D&D (2024) combing through the new glossary changes.

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
The whole influence action just needs to go away. Don't make it an playerfacing action. Players should never be allowed to force charisma checks.
The new version is better but than the last still way worse than the status quo, where the DM decides when a charisma check is warranted and what the DC is
Let me start by saying I agree with you. However, I don’t think this version actually does allow a player to force a Charisma check. It’s mostly just a reframing of the existing social interaction rules to make them transparent to players (and to DMs who, let’s be honest, probably didn’t read the DMG where these rules are currently found). It describes the attitudes NPCs might have towards the PCs, and when an ability check is “usually required” or might succeed or fail automatically, based on the NPC’s attitude and the nature of the request. But the Interaction portion still makes it clear that the player describes what they do to try to influence the NPC, and the DM can temporarily shift the NPC’s attitude based on that description. Keep in mind that the rule’s glossary for ability checks still specifies that the DM calls for one when there’s an uncertain outcome and narratively interesting consequences. Now, the Influence action does provide a default DC for the Charisma check if one is called for, but again, the glossary for ability checks specify that the DM can override any DC set by the rules.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Lojaan

Hero
Not a fan of the new long rest. It takes things back to being inevitable.

Also poorly worded at the end.

"You can resume a Long Rest immediately after an interruption. If you do so, the rest requires 1 additional hour to finish per interruption."

So if you get into combat and you cast two spells, that's 3 interruptions for an additional 3 hours. But your non-caster friend who also got into combat, but didn't cast any spells only has an additional 1 hour added to their long rest. So now everyone has different lengths of long rests.
I dont think they changed anything from the original version, just clarified it. You know, stop people thinking that they can get up, fight for an hour non-stop, then go to bed again as if nothing happened.
 

Levistus's_Leviathan

5e Freelancer
The whole influence action just needs to go away. Don't make it an playerfacing action. Players should never be allowed to force charisma checks.
The new version is better but than the last still way worse than the status quo, where the DM decides when a charisma check is warranted and what the DC is
The new rule still says that a DM decides if the roll is warranted. Checks with Friendly creatures can automatically succeed, and checks against sufficiently Hostile creatures can automatically fail. And it says that it's not mind-control, so there's no possibility of there being scenarios like "I convinced the king to make me his heir because I rolled a Natural 20". And the result of the roll is up to the DM.

I do think that the DC rules could use a bit of tweaking, but overall I think it's a good idea and an improvement on the last version.
 

Staffan

Legend
  • Attack[action]: Seems that it's changed from "you can equip or unequip one weapon before or after any attack" to "you can equip or unequip one weapon before or after each attack you make"...
    • I'm not sure that's better or worse. My initial feeling is that it's functionally identical change for the sake of change without doing anything about this huge problem. Am I overlooking the change?
"Any" implies that you can do it once, but before or after any attack. "Each" implies multiple times. I guess this is primarily intended for thrown weapons, in order to remove any limit on number of attacks.
"After you finish a Long Rest you must wait at least 16 hours before starting another one" Anything to put hurdles between long rest spamming of 5mwd is great.
I would make the limit slightly lower, along the lines of 12 hours or so. Still long enough to remove multiple long rest shenanigans, but giving some wiggle room about when you take your rest.
  • Dazed: It's not in the changelog but fills a niche that feels similar to the old shaken condition. On your turn you can move or take an action but not both. You also can't take reactions or bonus actions.
I think you're thinking of Staggered, not Shaken.
 


Stalker0

Legend
The new rule still says that a DM decides if the roll is warranted. Checks with Friendly creatures can automatically succeed, and checks against sufficiently Hostile creatures can automatically fail. And it says that it's not mind-control, so there's no possibility of there being scenarios like "I convinced the king to make me his heir because I rolled a Natural 20". And the result of the roll is up to the DM.

I do think that the DC rules could use a bit of tweaking, but overall I think it's a good idea and an improvement on the last version.
While technically true, I do find rolling has a momentum all its own. You let players make a few persuasion rolls and suddenly they get it in their heads that they can do that in any situation.
 

tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
Epic
"Any" implies that you can do it once, but before or after any attack. "Each" implies multiple times. I guess this is primarily intended for thrown weapons, in order to remove any limit on number of attacks.

I would make the limit slightly lower, along the lines of 12 hours or so. Still long enough to remove multiple long rest shenanigans, but giving some wiggle room about when you take your rest.

I think you're thinking of Staggered, not Shaken.
It doesn't specify what kind of attack though.. each attack [action]? each [melee/ranged weapon] attack? Without specificity the answer is going to depend on the table.
edit: The fix for thrown weapons having a unique problem with being drawn needs to be on the thrown weapon property where the solution is unique
 
Last edited:

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
The new rule still says that a DM decides if the roll is warranted. Checks with Friendly creatures can automatically succeed, and checks against sufficiently Hostile creatures can automatically fail. And it says that it's not mind-control, so there's no possibility of there being scenarios like "I convinced the king to make me his heir because I rolled a Natural 20". And the result of the roll is up to the DM.

I do think that the DC rules could use a bit of tweaking, but overall I think it's a good idea and an improvement on the last version.
To be fair, I do think the wording needs a bit more work. This is a big improvement over the last packet, but it could stand to be a lot clearer that the DM has final say over whether a roll is required (or possible).
 



Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top