D&D (2024) D&D 2024 Rules Oddities (Kibbles’ Collected Complaints)

[mellored]

I just find the new version of this much more trouble, since it comes online at much lower level,

Barbarian gets advantage at level 1.
Rogue gets expertise at level 1.
Bard gets +1d6 at level 1 and expertise at level 3.

Full auto-grapple needs reliable talent, but nearly-always grapple is available before you get spiked growth.

And you can get a mount to move fsster.

Well, the downside is that many folks won't think balance is better or the rules are cleaner, such being the subjective nature of these things

I can objectively prove the balance is better. Run a 1v1 with an elemental monk and moon druid in 2014 and again for 2024.


The issue is a perception thing. You have hundreds of people looking for and posting the new problems. While all the old problems have already been found, worked around, and faded from view.

I.e. you see posts about 2024 grappler feat, but don't see posts about 2014 auto-grapple and ride a horse. Even though 2014 is objectively more powerful.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

I do quite dislike Reliable Talent in general personally

I'm curious to see the effect of that. You can stack skill mods onto the Rogue so they don't even need to roll to beat specific thresholds (first 15, then 20), which could turn lv7+ games into a diceless experience (for skills the Rogue is trained in). Add in reactive boosts (lv2 Fighter Tactical Mind for +1d10 to anything when the exasperated GM says 'actually the DC is 21'), and you've covered a ton of ground.

Where this affects the party right at lv1, is that they should acknowledge this, and make their skill picks accordingly. It is good for one person to have the same skill proficiency as the Rogue (because Help action requires proficiency now) but it should not be anyone's 'hey this is my thing that I am the go-to guy for' in the long term.

it got brought down 4 whole levels to level 7. Cannot say I'm a fan of that, but that's just in the 'power creep/more stuff' bucket

I think it got brought down just because WotC absolutely hates the idea of giving Rogue subclasses a feature at lv6, so this was their way of avoiding that.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

I'd personally just ban out Spike Growth from D&D 2024

Much as I hate the cheese-grater, I do want to point out that initiating a grapple is much less likely to land in 2024, whereas it could be practically automatic from lv1 in 2014 (all you needed was a raging Barbarian, because no monster is ever trained in any skill).

It's a save, and there is no way to improve the DC, it's just always 8+Str/Dex+proficiency, and target picks their better stat to roll against it. So your odds are kind of 50/50. I'm not saying Spike Growth causing a 50/50 roll between 0dmg and infinite damage is great (it should only trigger from target's own movement), it's just not really worse than it already was in 2014.

 

[Oofta]

I’m having a bit of trouble following all of these changes without seeing the full text (and context) but based on what I’m understanding, I agree.

If you're hesitant to get the new books that's fine. However there have been a bunch of reviews from streamers that got an advanced copy and these issues raised have not been mentioned as problems as far as I know. Neither have they been raised by people answering questions on this forum that got the book at Gencon.

I don't need the rules to tell me that if a PC walks off the edge of a cliff they'll fall. I don't need the rules to tell me that you can't simultaneously wield two weapons in one hand. There are always going to be edge case exploits like this, that's why we have a person as DM not a computer.

Maybe I'll change my mind when I get the actual text and I'll just make a handful of house rules to shut down stupid PC trick exploits. Either way I'm not too concerned. Ask me again in October when I've actually used the rules for a while.

 

[TiQuinn]

If you're hesitant to get the new books that's fine. However there have been a bunch of reviews from streamers that got an advanced copy and these issues raised have not been mentioned as problems as far as I know. Neither have they been raised by people answering questions on this forum that got the book at Gencon.

I don't need the rules to tell me that if a PC walks off the edge of a cliff they'll fall. I don't need the rules to tell me that you can't simultaneously wield two weapons in one hand. There are always going to be edge case exploits like this, that's why we have a person as DM not a computer.

Maybe I'll change my mind when I get the actual text and I'll just make a handful of house rules to shut down stupid PC trick exploits. Either way I'm not too concerned. Ask me again in October when I've actually used the rules for a while.

Yeah, I’m not big on trying to parse the rules in ways that benefit me to the utmost, be it player or DM. My assumption is that the rules are not intended to be used to create double effects, multiple saves back to back and so on. I don’t like that the rules are written in such a way that creates confusion but I think that ship sailed awhile ago.

 

[Maxperson]

I suspect opportunity attacks against allies probably aren’t intended either. At least in the sense that, I don’t think they really considered that anyone would want to do that.

I'm having a hard time believing that they weren't intended against allies since they very specifically changed the wording to include opportunity attacks against allies. Why make that change if you didn't intend people to do it?

 

[Nefermandias]

With the 2014 rules, a DM could limit the grappling + moving enemies shenanigans by simply applying the movement penalty for a heavily encumbered character.

Now, even encumbrance rules seems to be gone.

This isn't looking good at all.

 

[Maxperson]

I mentioned this one a few posts up.


I presume this will be explained in the new MM, which won't be out for another 6 months!

It could also be in the DMG where DMs might need to know the rules on grappling for players who use it.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

With the 2014 rules, a DM could limit the grappling + moving enemies shenanigans by simply applying the movement penalty for a heavily encumbered character.

Grappling wasn't intended to make you pause and count pounds, though. Applying encumbrance to grappling makes dragons struggle to fly off with, say, a single cow, and people start putting up an anti-grapple defense by loading their backpack with rocks, etc.

 

[mellored]

With the 2014 rules, a DM could limit the grappling + moving enemies shenanigans by simply applying the movement penalty for a heavily encumbered character.

Even if they are riding an elephant?

This isn't looking good at all.

In 2024 a DM can limit the shenanigans just as easily.

And say that TWF requires two hands.

And that stealth breaks when you leave cover.