D&D (2024) D&D 5.11 - the time of big change is over

[DEFCON 1]

I wouldn't even say the changes WotC has offered up in the playtests thus far were all that radical. A lot of them were just window dressing in my opinion.

To me... any change WotC made that could be reverted by a DM by just using the 5E14 rule instead could not be considered a radical change.

 

[dave2008]

I dig most of the "radical new ideas" and am pretty disappointed to hear this news.

To be clear, this isn't "news" it is speculation. The only thing they have said they are walking back so far (and I don't believe that is set in stone - though likely) is the subclass progression staying the same as 2014 except all subclasses start at level 3.

 

[DEFCON 1]

To be clear, this isn't "news" it is speculation. The only thing they have said they are walking back so far (and I don't believe that is set in stone - though likely) is the subclass progression staying the same as 2014 except all subclasses start at level 3.

And heck, I don't even think they are going to end up doing that and reverting everyone back to the 5E14 version. Paladin subclass features come in at 3, 7, 15 , & 20-- and with the advent of epic boons at 20th level I don't think there's any way they're going overlap that with the final paladin subclass feature. That feature will probably get bumped up to like 18th or 19th most likely.

To be honest... once you move all the initial subclasses features to 3rd level I really don't see the ones behind them mattering that much whether they are on a matching schedule or not. Here's what they will look like with a 5E14 format but everyone starting at 3rd level:

Barbarian / Druid / Warlock / Wizard: 3, 6, 10, 14
Cleric: 3, 6, 8, 17
Fighter: 3, 7, 10, 15, 18
Monk: 3, 6, 11, 17
Paladin: 3, 7, 15, 20
Ranger: 3, 7, 11, 15
Rogue: 3, 9, 13, 17
Sorcerer: 3, 6, 14, 18
Bard: 3, 6, 14

So four of the subclasses are already at the standardized placement, Ranger is just one level later for every feature past 3rd (so they might as well be on the standardized path), the Fighter has an extra feature and the Bard is a feature down, and the rest all have their final feature in Tier 4 at 17th+ level, so those features might as well not even exist for 95% of the tables out there.

So personally I don't see anything worthwhile in maintaining the 5E14 format either. I think most players would actually like their fourth subclass feature to arrive prior to 15th level in Tier 3 so that they might get more use. Whether or not they are on a 3, 6, 10, 14 schedule or move a level up or down for some classes here or there is fine... but if they officially establish all classes get 4 features and the first one arrives at 3rd level... the placements of the rest won't actually matter to players all that much.

 

[Stalker0]

And that could be all we see. This was never supposed to be a complete overall, just a tweak. I don't see the need to change a bunch of things or playtest them all if they do.

Again this is where the 5.5 vs 5.1 debate has come from. On the spell front personally I was hoping for a lot of spell tweaks, there are many spells that really need some adjustment, several are downright aweful, a few pretty OP.

This suggests we will get a lot fewer tweaks than I was hoping for

 

[Parmandur]

To be honest... once you move all the initial subclasses features to 3rd level I really don't see the ones behind them mattering that much whether they are on a matching schedule or not. Here's what they will look like with a 5E14 format but everyone starting at 3rd level:

We don't know if "Epic Boon at 20: has made the cut. Based on Crawfords comment, it is very possible that it hasn't.

 

[Parmandur]

Again this is where the 5.5 vs 5.1 debate has come from. On the spell front personally I was hoping for a lot of spell tweaks, there are many spells that really need some adjustment, several are downright aweful, a few pretty OP.

This suggests we will get a lot fewer tweaks than I was hoping for

They have tweaked several Spells, I expect we've already seen the larger part of their plans there in the guest 5 packets.

 

[dave2008]

Again this is where the 5.5 vs 5.1 debate has come from. On the spell front personally I was hoping for a lot of spell tweaks, there are many spells that really need some adjustment, several are downright aweful, a few pretty OP.

This suggests we will get a lot fewer tweaks than I was hoping for

It could also mean they aren't playtesting the tweaks. I mean do we really need a playtest to tell us that Fireball should do less damage? IDK what they will do, but I am guessing they will take the more conservative route as that is what they have done the whole edition.

 

[Stalker0]

I mean do we really need a playtest to tell us that Fireball should do less damage?

I would argue yes. I think there is a solid camp of people that think 3rd level spells should do that kind of damage, that damage is often under-represented in spells compared to control.

But I don't know for certain, hence a playtest

You may be right that they will make many tweaks without feedback, but to me it seems odd that they want feedback on so many other things, but not more spells, as spells are such a cornerstone of the dnd experience, whether its for players using them, or dms using them against players.

 

[Parmandur]

I would argue yes. I think there is a solid camp of people that think 3rd level spells should do that kind of damage, that damage is often under-represented in spells compared to control.

But I don't know for certain, hence a playtest

You may be right that they will make many tweaks without feedback, but to me it seems odd that they want feedback on so many other things, but not more spells, as spells are such a cornerstone of the dnd experience, whether its for players using them, or dms using them against players.

I think it's quite likely that a lot of Spells won't be touched.

 

[zedturtle]

Just skimmed the thread, but having watched the video, I think Chris is (mostly) right.

He has a good point about the timeframes. Ha$bros is good about hiding the production end of things, with books magically appearing in stores and on DnDBeyond automagically it seems. But anyone who's shopped in the larger TTRPG marketplace knows that naughty word happens. Books take months to write, lay-out, art, edit, proofread, and more. And then they often take months to print, bind, and ship to the warehouse, for eventual journey to the customer. And crap happens – one of the publishers I work with just went through a very painful shipping process, worse than almost anything before (and I'm including the 18-month voyage from the print-shop to my garage for US fulfillment during the pandemic) – long story short, the books made it into the US, to the first warehouse but were then lost in the shipment from that warehouse to me. Amazingly frustrating.

Anyway, major changes need to stop soon. And 'what has gone before' will comfort a lot of the player base, and quiet those freaking out about a new edition. So, I'm likely out. 5e is safe now, and I can spend the next 20 years remixing it if I like. And Pathfinder Remaster sounds like my wishlist* for Pathfinder and the way forward.

---

* When I started talking about my proposed changes to my Pathfinder-stan friends, they pushed back HARD. One in particular was like 'Pathfinder players NEED alignment' and grumbled at the ideas of Proficiency Without Level, Static Defences, Checks for attack, and all that.

I tried to explain to him that new players would appreciate 'all rolls are Checks, roll 1d20 and add the number here' and find it less confusing. Of course, he's been playing fantasy adventure games since he was eight, and we're <ahem> years old now (let's just say we've got XP to spare).