D&D 5E And just like that, no one cares about Frostmaiden any longer

[jayoungr]

I suspect the conversation will still revolve around Tashas and not RotFM. I think it shows that expanded character options get a lot more attention to adventure paths.

I think it just shows that this forum is more mechanically-minded than adventure-minded. When we're in between books, what are most of the threads about? How to revamp the mechanics, which mechanics we hate, how to balance our homebrew mechanics. Not how to construct an adventure or discussing past adventures. (Not to say adventures get no discussion; they're just not the most frequent or most discussed threads.) A different forum, with a different focus, would almost certainly reverse those numbers.

Also, this forum as a whole is pretty negative about WotC's published adventures when we do talk about them. None of them are universally popular (CoS probably comes closest), some people would only be interested if the adventures were tied to their favorite setting, and there are a fair number of people who really would rather not see any more full-length hardback adventures at all.

In short, I wouldn't assume that we're a perfect representation of all players everywhere.

 

[Burnside]

 

[Scott Christian]

Cheapskate that I am, I recommend D&D books to my local Public Library, let them pay for it, borrow and read it, then decide if I want to pay for my own book (or just xerox off the most interesting pages).

Yeah, nothing wrong with that. The way I read the post I was responding to is that they did not read the book. At all. They only took the spell or subclass. Nothing wrong (stated this earlier too) with getting it from the library. More power to you. Let's keep the library relevant.

 

[Scott Christian]

I'm wondering if the "one supplement" rule will remain popular, I know the setting classes & subclasses have pushed the groups I know, not to mention my group's increased interest in 3P supplements through the OGL or dmsguild. I have a feeling Tasha's will push a lot of groups to expand that to two. Also, probably worth questioning if it is actually popular in the D&D-playing-public as opposed to the online boards - people who don't know about AL may have never even considered it.

Been wondering this myself. Last three campaigns I have played in, two groups used the rule, one did not. The ones that did definitely had a different feel than the one that did not. But, not sure if groups will slowly toss out the rule as more and more books get published. Good thought.

 

[Reynard]

In short, I wouldn't assume that we're a perfect representation of all players everywhere.

Precisely. And that's generally true of any community. if you go to reddit, both r/dnd and r/dndnext give you completely different impressions of the player base. In r/dnd you see mostly cutesy character art and homebrew items etc... R/dndnext is a place where folks dissect rules. Then there are other forums whose member might be more focused on tactical play or world building. The point is, EN World is not even representative of the players who frequent EN World -- only those who post. @Morrus has indicated his monthly visits outstrip posts by orders of magnitude, and it is a rare poll that even gets 100 responses. If you want most threads that get over 100 comments, the later pages are almost always dominated by 2 or 3 posters reiterating the same points over and over again.

Sorry for the tangent.

 

[Parmandur]

I had it confirmed somewhere it was PHB+1. It was the same reason they reprinted the melee cantrips in Xanathars.

If they didnt reprint the Artificer in this book, Artificers at AL tables would be stuck with the PHB and Eberron Explorers guide as their +1 (denying those guys the new feats and archetypes and race options from this book).

Really, they're just kicking the can down the road though. Unless they release a revised PHB with the Artificer in it, they're kind of stuck having to do this every time they release another +1.

Im pretty sure they know this though, so I wouldnt be surprised if we dont see a revised 5E CRB's hit the shelves next year some time.

Not 5.5E but more a compilation of what's come before, with the Artificer a core class with the rest of them.

Given that XGtE came out in 2017, and this is coming out in 2020, I think it's a few more years before they have to worry about the +1 thing becoming cumbersome. More likely we'll get a soft 6E around the 50th anniversary.

 

[MarkB]

Been wondering this myself. Last three campaigns I have played in, two groups used the rule, one did not. The ones that did definitely had a different feel than the one that did not. But, not sure if groups will slowly toss out the rule as more and more books get published. Good thought.

One option (for both AL and individual groups) would be to modify the rule to "PHB+1, but the two Everything books count as one."

 

[jayoungr]

One option (for both AL and individual groups) would be to modify the rule to "PHB+1, but the two Everything books count as one."

If WotC are in fact planning on making a series of player option books with "Everything" in the title, they could expand that indefinitely. Kind of like stacking monsters in Munchkin.

 

[Marandahir]

Given that XGtE came out in 2017, and this is coming out in 2020, I think it's a few more years before they have to worry about the +1 thing becoming cumbersome. More likely we'll get a soft 6E around the 50th anniversary.

The challenge really has been that PHB+1 doesn't allow for, say, Tabaxi College of Eloquence Bard.

You either get non-standard classes & subclasses or non-standard ancestries as an option. You CAN get a bit of both by choosing a campaign setting book, but most of those are not AL-legal, either for the choice.

Here's hoping that the Lineages section in TCE doesn't just focus on the PHB ancestries but also provides lineage options for VGM, MTF, and the various officially-WotC-published campaign setting books put out until now.

 

[Parmandur]

The challenge really has been that PHB+1 doesn't allow for, say, Tabaxi College of Eloquence Bard.

You either get non-standard classes & subclasses or non-standard ancestries as an option. You CAN get a bit of both by choosing a campaign setting book, but most of those are not AL-legal, either for the choice.

Here's hoping that the Lineages section in TCE doesn't just focus on the PHB ancestries but also provides lineage options for VGM, MTF, and the various officially-WotC-published campaign setting books put out until now.

Based on what they've laid down so far, Tasha's should have folks covered through the Lineage system.