D&D (2024) Kobold Press posts 2024 DMG Hit Piece

[Cadence]

Nah, that was silly nonsense in 2003, it would be silly nonsense now. Besides, going withbthwt, what will they call the next revision, 5.75?

There was a post recently about Zeno's paradox in another thread. Using edition numbering to teach it would be awesome!

 

[abirdcall]

I think there's a world of difference between a DMG that has a "new DM guidance" section, and a DMG that is pretty much noting but new DM guidance. The new 2024 DMG is firmly in the latter camp, and while I like what it does, I suspect strongly that in a year or two WotC has plans for an Advanced DMG down the road as there's a lot of "experienced DM" content missing from it.

There are 100 pages of magic items.

172 to 352 is cosmology, treasure, and bastions which all interest me as an experienced DM.

 

[Cadence]

But they don't even call it that on the book covers
3.5 said 3.5, 4e essentials said 4e essentials.. eh. Just nitpicking.

View attachment 386508

It does have a number (year) for the PHB hidden on the back cover of the DMG (and presumably MM though).

Here's the PHB calling out the other two:

 

[Cadence]

I don't agree with this. If they were going to name it 6e, there would have been significantly more changes. The changes we got with 5.5e were because they wanted 5e to be compatible with it. That desire wouldn't have been there for a completely new edition.

The 3pp folks would see more pressure to change stuff with a change to 6e, because their stuff wouldn't work or wouldn't work well with the new edition.

Sure, but I was following up a previous hypothetical to him. Hence the "(based on how I phrased it as only changing the name)? ".

 

[Parmandur]

There was a post recently about Zeno's paradox in another thread. Using edition numbering to teach it would be awesome!

Hence we can see that Edition changes are, infact, impossible.

 

[dbolack]

Strong disagree. More awareness of alternate rules and ways to play is always better. I don't agree with Umbran's take either. Neither WotC nor any 3pp should be the exclusive home of different play.

Decision paralysis via optionals is a common cause of new folks hard bouncing on a rules set.

 

[Staffan]

If adding a 2 to a title confused people then I don't see how releasing a second set of 5E core books for 2024 with the exact same names as the 2014 core books won't be even more confusing.

The issue with PHB2 and DMG2, as I understand it, was that a not insignificant number of people thought they were replacements for/upgraded versions of the PHB and DMG, much like FIFA 2024 is a replacement for FIFA 2023 in the video game world. This would generally be people who aren't invested in the game themselves, but who might buy it as a present for someone. So from that perspective, the naming scheme they've used so far in 5e (Xanathar's Guide to Everything, Tasha's Cauldron of Everything) seems to be working better, because they aren't suggesting the book in question replaces anything.

This is not an issue with the 2014/2024 rules, as the 2024 rules are a replacement, and in general won't be sold simultaneously in stores (they likely are right now, but that's only until the 2014 rules are sold out).

 

[Distracted DM]

Same for me. If they want to make the DMG the Intro To DMing book that's fine by me, I'm already using A5E for most of my games- but I do like the Bastion rules as a foundation to build on.

The 2024 DMG just isn't a book targeted at experienced DMs. Both A5E and ToV books really are superior in that respect.

Being good at teaching the game?

Apologies if I wasn't clear with the above. I'm saying that the new 5e DMG is targeted at new GMs- it's made to teach them. It's not targeted at experienced GMs, there's less there for them. The A5E and ToV game master books are much better if you're someone who already knows the basics of running a ttrpg and are looking to improve further.

 

[Distracted DM]

It's on the back that it's "This revised and expanded..." and "Companion to ... [DMG 2024 and MM 2025]" along with the 50th anniversary logo.

Referring to the year is as good an indicator as any, especially since this isn't really the edition number 5 anyway.

You're right, you have to look for it but it is there near the bottom on the back of the standard cover. Though I think it's absent on the special editions. I think titling them "Player's Handbook/DMG/MM 2024" would be more clear but.. I guess that's more awkward to print? Didn't seem to be a problem for 3.5 or Essentials though

Spoiler

 

[Retros_x]

If we can discuss the differences in rules,, tone and style across five versions of "the Basic game", we can keep 5.14 and 5.24 separate.

but, but, but, the people need to know it! Ability scores are backgrounds! We gotta stop them! Somehow!