D&D (2024) Do you plan to adopt D&D5.5One2024Redux?

[Greg K]

Do the best fantasy RPG games need to start with a "D" ?

Barbarians of Lemuria, Beasts & Barbarians (for Savage Worlds), Honor + Intrigue, Savage Lankhmar, Savage Pathfinder, Tiny Dungeon 2e, BASH Fantasy: Legend of Steel, GURPS Fantasy, Fantasy Hero...nope, they do not need to start with a "D".

 

[TheSword]

I’d really love to see how many people in the No column have openly declared that they don’t and won’t play 5e at all in the many other threads on the subject.

We’ll never know, but you know who you are.

Clear that even with this there is large support for the 2024 edition which is good to see.

 

[TheSword]

Referring to WotC's version of the game simply as "5e" is a pain point for me, whether I know what you mean or not. It's dismissive of all the great work on that game people who aren't WotC have done, and elevates them beyond what I believe they deserve.

It is their game though. They bought it. Then developed it.

They allow other companies to sell products and profit from compatibility but it’s still WotC 5e.

Even where 3pp have released a cloned version of the game wholecloth that is 90% alike I still see it as WotC’s D&D because they’re still using WotCs licence and WotC rules at the core. Saying otherwise is smoke and mirrors.

 

[Li Shenron]

Nope.

I haven't like the direction taken by 5e since Tasha, and I am almost always the DM, so we'll keep playing the 2014 version of 5e up to Xanathar fo the foreseeable future.

In addition, I have a lot of DIY props such as character sheets and spell/action cards which are based on the 2014 version, and I certainly do not want to re-create them all to follow rules updates.

 

[mamba]

Even where 3pp have released a cloned version of the game wholecloth that is 90% alike I still see it as WotC’s D&D because they’re still using WotCs licence and WotC rules at the core. Saying otherwise is smoke and mirrors.

so you are essentially agreeing with @Micah Sweet, 5e is not just D&D 2014 but also derivatives like A5E and ToV

 

[Lanefan]

Then they do that, I guess. In game, maybe they only found enough gold to buy 3 healing spells instead of 5 because they didn't do quite as well. So now they have to take a week to heal up instead of 2 days.

I mean, from your years of posts, "let whatever happens, happens", seems to be a core portion of your play ethos. That's exactly what I'm advocating!

I guess I'm just not seeing it then.

Well, that's the exactly the tension that I think makes for good gameplay. The "smart" play might be to not take risks, but if you don't take risks, you aren't playing as efficiently and, as such, slow your advancement.

The whole point of resource attrition play, in addition to trying to enhance versimilitude, is to balance increasing risk (because of the drain on resources) with increasing rewards (putting the best loot towards the end of the dungeon).

For me, resource attrition is a large part of play; and IMO the best way to achieve this is to make the resources somewhat harder to recover than 5e has them.

A single overnight rest, for example, should only get you back a small-ish portion of your hit points, not all of them. It should get you back all your spells but they should be limited in number (i.e. no at-wills), forcing you to either ration them or - with whatever consequences it might entail - spend 23+ hours out of every 24 resting.

That said, sure there'll be times when they miss some treasure. But not-so-gently encouraging them into a disciplined para-military playstyle* isn't the answer - not for me, anyway; it's probably my least-favourite way to play the game.

* - this seems to be where you're going here; if I'm wrong on this, apologies - I've misread you again.

 

[Lanefan]

I never said I was confused. I'd prefer folks to be more precise, and feel using term "5e" when they mean WotC is a bad habit.

I'm not sure I get this. 5e (and 5.5e) are the WotC games, like it or not; and so if I reference either one that's what I mean.

The various 5e-adjacent systems would, I think, need to be called out by name to be included here. Same as specifically mentioning the first Pathfinder if one wants to lump it in with 3e, 3.5e, or both.

 

[Lanefan]

Barbarians of Lemuria, Beasts & Barbarians (for Savage Worlds), Honor + Intrigue, Savage Lankhmar, Savage Pathfinder, Tiny Dungeon 2e, BASH Fantasy: Legend of Steel, GURPS Fantasy, Fantasy Hero...nope, they do not need to start with a "D".

Don't you mean Darbarians of Lemuria, Deasts and Darbarians, Donor and Intrigue, Davage Lankhmar, etc.?

 

[Lanefan]

Clear that even with this there is large support for the 2024 edition which is good to see.

There's always a large cohort who jump to the new shiny no matter what, whether it's D&D or iphones or operating systems or whatever.

Keeping people in that "must have the new shiny" frame of mind is - sadly - what keeps a lot of tech companies in business. Thankfully, the spin cycle isn't as fast in RPGs.

 

[Oofta]

There's always a large cohort who jump to the new shiny no matter what, whether it's D&D or iphones or operating systems or whatever.

Keeping people in that "must have the new shiny" frame of mind is - sadly - what keeps a lot of tech companies in business. Thankfully, the spin cycle isn't as fast in RPGs.

In most cases, "new an shiny" doesn't apply to something a decade old.