D&D (2024) 50th Anniversary: 6E in 2024?

[Henadic Theologian]

These fine folks were pretty darned accurate, I'd say.

In the sense that its not 6e, yes, but the changes ARE significant to many things, its not just just Tasha's + Tweeks, I mean not every massive change took, but enough big & small changes to various things that most of the classes/species play different.

I think folks are down playing how transformative it is, yes its compatible with most of the stuff in past books, especually Races, Linages, and Species as well as subclasses and adventures, but capablitie and complexity is vastly different, even given that most of the biggest changes got dumped.

 

[Horwath]

In the sense that its not 6e, yes, but the changes ARE significant to many things, its not just just Tasha's + Tweeks, I mean not every massive change took, but enough big & small changes to various things that most of the classes/species play different.

I think folks are down playing how transformative it is, yes its compatible with most of the stuff in past books, especually Races, Linages, and Species as well as subclasses and adventures, but capablitie and complexity is vastly different, even given that most of the biggest changes got dumped.

what big changes exactly?

there are just little tweaks.

Mastery?
Yeah, they could not admit that Battle maneuvers should have been core fighter if not core for all non full-spellcasters, so we got this super-light version of it.

paladin smite got nerfed and monk got buffed, that can be done by anyone with 10 min worth of house ruling.
1st level feat for everyone? Yeah, just put in most popular house rule for 5E as default. They really put the brain trust to work on that one.

we got basically only one draft of new version of feats, so my hopes are that aspect will get balanced and improved in final print.

most good(big) changes got rolled back because of "muh compatibilitah" with past books, which will be thrown out as soon as "Xanatar 2" or "Tasha 2" hits the shelves in 2025/2026.

universal sub-classes progression? removed.

sub-classes for multiple classes? removed.

cantrips for paladins and rangers? removed. let them spend fighting style instead. We cant have that by default. It might seem as that not giving them in 2014 was a mistake.

all subclasses moved to 3rd level as new players are too stupid according to devs? checked.

inflating ability scores? checked.
instead of thinking of new cool feats, lets just remove a feat slot from characters and force them to take 22 in their primary as that is mechanically best option to get.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

what big changes exactly?

there are just little tweaks.

Mastery?
Yeah, they could not admit that Battle maneuvers should have been core fighter if not core for all non full-spellcasters, so we got this super-light version of it.

paladin smite got nerfed and monk got buffed, that can be done by anyone with 10 min worth of house ruling.
1st level feat for everyone? Yeah, just put in most popular house rule for 5E as default. They really put the brain trust to work on that one.

we got basically only one draft of new version of feats, so my hopes are that aspect will get balanced and improved in final print.

most good(big) changes got rolled back because of "muh compatibilitah" with past books, which will be thrown out as soon as "Xanatar 2" or "Tasha 2" hits the shelves in 2025/2026.

universal sub-classes progression? removed.

sub-classes for multiple classes? removed.

cantrips for paladins and rangers? removed. let them spend fighting style instead. We cant have that by default. It might seem as that not giving them in 2014 was a mistake.

all subclasses moved to 3rd level as new players are too stupid according to devs? checked.

You know that is not what they said or mean. I have played with many new players and it is not about stupidity but about uninformed decisions. I'd even say that it is actually a sign of taking new players serious as giving them the chance to learn how their characters play and then make an informed decision themselves.
What I heard was proposals to just chose the subclass for new players at level 1 as a DM. This is patronizing.

And I as an experienced player and DM like the descision point pushed back to 3rd level, as I can also make more informed decisions about my character. I hate doing everything on the drawing board.

Actually I'd love a level 0 instead of full hp at level 1.

For me the best progression would be:
Level 0:
chose race and background feat.
Level 1:
Chose class.
Level 2:
Chose subclass. (yeah in the happy middle between your preference and wotc.)
Level 3:
Get an important optional feature of the class (like warlock choice of pact), fighting style etc.

inflating ability scores? checked.

I hate that.

instead of thinking of new cool feats, lets just remove a feat slot from characters and force them to take 22 in their primary as that is mechanically best option to get.

Yes. It should be limit to 18 before level 19 and then you are allowed to go up to 20 then. I really don't know why they want to push ability scores that high...

 

[Horwath]

You know that is not what they said or mean. I have played with many new players and it is not about stupidity but about uninformed decisions. I'd even say that it is actually a sign of taking new players serious as giving them the chance to learn how their characters play and then make an informed decision themselves.
What I heard was proposals to just chose the subclass for new players at level 1 as a DM. This is patronizing.

maybe players will make bad decision about picking subclass at level 1. It happens, it's called learning the game.
Maybe on their next leveling you allow to rework their previous choices.

