D&D (2024) What is your oppinion of 5.24 so far?

[FrogReaver]

Nice how people call things lazy if they mean they don't like it.

The shield mastery feat always had that type of bonus action.
The standard bonus action of two weapon fighting was that kind of bonus action. Need to attack with your light weapon first. Make a second attack.

So why did you not complain 10 years ago?

There were alot of complaints about those things 10 years ago.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Does the shield master shove retroactively change the attack that happened beforehand/ simuntaneously or is the attack resolved then you use it?

Ok. Now I understand your concern. But a reaction would have done the same. Change the attack that triggered it. Or the old no action smite.

This is true even if the feat has no trigger because BA aren't reaction so it has the built in limitations that the bonus action description has.



Off topic- the trigger for shieldmaster is dumb and should been cut years ago rather than going around in circles about it's timing.

 

[Stoutstien]

Ok. Now I understand your concern. But a reaction would have done the same. Change the attack that triggered it. Or the old no action smite.

I have issues with reaction changing the trigger but before is at least all of them were either none-actions or reaction. A bad pattern is at least a pattern.

You see that shield is a reaction so you expect it to effect the trigger in some way where shield of faith is a bonus action so you'd check for the conditions to cast, then you active it from there.

They wanted to turn smite like effects into spells, keep the timing, and tried to use bonus actions as a gate for output rather than just using reactions.

There was a few different ways they could have addressed this without making spell casting even more rote/note based to function but then again I'm not surprised they didn't.

 

[Gradine]

There are so many different ways to interpret survey data, especially when so many of the questions are placed on a scale, that without knowing their actual methodology pretty much all speculation regarding it can be dismissed as baseless and meaningless.

About the only thing we can say for certain is that there are definitely some aspects of the design that were impacted by survey feedback. As to the what and the how, we have only what they tell us and how much trust we place in that, for what it's worth.

That said, I would be doubly suspicious of any speculation based in the irrational belief that one's own preferences could never possibly be in the minority.

 

[SlyFlourish]

I've DM'd what is probably approaching a hundred sessions with playtest characters and I have not noticed it playing very differently from 2014 5e. And I am very sensitive to things that slow the game down. I loathe fiddly bits. I didn't like 3.5 very much because it had too many fiddly bits. I honestly think that I would be the first to notice if your fears were true. Have you played with it much, or are you concerned from reading it?

That's definitely good feedback to have. Real-world experiences definitely outweigh theoretical observations. I hope it works out, I really do.

 

[Malmuria]

I've DM'd what is probably approaching a hundred sessions with playtest characters and I have not noticed it playing very differently from 2014 5e. And I am very sensitive to things that slow the game down. I loathe fiddly bits. I didn't like 3.5 very much because it had too many fiddly bits. I honestly think that I would be the first to notice if your fears were true. Have you played with it much, or are you concerned from reading it?

How experienced are your players? I don't think the level of complexity will be much of a problem for very experienced players who know the rules and can make swift choices. New players, or players that are uncomfortable with rules complexity might have more trouble with increased options.

 

[Neonchameleon]

How experienced are your players? I don't think the level of complexity will be much of a problem for very experienced players who know the rules and can make swift choices. New players, or players that are uncomfortable with rules complexity might have more trouble with increased options.

The thing is that there aren't that many extra decisions unless you're jumping in at high level. The Weapon Mastery procs, for example, are just things that happen. The main extra decisions I see come in at the rogue level 5 alternate uses of sneak attack dice and the barbarian and fighter level 9 abilities whether to give up advantage from Reckless or to change weapon masteries. And you should know your characters by then.

 

[Clint_L]

We're finding that combat is slower because there are more options. Grappling, toppling, and so on all add another choice, saving throw, etc., not to mention new class or sub-class options (e.g. the monk has a lot more choices to make now, and we have a monk). Each option by itself is small, but it definitely feels a bit more complicated and slows play maybe 10% at our table.

 

[mamba]

That said, I would be doubly suspicious of any speculation based in the irrational belief that one's own preferences could never possibly be in the minority.

assuming that is directed at me, but I fully agree with this, it never was about 'what I would have preferred did not win, so their polls must not be working'

 

[FitzTheRuke]

How experienced are your players? I don't think the level of complexity will be much of a problem for very experienced players who know the rules and can make swift choices. New players, or players that are uncomfortable with rules complexity might have more trouble with increased options.

I've played with everyone from very experienced (but not optimizer) players to literally brand-new just got into it after playing BG3 players. And ones in-between.

The one thing that I will admit that I haven't seen is an optimizer playing at mid-to-high levels. I guess I can imagine someone who wants to not only optimize their character, but optimize their turn for "maximum effectiveness" with, say, a high-level fighter or monk with a lot of moving parts, who wants to try to knock down someone and then switch weapons and slow them or some other crazy combinations where they want to find out if the first attack succeeds or not before moving on to the next... THAT I guess I can imagine slowing the game down, especially if they're that rare combination of really concerned about choosing one thing IF this happens, and another if THIS happens - as opposed to planning their turn out and doing it... maybe.

I just haven't seen that sort of player in many many years. I'm not sure that I'd put up with it, regardless of "edition". Take your turn. Don't bore other players. Get it done. It doesn't have to be "perfect".