D&D (2024) D&D 2024 Rules Oddities (Kibbles’ Collected Complaints)

[KibblesTasty]

Much as I hate the cheese-grater, I do want to point out that initiating a grapple is much less likely to land in 2024, whereas it could be practically automatic from lv1 in 2014 (all you needed was a raging Barbarian, because no monster is ever trained in any skill).

It's a save, and there is no way to improve the DC, it's just always 8+Str/Dex+proficiency, and target picks their better stat to roll against it. So your odds are kind of 50/50. I'm not saying Spike Growth causing a 50/50 roll between 0dmg and infinite damage is great (it should only trigger from target's own movement), it's just not really worse than it already was in 2014.

Well, I'm trying to avoid diving too much into the weeds in these, but it is hard as there's a lot going on differently.

An optimized grappler was more likely to succeed a check in 5e 2014, absolutely. But they were a lot less likely to make a check. Due to a lot of changes and feats, Grappling is a lot more prevalent; for example, the same change that lets you do TWF with a shield means that you can do TWF while Grappling, since you only need one hand. But that's just an example, there's a lot of things going into it. You don't need to use the Attack action to grapple anymore, which means you can do it on opportunity attacks, and Monks can make 3+ grapple attempts very early on. To add to that, with the Grappler feat, you don't have to choose between damage and grappling (1/turn), so people try a lot more.

As for things like grappling while mounted, a lot of digital ink has been spilled on if that works in 5e, but I'll simply head that off by saying it works the same in 5e 2014 and D&D 2024, so it's not a discussion relevant to compared the two IMO.

I cannot say which folks will have more trouble with, but I can say that Spike Growth has felt a lot closer to a must ban in D&D 2024 than 5e 2014 for me so far, and that's as someone that had some trouble with it in 5e 2014.

If you're hesitant to get the new books that's fine. However there have been a bunch of reviews from streamers that got an advanced copy and these issues raised have not been mentioned as problems as far as I know. Neither have they been raised by people answering questions on this forum that got the book at Gencon.

I don't need the rules to tell me that if a PC walks off the edge of a cliff they'll fall. I don't need the rules to tell me that you can't simultaneously wield two weapons in one hand. There are always going to be edge case exploits like this, that's why we have a person as DM not a computer.

Maybe I'll change my mind when I get the actual text and I'll just make a handful of house rules to shut down stupid PC trick exploits. Either way I'm not too concerned. Ask me again in October when I've actually used the rules for a while.

This list is definitely not a replacement for reading the rules, it's more of a guide of what to check in the rules to people reading them if they want to review what might be problematic for their games.

It was I originally typed up for that reviewer crowd; a few folks have been asking me to summarize or explain the new issues (being a mechanics bloke), and I wanted to gather it all in one place so I could just point them to a list. The list is not a review, its a list of compiled complaints!

For the most people, I think deciding if they like 2024 vs. 2014 will have everything to do with a few factors such as $ cost of the new books and if they want to pay WotC that, if they like weapon mastery and how changes the pace and style of play, and preferred player power levels (2024 characters are a good bit stronger, they just get more stuff, more feats, more features, etc).

I think the only way I would say this list is should influence someone's decision to buy it is if they are hoping for an edition they can play without patches, bans, or nerfs, in which case I would say it is no more than that 5e 2014 was.

 

[darjr]

@KibblesTasty Thank you for this. Thank you for stopping by.

I haven't read it all yet but it looks like a lot of work went into this, thanks.

 

[Oofta]

Well, I'm trying to avoid diving too much into the weeds in these, but it is hard as there's a lot going on differently.

An optimized grappler was more likely to succeed a check in 5e 2014, absolutely. But they were a lot less likely to make a check. Due to a lot of changes and feats, Grappling is a lot more prevalent; for example, the same change that lets you do TWF with a shield means that you can do TWF while Grappling, since you only need one hand. But that's just an example, there's a lot of things going into it. You don't need to use the Attack action to grapple anymore, which means you can do it on opportunity attacks, and Monks can make 3+ grapple attempts very early on. To add to that, with the Grappler feat, you don't have to choose between damage and grappling (1/turn), so people try a lot more.

As for things like grappling while mounted, a lot of digital ink has been spilled on if that works in 5e, but I'll simply head that off by saying it works the same in 5e 2014 and D&D 2024, so it's not a discussion relevant to compared the two IMO.

