D&D (2024) D&D 5.11 - the time of big change is over

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

@OldSchoolGamerGirl

For the 2024 approach to building a species, any Human and any Elf can have high Charisma.

yeah that isn't what I liked...

I liked the variability. I have +2 cha yeah but two more +1s anywhere means I can be good at anything... then I can pick a free skill or trade that out for a spell (High elf cantrip) or trade that out for a swim speed.

Darkvision, for those players who want it, is available from the Elf parentage.

I mean I can play an elf and refluff it or I can play a human (or anything else) and refluff it...

With regard to 2014 Half Elf race flavor, 2014 didnt really support this flavor anyway via mechanics. This nonmechanized flavor is just as doable for a 2024 Elf-Human.

how is that?

Actually, because backgrounds are part of the 2024 approach, the flavor works out better.

I also miss the ribbons of background features

 

[UngeheuerLich]

It could also mean they aren't playtesting the tweaks. I mean do we really need a playtest to tell us that Fireball should do less damage? IDK what they will do, but I am guessing they will take the more conservative route as that is what they have done the whole edition.

No. Because fireball is spot on.

 

[Remathilis]

We don't know if "Epic Boon at 20: has made the cut. Based on Crawfords comment, it is very possible that it hasn't.

In prior UA feedback videos, he said epic boons have been well received and they liked the idea of moving them from the DMG to PHB as a bookend to the background feat at level 1. And since they have been in every packet with a class in it, I think it's safe to call them a lock.

 

[Parmandur]

Just skimmed the thread, but having watched the video, I think Chris is (mostly) right.

He has a good point about the timeframes. Ha$bros is good about hiding the production end of things, with books magically appearing in stores and on DnDBeyond automagically it seems. But anyone who's shopped in the larger TTRPG marketplace knows that naughty word happens. Books take months to write, lay-out, art, edit, proofread, and more. And then they often take months to print, bind, and ship to the warehouse, for eventual journey to the customer. And crap happens – one of the publishers I work with just went through a very painful shipping process, worse than almost anything before (and I'm including the 18-month voyage from the print-shop to my garage for US fulfillment during the pandemic) – long story short, the books made it into the US, to the first warehouse but were then lost in the shipment from that warehouse to me. Amazingly frustrating.

Anyway, major changes need to stop soon. And 'what has gone before' will comfort a lot of the player base, and quiet those freaking out about a new edition. So, I'm likely out. 5e is safe now, and I can spend the next 20 years remixing it if I like. And Pathfinder Remaster sounds like my wishlist* for Pathfinder and the way forward.

---

* When I started talking about my proposed changes to my Pathfinder-stan friends, they pushed back HARD. One in particular was like 'Pathfinder players NEED alignment' and grumbled at the ideas of Proficiency Without Level, Static Defences, Checks for attack, and all that.

I tried to explain to him that new players would appreciate 'all rolls are Checks, roll 1d20 and add the number here' and find it less confusing. Of course, he's been playing fantasy adventure games since he was eight, and we're <ahem> years old now (let's just say we've got XP to spare).

Worth noting that WotC prints in the USA, and usually has about a 3 month turnaround from sending the book to the printer to store shelves, ao they could be testing for up to a year longer, in theory.

 

[Parmandur]

In prior UA feedback videos, he said epic boons have been well received and they liked the idea of moving them from the DMG to PHB as a bookend to the background feat at level 1. And since they have been in every packet with a class in it, I think it's safe to call them a lock.

Epic Boons are a hit, but is making them a capstone a hit...?

 

[UngainlyTitan]

And heck, I don't even think they are going to end up doing that and reverting everyone back to the 5E14 version. Paladin subclass features come in at 3, 7, 15 , & 20-- and with the advent of epic boons at 20th level I don't think there's any way they're going overlap that with the final paladin subclass feature. That feature will probably get bumped up to like 18th or 19th most likely.