And I as an experienced player and DM like the descision point pushed back to 3rd level, as I can also make more informed decisions about my character. I hate doing everything on the drawing board.

Actually I'd love a level 0 instead of full hp at level 1.

level 0 is a good idea for those that want it, and I support it 100%

For me the best progression would be:
Level 0:
chose race and background feat.
Level 1:
Chose class.
Level 2:
Chose subclass. (yeah in the happy middle between your preference and wotc.)
Level 3:
Get an important optional feature of the class (like warlock choice of pact), fighting style etc.

this why I havent seen a campaign start at 1st level since 2014.
it's 3rd level or higher. even with new players that never played D&D, there is simple too little to do with your character at level 1.

we even think about houseruling giving 1 extra feat at levels 1,2&3 to get the character concept going sooner. Feats only, no ASIs.

 

[Charlaquin]

In the sense that its not 6e, yes, but the changes ARE significant to many things, its not just just Tasha's + Tweeks, I mean not every massive change took, but enough big & small changes to various things that most of the classes/species play different.

I think folks are down playing how transformative it is, yes its compatible with most of the stuff in past books, especually Races, Linages, and Species as well as subclasses and adventures, but capablitie and complexity is vastly different, even given that most of the biggest changes got dumped.

Looks pretty much like Tasha’s + Tweaks (T&T?) to me. Weapon Masteries are a slightly bigger change than what I was predicting, but not by a wide margin, and I’d say I was otherwise right on the money.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

maybe players will make bad decision about picking subclass at level 1. It happens, it's called learning the game.
Maybe on their next leveling you allow to rework their previous choices.

Yes, I'd allow it. But I personally like rebuilding characters all the time. And for me personally having subclass choice at level 2 or 3 is good. I can understand people having other opinions. I don't see how you can conclude that WotC thinks new players are dumb.

level 0 is a good idea for those that want it, and I support it 100%

We need more supporters.

this why I havent seen a campaign start at 1st level since 2014.
it's 3rd level or higher. even with new players that never played D&D, there is simple too little to do with your character at level 1.

For us it is fine and we usually start at level 1. But I get why starting at level 3 is useful.

we even think about houseruling giving 1 extra feat at levels 1,2&3 to get the character concept going sooner. Feats only, no ASIs.

Why not. Sounds fun. Tell me how it works out.

 

[Horwath]

Yes, I'd allow it. But I personally like rebuilding characters all the time. And for me personally having subclass choice at level 2 or 3 is good. I can understand people having other opinions. I don't see how you can conclude that WotC thinks new players are dumb.

I like 1st level subclass, but I can see that it can be too much of a power budget problem, especially for multiclassing.

1st level subclass should focus on proficiency/bonus spells and maybe some minor feature.

I.E:
Scout rogue:
1st level, proficiency in Nature+Surival
then,
3rd level, expertise in Nature+Survival, and skirmish movement.

Champion fighter:
1st level: Remarkable athlete
3rd level: Improved critical
damn this subclass still sucks; maybe add at 1st level +1HP per fighter level??

Life cleric:
1st level; bonus 1st level spells, Disciple of life
3rd level: Preserve life

 

[Micah Sweet]

You know that is not what they said or mean. I have played with many new players and it is not about stupidity but about uninformed decisions. I'd even say that it is actually a sign of taking new players serious as giving them the chance to learn how their characters play and then make an informed decision themselves.
What I heard was proposals to just chose the subclass for new players at level 1 as a DM. This is patronizing.

And I as an experienced player and DM like the descision point pushed back to 3rd level, as I can also make more informed decisions about my character. I hate doing everything on the drawing board.

Actually I'd love a level 0 instead of full hp at level 1.

For me the best progression would be:
Level 0:
chose race and background feat.
Level 1:
Chose class.
Level 2:
Chose subclass. (yeah in the happy middle between your preference and wotc.)
Level 3:
Get an important optional feature of the class (like warlock choice of pact), fighting style etc.

I hate that.

Yes. It should be limit to 18 before level 19 and then you are allowed to go up to 20 then. I really don't know why they want to push ability scores that high...

Marketing. People like higher numbers.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Marketing. People like higher numbers.

Is that bad?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Is that bad?

It's not good.