D&D 5E 50th Anniversary and beyond

[Geoff Thirlwell]

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

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

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.

 

[Oofta]

I don't think we "know" anything for certain. For example, while I doubt it will be, stat bonuses being variable could be a variant rule with the current adjustments being the default.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

"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.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

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]

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]

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.

 

[J-H]

I'm not interested in buying any new/revised books. They aren't selling anything I want to buy post-Tasha's.

 

[D1Tremere]

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.

 

[Scott Christian]

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.