D&D General Mike Mearls sits down with Ben from Questing Beast

[KYRON45]

so do not watch the video then, I have no issue with that, but then also do not tell me what is being said in the video

I have never had anyone tell me the story of a book they have not read because the cover turned them off…

Twilight is about a girl that falls in love with various human eating monsters.
Now you have.

 

[TiQuinn]

so do not watch the video then, I have no issue with that, but then also do not tell me what is being said in the video

I have never had anyone tell me the story of a book they have not read because the cover turned them off…

Not even Fifty Shades of Grey?

 

[KYRON45]

Not even Fifty Shades of Grey?

Fifty Shades of Grey is about a street artist that got a really great deal on grey spectrum spray-paint.
I may have a future as a Goodreads influencer.

 

[Distracted DM]

This sounds very much like Shadowdark.

Yup! Shadowdark's is pass-fail iirc. I enjoy DCC's roll-to-cast degrees of success, buuut I prefer either over 5e's system. I didn't discover how much I liked roll-to-cast til I saw DCC, and later Shadowdark solidified it.

 

[mamba]

Yup! Shadowdark's is pass-fail iirc. I enjoy DCC's roll-to-cast degrees of success, buuut I prefer either over 5e's system. I didn't discover how much I liked roll-to-cast til I saw DCC, and later Shadowdark solidified it.

yea, I would much prefer D&D to have cast to roll and degrees of success and failure. Funny how magic is the most reliable option in D&D

 

[aiouh]

I'm honestly struggling to even guess what Mearls could even be referring to beyond Weapon Masteries, which are welcome but a very minor change overall seeing as only a few classes get them and those that do don't have to use them.

The characters have much more options, those character building options are a lot more involved because backgrounds now tie to ability score improvements AND feats and for a lot of class features those weapon masteries kind of matter, so omitting them would be neutering the design of D&D2024, it's not as hackable because these systems are interfacing with each other.

I agree that its not extremely complex stuff, but compared to (Vanilla, no TCE, no XGE) 2014, it is definitely more crunchy. These things compound at the table and do make a difference. Especially with players who aren't the type to post on ENWorld.

 

[Aldarc]

Yup! Shadowdark's is pass-fail iirc. I enjoy DCC's roll-to-cast degrees of success, buuut I prefer either over 5e's system. I didn't discover how much I liked roll-to-cast til I saw DCC, and later Shadowdark solidified it.

I enjoyed roll-to-cast in Blue Rose. I enjoyed it in True 20. I enjoy it in Fantasy AGE. I enjoy it in Index Card RPG. I enjoy it in Dragonbane.

 

[Zardnaar]

The characters have much more options, those character building options are a lot more involved because backgrounds now tie to ability score improvements AND feats and for a lot of class features those weapon masteries kind of matter, so omitting them would be neutering the design of D&D2024, it's not as hackable because these systems are interfacing with each other.

I agree that its not extremely complex stuff, but compared to (Vanilla, no TCE, no XGE) 2014, it is definitely more crunchy. These things compound at the table and do make a difference. Especially with players who aren't the type to post on ENWorld.

I tried explaining vex/Nick to newer player. Derp.

 

[MerricB]

Mearls' example was wanting to play a dwarven smith wielding a warhammer.

And that there are several mechanics that 2024/5E inserts that get in the way of that fantasy.

• Want to play a smith? Well, you should play a farmer instead, because they get a better origin feat
• Hit someone with a warhammer, well you're pushing them away! But what if I want to hit them in the leg and stop them getting away... well you should have used a different weapon.

That warhammers get push is arbitrary. There are several weapon mastery properties that you could make a case to give to hammers. But, because Wizards wants to distinguish weapons and make martial classes more complex, they settled on the warhammer getting push.

And while that works for the mindset of "choose the best mechanics to build your character", it's a distinct difference to "choose a concept and see it realised in the game".

Not that 5E is flawless in that regard, either, but 2024 takes it further towards a mechanics-first game.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Mearls' example was wanting to play a dwarven smith wielding a warhammer.

And that there are several mechanics that 2024/5E inserts that get in the way of that fantasy.

• Want to play a smith? Well, you should play a farmer instead, because they get a better origin feat
• Hit someone with a warhammer, well you're pushing them away! But what if I want to hit them in the leg and stop them getting away... well you should have used a different weapon.

That warhammers get push is arbitrary. There are several weapon mastery properties that you could make a case to give to hammers. But, because Wizards wants to distinguish weapons and make martial classes more complex, they settled on the warhammer getting push.

And while that works for the mindset of "choose the best mechanics to build your character", it's a distinct difference to "choose a concept and see it realised in the game".

Not that 5E is flawless in that regard, either, but 2024 takes it further towards a mechanics-first game.

At a minimum, this is a strong argument in favor of custom backgrounds which I remain baffled aren't in the 2024 DMG.

And likewise giving more flexibility to weapon masteries, even if we need some guardrails to prevent everyone from just grabbing the most damaging weapons and giving them the best masteries for their build.