log in or register to remove this ad

 

D&D 5E 50th Anniversary and beyond

Hi
We‘ve been told there will be some sort of revision of the rules and aspects of the game for the 50th anniversary in 2024

The things we know about are:
Starting stat bonuses no longer being tied to race
The removal of character age, height and weight as factors
Changing monster and NPC spells to Actions rather than being the same as PC spells
Not having alignment tied to race and which in turn leads to the reduction of racial conflict
Presumably incorporating the class abilities from Tasha’s into the core game
Adventures carrying trigger warnings

Please forgive me if I’ve missed or misquoted anything. I don’t want to dredge up old and repeated arguments about the merits or lack of them for these points but I was wondering if anyone believes these changes will result in them stopping buying new product?
I personally don’t agree with many of the changes and as I’ve got a bit of a backlog of adventures I’ll probably stop buying new stuff when the revised rules come out. Does anyone else feel less than excited?

Cheers
Geoff
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I love the starting stats bonues as mark of identity, but these caused a tendency toward the typecasting, and with this the PC races was focused into melee fight, spellcasting or stealth. The idea of Pathfinder 2 was enough simple and flexible.

I wonder about the removal of longevity because action-live actors get old, or the rejuvenation potions can affect too much.

It is not wrong alignment tied to races, but better with factions, for example religion.
 


Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
"if anyone believes these changes will result in them stopping buying new product?"

1. No. It won't impact my purchasing decisions.

2. In addition, I reject the implicit premise- that these decisions will greatly impact the purchasing decisions of others in a negative fashion. D&D/Hasbro is doing a great job, and while I don't agree with everything they do, I can't disagree that they are appealing to the majority of the market.
 

Galandris

Foggy Bottom Campaign Setting Fan
It is not wrong alignment tied to races, but better with factions, for example religion.

If all the discussions about ASIs only resulted in replacing the "orcs are the strongest people" by "Worshipper of Gruumsh are the strongest people"... ;)

To answer the OP it's not that I would stop buying newer products, it's just that I certainly don't see anything new enough and interesting enough to make me buy a revised edition. None of the listed purported changes add any value to me and my group, so I don't see buying a "50th anniversary edition" if it doesn't add anything more for the price.
 

Jacob Lewis

Ye Olde GM
It's still two years away and we've only seen a few hints of some of the proposed changes. Most of these, by the way, are responses to cultural and social feedback from the community.

Look, I have not been a fan of this edition and haven't been excited by any announcements in years. That doesn't mean I stopped taking an interest in the game I have been playing for forty-something years, even if it's not the same version everyone else is playing. You can get off the edition treadmill at any point and enjoy the backlog of materials for a lifetime. More if you play with different people and use the materials more than once.

Just remember that whatever appeals or offends you, may repulse or attract someone else who is just as big a fan of the game as you. It is not wrong to have an opinion, but it is to criticize others for having or expressing one. So if you're here to boycott, go for it. I'll support you. But I won't deny anyone else's decision to embrace the new changes, whatever they may be.
 

Oofta

Title? I don't need no stinkin' title.
I think it's still too early to know if I'm going to purchase a new edition. Maybe I will, maybe I won't. Odds are I will. A lot of the changes will be included in the free PDF so I can always go through that. Some of the monsters and spells could be tweaked for balance and there might be more core changes I'll appreciate. There are plenty of things that are more campaign world specific that I can ignore if I choose. Time will tell.
 


