowing full well that there was going to be 50th Anniversary Core books, and that they'd have changes.

The OneD&D announcement somehow managed to make me feel like the changes would be both bigger than I expected, and somehow smaller than I expected. (I think I may have been imagining TWO scenarios, which this looks like it will fit somewhere between!)

At any rate, I am 95% sure that the upcoming books will work absolutely fine with the new core. Mostly because I don't expect them to have a lot of class or subclass options (which I think will be the most changed by the revision).

I think (unsurprisingly?) we're on the same page here. Even if it is still possible to run the old subclasses, I am wary of the power-realignment that is obviously happening (1st-level feats, etc.)

 

[Reynard]

The real big question is if they are restructuring the Classes. I doubt it is a coincidence that testing one Class a month would bring us to the end of the stated time frame for the playtest.

I don't know how that would actually help us test much, though. Class synergies are as important as solo class behaviors IMO. It's like giving us the "no GM crits" without the balancing monster recharge abilities.

 

[Kobold Stew]

The real big question is if they are restructuring the Classes. I doubt it is a coincidence that testing one Class a month would bring us to the end of the stated time frame for the playtest.

That's interesting observation, but I hope it's not accurate.

One class per month would PREVENT any real playtesting -- it would lead to responses based only on whiteroom analysis, or mixed-edition groups.

 

[Parmandur]

I don't know how that would actually help us test much, though. Class synergies are as important as solo class behaviors IMO. It's like giving us the "no GM crits" without the balancing monster recharge abilities.

Qell, probably about the same as them giving us the race rules without anything else: they want the options playtestedalongside the 2014 options because they are dead serious about normalizing backwards and forwards compatibility.

What they did say is that the Character Origins UA is the big one, and that the future UA drops will be smaller and more focused. So, whether they are doing one Class at a time or a couple at a time, it would seem that Classes are likely to be the bulk of testing.

 

[Parmandur]

I