Search results

Assuming I resume running D&D (more likely to experiment with other systems for a while), 5.0 would be the default assumption. But I wouldn't deny players access to 5.1 material if they wanted it. (Though there may be modifications, depending on what sort of 5.0 game - for example, if feats are...

From a quick perusal: There are a number of campaign design tools useful for sandbox play in the 2014 DMG, but near as I can tell they don't have a section that explicitly endorses sandbox play. That said, they're also pretty loose on playstyle guidance generally, whereas it sounds like 2024 has...

Dragonmarks, due to their dependence on replacing 2014's subraces, don't work with 2024's species as is. And they're already playtesting a new artificer. I think it's entirely probable we'll see a 2024-version update in the next few years.

That series of posts really looks like you're trying to drive them away, without officially driving them away. Not a great look, considering.

And yet, it's basically the ancestor of the NPC section in the 2014 MM (and therefore the 2024 NPCs). Funny how these things work out!

For me at this point, what 2024 has or doesn't have is basically an intellectual question.

3e and BECMI as well. OD&D and 5e are the only ones that lack halflings as a monster listing. (And since OD&D did list men, dwarves, and elves, that was probably an oversight. That also wasn't the only place halflings were overlooked in OD&D.... but I digress.)

In seriousness, the OG gnome-troll hybrid gnolls are one of my favorite weird lost bits of OD&D lore, and wish there'd been some elaboration before AD&D overwrote them. (My other favorite lost tidbit are gnomes and kobolds being implied in Blackmoor to have underwater civilizations...)

I admit to being curious how this will be handled in the inevitable (and likely near-term) 2024-version Eberron update. Though I suspect they just won't address it.

The impression I got is that the new NPC statblocks are supposed to represent individuals of all species, so I don't expect any species templates to modify them in the new MM. Presumably if you want an aarakocra mage to have aarakocra traits like flight, that'd be a homebrew thing from here on...

Kinda funny that D&D went from a single (and not clearly explained) save-or-die poison in OD&D, to a proliferation of fiddly poison types in AD&D, back to just a single poisoned condition (plus poison damage type) in 5e. History may not repeat, but it certainly rhymes.

Yup. For example, the former Drow Priestess of Lolth and Orc Eye of Gruumsh could be repurposed into different types of NPC cleric. EDIT: To clarify, I suspect they will remove the specific Lolth and Gruumsh connections, and make the archetypes usable for a wider range of deities.

A fair portion of the 2e Monstrous Manual is drawn by DiTerlizzi, FWIW. (And the entirety of the first Monstrous Compendium Annual.)

What @Levistus's_Leviathan said, plus... Grimlocks seem likely to become Aberrations (like Kuo-Toa). Sahuagin perhaps as well. I could see Quaggoths and Troglodytes being moved there too. Yuan-Ti might become Monstrosities instead of Aberrations (to match the other Yuan-ti). Others likely to...

I would advise waiting for the 5.2 SRD, and make your decision about the actual rulebooks based on that. You might even decide that the SRD alone is enough. And as has been pointed out upthread, there's no hurry on this.

Or, you're willing to pay more to keep your favorite FLGS or smaller online RPG retailer in business. (I recognize that many can't afford to do that, including my past selves. And that not everyone has a FLGS, or even an LGS...)

I believe they're referring to the lore from the Empyrean preview.

To be fair, someone did the same thing for 5e.

5e 2014 lore has already been retconned plenty in 2024, such a change would hardly be a surprise at this point.

Hadn't heard of this one, thanks!