D1Tremere

Adventurer
This is a loaded question, and definitely has a biasing frame. I would like to address these one by one.
Change: Starting stat bonuses no longer being tied to race
Response: It seems likely this will be fully implemented moving forward, and that is a good thing. I can personally see no sound arguments against it, and many for.
Change: The removal of character age, height and weight as factors
Response: I don't things these things have any defined rules at present. Much like "Race", the impact of age on a person varies based on culture and lifestyle so that makes sense.
Change: Changing monster and NPC spells to Actions rather than being the same as PC spells
Response: This would be a huge bonus! If you assume that the basic rules are written to help new Players/DMs, and to give tools, this is a perfect change. As an experienced DM I can change this as needed on a case by case basis, or just run with it when I need to save prep time or come up with something on the spot.
Change: Not having alignment tied to race and which in turn leads to the reduction of racial conflict
1st Response: Unless I misunderstand, this is the definition of a loaded question. The question, How do you feel about not having alignment tied to race? The imbedded assumption/argument, which leads to a reduction of racial conflict.
I love not having alignment. I ignore alignment, recognizing it as a mechanic to serve as a guidepost for newer Players/DMs. I love the idea of de-coupling it from "Race". It should be a much more bio/psycho/social emergent property.
2nd Response: If the statement means that doing away with "Racial" alignment will reduce conflict between "Races" in the game, I see no reason why it would. If the statement means doing away with "Racial" alignment will reduce "Racial" conflict in the real world, I see no reason why it would. What I do think it will lead to is newer Players and DMs feeling encouraged and empowered to move away from simplistic explanations for PC/NPC behaviors. I hope it will also increase the comfort level of diverse players as they see the game move away from tropes that can be harmful and offensive to those from traditionally marginalized backgrounds.
Change: Presumably incorporating the class abilities from Tasha’s into the core game
Response: I truly hope so. This allows for as little or as much depth and customization as a Player/DM is prepared to go into.
Change: Adventures carrying trigger warnings
Response: These are a solid addition. If you are an experienced DM then you likely already cover these in the session 0, but even experienced DMs often make assumptions about their players that can leave them feeling uncomfortable and reduce fun for all. This is a great addition for new Players/DMs who may not have much experience with addressing these issues.

Additional: If you personally see no value in any or all of these changes, I would challenge you to consider the assumptions you hold and with regard to that change and how they could impact others if they are wrong.
 

I think the changes better reflect the D&D universe as it has been portrayed the last ten years. It has always been a mash-up, but it is now a mash-up on top of a mash-up, which suits Wizard's need to publish three or four additional books each year well. I do have a hard time understanding how their move into the movie and tv market will reflect this. My guess is, it won't.

Personally, I am happy for the changes - all of them. I do feel sympathy for those that don't like the changes. Their reasons, in my humble opinion, are just. But the D&D-verse, as it now stands, is Candy Land jelly mixed with Star Wars peanut butter, then spread on Conan bread, and served with a side of Dr. Who milk. A fun combination for many, especially younger players. Yet for the more esoteric, it's gotta be a difficult sandwich to eat - even with the milk. ;)
 

Lyxen

Great Old One
I think the changes better reflect the D&D universe as it has been portrayed the last ten years.

Actually no. First, 5e is less than 10 years old, so it was not portrayed that new way except recently, after about half its life so far. Moreover, it certainly does not represent any universe of D&D published so far, just the way the game is forced to evolve under external pressures which actually have little to do with the game itself, which has actually been more or less consistent with itself for... well, actually, we are nearing its 50th anniversary.

Furthermore, anything is totally wild speculation at this stage, for example the lineages who sent some people in a crazy frenzy with the UA release have now been completely suppressed from the last two official books, which means that they remain just an artefact of Van Richten, my guess is that they won't make it into the anniversary changes. But again, wild guesses - including mine just above - is all we have.
 

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/They)
Hi
We‘ve been told there will be some sort of revision of the rules and aspects of the game for the 50th anniversary in 2024

The things we know about are:
Starting stat bonuses no longer being tied to race
The removal of character age, height and weight as factors
Changing monster and NPC spells to Actions rather than being the same as PC spells
Not having alignment tied to race and which in turn leads to the reduction of racial conflict
Presumably incorporating the class abilities from Tasha’s into the core game
Adventures carrying trigger warnings

Please forgive me if I’ve missed or misquoted anything. I don’t want to dredge up old and repeated arguments about the merits or lack of them for these points but I was wondering if anyone believes these changes will result in them stopping buying new product?
I personally don’t agree with many of the changes and as I’ve got a bit of a backlog of adventures I’ll probably stop buying new stuff when the revised rules come out. Does anyone else feel less than excited?

Cheers
Geoff
The only thing that I would note is that not all monster spells seem to be getting changed to general actions, just the ones that contribute to calculating the monster’s CR.

Personally, I find all of these changes to be for the better (well… I’m not super keen on removing age and height/weight descriptions, but I don’t consider that a significant loss). But I’m worried about what other changes might be coming down the pipe that we haven’t seen so clearly telegraphed. I really, really don’t want to lose short rest based recovery, especially for warlocks. And I could see them potentially getting rid of experience points or making them an optional rule, which I would hate. I don’t know, I’m excited for the 50th anniversary revisions, but worried that they might be a mixed bag for me.
 
