D&D 5E (2024) Jeremy Crawford: “We are releasing new editions of the books”

[mamba]

A year or so down the line Im really going to be interested if the same folks still insist the birds aren't real.

that cuts both ways…

 

[Indaarys]

Ive been saying from the beginning that mixing editions like they're trying to is just going to send class disparity problems into the stratosphere.

The games already a difficult juggle as it is, having to juggle twice as much is not going to go over well.

The way I see things the only two outcomes here are that book bans (practically guaranteed to center on 2014] end up making 1DND a new de facto edition (nullifying the entire point of trying to weasel out of calling it one), or that the zeitgeist starts revolving around trying to make the mix work in a way that doesn't leave people defeated for wanting to use whats in their books.

People who only have 2024 are going to be dealing with mostly nerfed classes up against people with 2014 who can not only use the more powerful versions, but are also permitted to start using broken feats and other rulesets.

Its one thing for DMs to have say over what can and can't be used in their game, but this edition mixing is WOTC telling players what they can use. That alone is going to cause conflicts.

 

[Indaarys]

Maybe the birds aren't real? I am still predicting thing are going to work out fine. Seriously what problems are you predicting that would take more than a 5 minute discussion with your group to solve?

Its not an issue of how it gets addressed at the table. Its an issue of the problem shouldn't exist in the first place.

I can easily resolve my laptop shutting off inadvertently by turning on power saver and keeping my utilization low.

I can also just not have that problem by plugging the thing in.

 

[Indaarys]

that cuts both ways…

Yes yes we know you're really defensive over all this.

 

[codo]

I think it's actually going to be far more confusing because you are going to have two different sets of designs for the same classes be viable at once, allowing players to choose between two rather differently-designed systems. You can say "Well, who will play the old stuff?" and I would say "More than you probably think".

Seriously, look at the debates we've had on this board alone: there are plenty of people who don't like the new designs and want things closer to the old stuff. Instead of saying "Well, you can play the older edition that is balanced around those conceits", you're now saying "Well, you can still use that old version at the table", thus completely negating the attempt to fix it by still outright allowing it with no changes. Don't like the 2024's version of the newly-balance druid? Well, time to go back to the 2014 druid with all its Circle of the Moon problems.

You can try and handwave the idea away, but the fact that people can just bring the old rules to the table if they don't like the new ones and try to play them is going to happen, and almost certainly more than you think. We've already seen some rough feedback for things like the Warlock. You don't think a bunch of people aren't just going to play the 2014 version?

Also, I find the conceit of "Everyone is going to buy the new rules" doesn't really play with the conceit of "You're going to cause a split in the community with a new edition", because I don't think a bunch of people are suddenly going to buy the rules only because they have a "5E" next to them. People are interested in the new rules because they are new, and I suspect that more people than you'd think would be up for an edition change right now. Instead, we're going to try and do a weird mixture of editions, where we have opposing designs competing. You're going to have people who ban old classes, or at least certain versions.

Do you really think that any of us here are actually going to be confused when the new version comes out? We are d&d nerds, who spend all day discussing the game online. None of us are actually going to be confused. Some of us may not like the new rules, but that is not the same thing.

I never said that nobody will use both versions at the same time. I said that the vast majority of groups who do use both, are going to be experienced players who aren't actually going to have any real problems with it.

Sure there will be some players who don't like the new rules and will stick with the old version, or switch to a different game entirely. So what, no mater what you do, there will always be people who don't like it. You can never please everyone. Look at the reaction from some people every time a new 5e book is released. There are always people saying that WotC ruined the game, and that they won't buy any more books, or switch to a new game. Yet 5e keeps chugging along being the best selling version of D&D ever, without even noticing.

 

[Indaarys]

I said that the vast majority of groups who do use both, are going to be experienced players who aren't actually going to have any real problems with it.

Just like how in 5e the expectation was that all the DMs would already be experienced. Such a great idea

 

[codo]

Just like how in 5e the expectation was that all the DMs would already be experienced. Such a great idea

That has nothing to do with what I am talking about. Do you think most new players and groups are going to use both books at once, or do you think that new groups are just going to buy the current book on Amazon or Target and just start playing? You don't think that most groups that end up using both aren't already playing 5e?

 

[Indaarys]

That has nothing to do with what I am talking about.

Its the same fundamental logic.

Do you think most new players and groups are going to use both books at once, or do you think that new groups are just going to buy the current book on Amazon or Target and just start playing?

I think anyone sufficiently interested in the game is going to eventually learn of all these books that have more powerful (re: often broken) content and will act accordingly.

They don't actually need to buy the books to use or get that content afterall, especially if we're talking online gaming versus in-person.

 

[Vaalingrade]

no one is forcing you to buy new WotC releases, not sure why you even care about the playtest

I want them to improve. To innovate. To succeed even.

They keep getting in the way of that.

Ignoring all the PR screw-ups, I had high hopes with the first and third playtest documents. Killing species ability scores, using 'species' at all in the first place, tightening up the rogue, taking away monster-facing crits, the changes to species, actually trying to make a new species no matter how badly they failed--I was on board with 5.5 and contrary to all the attacks on this thread, I was using 5.5 as a term of endearment because it represented improvement and innovation (which isn't much, seeing as 3.5 was okay, but randomly ended up taking down all my then-current characters and 4Es was a brutal throat slash to the Good One in the name of chasing the people actively sabotaging it).

Buuut then stuff started to be regressive like suddenly casters all having to be prep casters and the bland druid wildshape and walking back on the crits, and things took a turn. Then the caster stuff. And I don't have the faith anymore. Not to mention all the people who parachute in to protect WotC from any and all criticism by accusing people of being spiteful and unforgiving about the actual bad stuff they did that frankly reflects badly on them as well.

But no, I guess other people know my feelings and motivations better than me.

 

[SteveC]

On the mixing Editions thing, I can only say that until recently I was playing a 3.5 game (Shackled City) and using online resources. There are some great wikis for spells/feats and so on. The problem is that they don't always filter very well between 3.0 and 3.5 and I can tell you there were some significant differences there. It caused problems a few times, so that's what I'm fearing here.

Some of the new class designs are significantly different in power and I think something like the Hexblade will be very different. (I admit that I am one of those people who takes 1hexblade level on every character that's charisma based and mixes it up in melee, so I have only me to blame).

I honestly don't think that a mix and match is going to work out very well between the two based on what we've seen so far.