I cannot say which folks will have more trouble with, but I can say that Spike Growth has felt a lot closer to a must ban in D&D 2024 than 5e 2014 for me so far, and that's as someone that had some trouble with it in 5e 2014.


This list is definitely not a replacement for reading the rules, it's more of a guide of what to check in the rules to people reading them if they want to review what might be problematic for their games.

It was I originally typed up for that reviewer crowd; a few folks have been asking me to summarize or explain the new issues (being a mechanics bloke), and I wanted to gather it all in one place so I could just point them to a list. The list is not a review, its a list of compiled complaints!

For the most people, I think deciding if they like 2024 vs. 2014 will have everything to do with a few factors such as $ cost of the new books and if they want to pay WotC that, if they like weapon mastery and how changes the pace and style of play, and preferred player power levels (2024 characters are a good bit stronger, they just get more stuff, more feats, more features, etc).

I think the only way I would say this list is should influence someone's decision to buy it is if they are hoping for an edition they can play without patches, bans, or nerfs, in which case I would say it is no more than that 5e 2014 was.

I don't expect any set of rules to be completely airtight while also allowing the flexibility and freeform play I've enjoyed over the years. With 4E they tried to lock things down much more and control the exploits. It worked in one sense but changed much of the nature of the game.

I'm not saying there are no potential issues, of course there are. On the other hand, I think some people are probably overreacting. Speaking for myself, I have no problem shutting down exploits if they are problematic although I'm sure there will be endless threads about some of them. I also suspect that some of the issues such as encumbrance will be addressed in the DMG. Ideally we wouldn't have to wait until November to get that book but we don't live in an ideal world.

 

[DarkCrisis]

Im sure it’s not all that bad and combat will run efficiently as always and the PCs aren’t overpowered.

Plus at the end of the a day, great apps like DDBs virtual table will take care of most of the math to help struggling DMs.

 

[Nefermandias]

Grappling wasn't intended to make you pause and count pounds, though. Applying encumbrance to grappling makes dragons struggle to fly off with, say, a single cow, and people start putting up an anti-grapple defense by loading their backpack with rocks, etc.

Yes, maybe the encumbrance rules aren't perfect, but it's also true that there's nothing in the 2014 rulebooks that explicit tell the DM to ignore carrying capacity during combat.

That said, I'm okay with Large dragons not being able to lift cows. Huge and Gargantuans ones on the other hand, should have no problem doing so.

 

[Weiley31]

You can do TWF with a shield.

I see nothing wrong with this. We need more shield bashing for Sword n Board.

 

[Scribe]

I see nothing wrong with this. We need more shield bashing for Sword n Board.

I think its actually that you are TWF with one hand, the shield is just a bonus. The new rules are flawed.

 

[Oofta]

I think its actually that you are TWF with one hand, the shield is just a bonus. The new rules are flawed.

If you just implement the literal rule instead of applying a modicum of logic.

On the other hand, if you're playing a thri-kreen with multiple hands so ... Dark Sun confirmed?

 

[Scribe]

If you just implement the literal rule instead of applying a modicum of logic.

Absolutely. I wouldnt allow this, and would mock any of my friends who tried to pull this off.

On the other hand, if you're playing a thri-kreen with multiple hands so ... Dark Sun confirmed?

I did love the Spelljammer species options, and they could have leaned into the weirdness on those for sure.

 

[Lazybones]

There have always been plenty of "exploits" in D&D, going back to the basic rules. My current players are quite good at exploiting the rules, especially with multiclassing combos and spell synergies. When a rules issue comes up during a session, I make an in-game ruling and then post final rulings on my Discord in a thread dedicated to that purpose. I welcome discussion but reserve the right to make a final ruling as the DM (as the rules specifically state I should do). I do my research and try to stay as close to RAW as possible, but I've never been afraid to nix a spell, a rule, or a combo that in my view negatively impacts the game.

Needless to say, there won't be any two-weapon fighting with a single hand, 10 STR characters picking up 300 lb orcs and running them around the battlefield, or people walking right past watchful guards in an empty, well-lit hallway because they rolled a 20 for Stealth while in the bushes, in any of my games.

I do expect to see many of the issues that have been discussed ad nauseam here since the PHB content was revealed addressed in the DMG, but if not, then I'll make them clear for my own games. Many of the scenarios that are being discussed are so ridiculous that I wouldn't expect any of my players to even try to suggest them, but I guess it's good to know in advance what people think the biggest flaws/blind spots in the new rules are.