Last edited:

Thanks for the comments. I tried to keep my language neutral and purposefully kept my arguments out of my post. I’m not sure why D1Tremere decided to decide that I was being biased and proceed to tell me how wrong I am. I too believe that the changes are reactionary to changes to current concerns but that doesn’t necessarily mean that they are the best reactions or indeed that a reaction was required. I’m a bit of an all or nothing person which is just how my collectors mentality works so I would find it hard to make selective purchases going ahead. If this is truly what the majority wants then fair enough but I think I’ve done most, if not all of the WotC surveys and I can’t recall being asked about any of these things so it does seem a bit odd that they have decided that this is the way forward. None of the changes offend me to the point I’m flipping the table over but they are enough to make me think that the modern version of the game is not for me. There’s plenty of content from the previous 48 years for me to play until the end of my days.
 

Faolyn

(she/her)
Not having alignment tied to race and which in turn leads to the reduction of racial conflict
Doesn't follow. Removing alignment won't get rid of conflicts. You can still have epic wars between orcs and elves, if you want there to be, but there needs to be something there other than "orcs are evil and want to kill elves, while elves are good and are fine with killing orcs."

You know, reasons like wanting land or resources, or getting revenge for something.
 

Doesn't follow. Removing alignment won't get rid of conflicts. You can still have epic wars between orcs and elves, if you want there to be, but there needs to be something there other than "orcs are evil and want to kill elves, while elves are good and are fine with killing orcs."
While I agree and hope you are right, I think WotC will avoid a “race attempts to take over the world” storyline for a while. It could be an interesting take if Elves or Dwarfs were the antagonists next time round though
 

clearstream

(He, Him)
Hi
We‘ve been told there will be some sort of revision of the rules and aspects of the game for the 50th anniversary in 2024

The things we know about are:
Starting stat bonuses no longer being tied to race
The removal of character age, height and weight as factors
Changing monster and NPC spells to Actions rather than being the same as PC spells
Not having alignment tied to race and which in turn leads to the reduction of racial conflict
Presumably incorporating the class abilities from Tasha’s into the core game
Adventures carrying trigger warnings

Please forgive me if I’ve missed or misquoted anything. I don’t want to dredge up old and repeated arguments about the merits or lack of them for these points but I was wondering if anyone believes these changes will result in them stopping buying new product?
I personally don’t agree with many of the changes and as I’ve got a bit of a backlog of adventures I’ll probably stop buying new stuff when the revised rules come out. Does anyone else feel less than excited?
One should never wish one's life away, but I say roll on 2024.

I am looking forward to it with mild apprehension, but not for any of the reasons you list. I'm far more concerned to see a really great piece of design around rests, and some careful rethinking of some skills. Also concentration: I am really curious if that will be touched.
 

jayoungr

Legend
Supporter
The removal of character age, height and weight as factors
Response: I don't things these things have any defined rules at present. Much like "Race", the impact of age on a person varies based on culture and lifestyle so that makes sense.
Height and weight sometimes affect whether a trap/hazard is triggered or not. (Example: "The bridge is old and unstable. If more than 50 pounds is placed on it, it will collapse.") For this reason, I would be quite surprised if they get rid of those factors altogether.
 

Actually no. First, 5e is less than 10 years old, so it was not portrayed that new way except recently, after about half its life so far. Moreover, it certainly does not represent any universe of D&D published so far, just the way the game is forced to evolve under external pressures which actually have little to do with the game itself, which has actually been more or less consistent with itself for... well, actually, we are nearing its 50th anniversary.
I will give you a little more than half, how about the last seven years. ;)


What you say is true. When 5e first came out, it definitely had a 2e vibe in my opinion; harkening back to a consistency that had been around for a long time. The way the races, spells, classes, and equipment were described, it created consistency within the lore (again, my opinion). But things rapidly changed, and I don't just mean at Wizard's. The changes have happened at a much faster rate, than say, when guys or gals were not looked at with some hesitation when they played a PC of the opposite gender. And I agree with you, much of this is due to external pressure. I am not sure that is any different than any other time there were changes. But it does seem to be happening faster.
Furthermore, anything is totally wild speculation at this stage, for example the lineages who sent some people in a crazy frenzy with the UA release have now been completely suppressed from the last two official books, which means that they remain just an artefact of Van Richten, my guess is that they won't make it into the anniversary changes. But again, wild guesses - including mine just above - is all we have.
100% agree. Speculation. But there are such things as trends, and many can see where the trend is going.
 


Hmm. I hadn’t considered that, but it would actually make a lot of sense.
It would. If they do decide to have variable bonuses to be the default rules, I’d like to think that there wouldn’t be any harm in them giving defined fixed bonuses as an option but that isn’t what we’ve seen in recent releases
 

Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top