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

[Micah Sweet]

You didn't ask me, but I'll start with: Monks, Weapon Masteries, alternate tactical uses for Sneak Attack.

All handled better in Level Up, along with so much more IMO.

 

[Maxperson]

People often try to defend the design by broadening the scope of "encounter" from resource consuming combat encounters to add literally any sort of social or exploration encounter even though those rarely include notable resource attrition (if any) & it causes a lot of confusion because social & exploration encounters are not included in what is written on DMG84.

To be fair the DMG tells them that they can. The Immersive Storytelling playstyle on page 34 for example. On page 74 in the Find the Ideal Introduction section is suggests beginning with a social interaction encounter. On page 87 the Sylvan Forest Encounter table includes a magical plant with berries. The Urban Encounter table on page 114 includes multiple non-combat encounters on it. Most of the encounter tables do. And then there's the Noncombat Challenges section on 261 that suggests using the combat XP tables to award non-combat experience, but only if the encounter involved a meaningful risk of failure.

 

[Maxperson]

I can choose not to give it to them personally, and I do. Vociferously and often.

I mean, you can choose not to acknowledge the leg up that they have, but it's not something that you have the ability give or take away. It's just something that they have.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

Idk, the removal of subclass at first level is a gigantic negative that offsets a lot of the gains.

I disagree about that. Subclass should not something that is easily multiclass-dippable. They've shown that levels 1 and 2 can provide decent, level-appropriate abilities, like the Cleric and Druid being able to choose their Divine Order or Primal Order at level 1. Not even Sorcerer needs a subclass at level 1. They have a spark that they need to actually explore and discover and unlock with effort.

With all subclasses starting at level 3, there is storyline advancement parity between classes, and allows for me as the DM to plan a RP session that every player can participate in, where each individual can select their "Order" (subclass). Paladins can take their Oaths, Druids can officially join their Circle hierarchy, Wizards can graduate to study their preferred school, etc.

 

[Maxperson]

Oh, and I'm sure that will happen. And that's fine.

I just rather hope though that the 5e-grognard community doesn't turn out so toxic that they need to yuck in everyone else's yum every single time WotC bangs out a new book or whatever. If the 5e grognard community goes off and does a Dragonsfoot, creating a vibrant, healthy community that keeps cheerleading it's own preferences without pooping in everyone else's cornflakes, that's the best result we can hope for. Everyone goes off and plays the games they love. Fantastic.

I am afraid, though, of the 5e-grognard community being far more like the 3e-grognard community, turning incredibly toxic and being completely incapable of letting other people enjoy something different, like we saw with the release of 4e. Particularly since there are a number of people who feel the incessant need to bang the "WotC is bad" drum endlessly, and will use any sort of perceived separation of different communities as tacit agreement with their issue du jour. "Oh, you are still playing 5e, that must mean that you think WOtC is the worst thing in the world! See how those guys hate 2024? That's because everyone hates WotC and isn't WotC just the worst?"

Having had to go through that for freaking YEARS with 4e, I really hope that this time around, people who want to stick with 2014 can do so without endlessly telling me what's wrong with the things that I like.

3e to 4e is the wrong comparison I think. The changes 5.5e brings are on par with 3.5e. 3e to 3.5e is the change to look at. I wasn't around on the forums yet in 2003, was the much angst or toxicity posted about 3.5e from 3e fans?

At home most of those I gamed with were okay going straight to 3.5e. Those that liked 3e and wanted to stick with it all eventually just adopted 3.5e as more and more material was released. There wasn't even a clear line where the crossover happened. One day they just looked up and realized they had been playing 3.5e for a while.

 

[MoonSong]

I disagree about that. Subclass should not something that is easily multiclass-dippable. They've shown that levels 1 and 2 can provide decent, level-appropriate abilities, like the Cleric and Druid being able to choose their Divine Order or Primal Order at level 1. Not even Sorcerer needs a subclass at level 1. They have a spark that they need to actually explore and discover and unlock with effort.

With all subclasses starting at level 3, there is storyline advancement parity between classes, and allows for me as the DM to plan a RP session that every player can participate in, where each individual can select their "Order" (subclass). Paladins can take their Oaths, Druids can officially join their Circle hierarchy, Wizards can graduate to study their preferred school, etc.

Subclass is thematically defining, also for many classes it is also party-role enabling. The nice thing about first level subclass is that you can have a cleric that is a tank, or a warlock /sorcerer who is the primary healer in the group. That is gone. And that is a huge negative in my book.

Edit: Also, this in particular is bad for divine souls as it devalues the features the subclass has. One of the most potent abilities the subclass brings is the ability to choose cantrips from an extra list, and you gain this ability after you have chosen most of your cantrips. There's not character advancement there. That's just biding your time until you get to actually play the character you wanted to play.

 

[Maxperson]

But....why? Just don't convert! They use their book, you use your book. They're compatible!

I don't think many DMs will allow that. The vast majority of DMs I've played with over the years have wanted all the players on the same page regarding which books are being used.

 

[Maxperson]

I’m also curious about the other side, what new 5.5e things do you most dislike?

1. Turning Smite into a bonus action is a huge one with me.

There were a number more I ranted to them about in the feedback, but I can't recall those now.

 

[TwoSix]

I don't think many DMs will allow that. The vast majority of DMs I've played with over the years have wanted all the players on the same page regarding which books are being used.

Yea, but that's the number one attitude I'm arguing against. It just doesn't make sense to publish books that are officially "compatible" and then not treat them like they're compatible.

If you're running your character, and I'm running my character, there's no "page" we have to share.

 

[Maxperson]

Yea, but that's the number one attitude I'm arguing against. It just doesn't make sense to publish books that are officially "compatible" and then not treat them like they're compatible.

If you're running your character, and I'm running my character, there's no "page" we have to share.

One of the examples I use when people claim compatibility is that I'm going to use my 2014 paladin with his unlimited smites and the 2014 great weapon master feat in a 2024 game. 10 to 1 says I get turned down.

You can argue against that attitude, but it's arguing against human nature. A few will see past that and allow players to mix up 5e and 5.5e, but I expect that the vast majority won't. I certainly wasn't allowed to use 3e stuff despite 3.5e being compatible with it.