To be honest... once you move all the initial subclasses features to 3rd level I really don't see the ones behind them mattering that much whether they are on a matching schedule or not. Here's what they will look like with a 5E14 format but everyone starting at 3rd level:

Barbarian / Druid / Warlock / Wizard: 3, 6, 10, 14
Cleric: 3, 6, 8, 17
Fighter: 3, 7, 10, 15, 18
Monk: 3, 6, 11, 17
Paladin: 3, 7, 15, 20
Ranger: 3, 7, 11, 15
Rogue: 3, 9, 13, 17
Sorcerer: 3, 6, 14, 18
Bard: 3, 6, 14

So four of the subclasses are already at the standardized placement, Ranger is just one level later for every feature past 3rd (so they might as well be on the standardized path), the Fighter has an extra feature and the Bard is a feature down, and the rest all have their final feature in Tier 4 at 17th+ level, so those features might as well not even exist for 95% of the tables out there.

So personally I don't see anything worthwhile in maintaining the 5E14 format either. I think most players would actually like their fourth subclass feature to arrive prior to 15th level in Tier 3 so that they might get more use. Whether or not they are on a 3, 6, 10, 14 schedule or move a level up or down for some classes here or there is fine... but if they officially establish all classes get 4 features and the first one arrives at 3rd level... the placements of the rest won't actually matter to players all that much.

Personally, for practical purposes, anything that kick in after level 15/16 rarely sees play and all the late subclass features could be introduced at levels 14 - 16 with out much disruption.

 

[TwoSix]

I think it's quite likely that a lot of Spells won't be touched.

I'm hopeful that they'll realize that, if we assume a situation where 2014 and 2024 rules are meant to be used concurrently, they'll realize that the changes they should make are tweaking underperforming spells up in power. As tuning a high performing spell down simply means that people will have more reason to go back to the 2014 rules.

"That's power creep" is the obvious reply, but that's inevitable if you accept a conclusion that both versions of the rules are meant to be in play. If they try to make the 2024 rules the "balanced" version, they're implicitly casting the previous rules as unbalanced, and thus subtly promoting the 2024 rules as a "new edition".

 

[tetrasodium]

Calling the e minor and almost superficial changes we have seen so far "radical" as a thing to step back from is like saying that I am stepping back from the grand canyon ledge... From my bed... In Florida.

Wotc needs to start showing the "not so radical" changes made for the gm and doing so quickly. Changing the death and dying rules in such a minor way does not cut it.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I'm hopeful that they'll realize that, if we assume a situation where 2014 and 2024 rules are meant to be used concurrently, they'll realize that the changes they should make are tweaking underperforming spells up in power. As tuning a high performing spell down simply means that people will have more reason to go back to the 2014 rules.

"That's power creep" is the obvious reply, but that's inevitable if you accept a conclusion that both versions of the rules are meant to be in play. If they try to make the 2024 rules the "balanced" version, they're implicitly casting the previous rules as unbalanced, and thus subtly promoting the 2024 rules as a "new edition".

I don't think it is power creap if you leave the top things be and just tweak the low end. Power creep in my book is only if newly introduced options are superseding old ones. Bringing up sorcerer subclasses up to par with tasha's options is ok.

I actually can see a stelath nerf to twilight clerics by just stating that thp go away on short rests.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Personally, for practical purposes, anything that kick in after level 15/16 rarely sees play and all the late subclass features could be introduced at levels 14 - 16 with out much disruption.

Yep. Which ultimately means we won't be going back to the 5E14 format for subclass feature distribution, we'll be adjusting and re-arranging them just like they did for these playtests. The only different being that rather than every class being 3, 6, 10, 14, you'll have some with that and others with like 3, 7, 11, 15... 3, 6, 11, 14... 3, 5, 10, 15... or whatever combos they want.

Which at that point I'm of the opinion that screw it, just make them all 3, 6, 10, 14 even if it's "boring"... just because you could then leave the door open for the "multiple classes" subclass idea you have at one point in the past. Obviously I can't speak for anyone else... but I can say quite easily that I have absolutely ZERO feelings on whether all classes as 3, 6, 10, 14 is boring whereas some classes being 3, 7, 11, 15 instead is not. There is NO "boring" or "not boring" feeling on which of these levels these subclasses come in at all. It literally does not matter to me which levels these four feature arrive.