Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 8520809" data-attributes="member: 6704184">No, it doesn't.Your behavior is disrespectful, and rude. If you continue to behave in this way toward me, there will be no further discussion between us.That is not remotely what I said. It is both obnoxious, and disrespectful, to pull the juvenile "ah so you agree with this thing that is clearly the opposite of your point" attempted gotcha BS.New options don't make a new edition. They're just new options. They aren't remotely incompatible. There is absolutely no issue using them with the PHB options. No effort whatsoever is required to do so. They are not distinct from the new options in every single supplement for 5e that has come out already.If by "a bit of work" you mean fully converting whole classes between editions wherein the underlying math isn't even the same, then it is extremely strange that you're complaining about the absolute lack of any effort whatsoever required to use a PHB Battlemaster who is a MMoTM Bugbear, Tasha's Ranger who is a PHB Wood Elf, and a Tasha's Bladesinger Harengon, in the same party. Literally nothing at all needs to change, no translation is required, they all work within exactly the same general rules, use the same resource frameworks, the same underlying math, and all the words in the rulestext in the books they come from mean the same things. You are effectively calling SCAG, Volo's, Xanathar's, MToF, and Tasha's, each a new edition, not to mention the collected errata and reprinted PHB that takes said errata into account.Duergar and Shadar-kai explicitly count as their parent race in both the original writeup and the optional variant writeup. There is absolutely no room for confusion on that. There is no "are we using these rules or these rules", here, outside of your own invented hypothetical. Your character has the traits listed in the writeups for the options you chose during character creation. It's very simple.So is literally any errata. By the logic you've presented, there are already about a dozen edition changes within 5e already. Hell, the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide presented variant Tieflings. All of a sudden you don't just know if a Tiefling character has +2 Charisma, or what spells they have, without asking if they used SCAG to make the character, and if so which variant options they used. Is SCAG a new edition?No, it isn't. It is literally not that, at all. There isn't a different set of rules, there are new variant stat blocks. This is not actually a new type of thing within this edition of the game. This is like arguing that if players had disliked the stat block format in the MM, and they changed how they formatted monsters in Volo's, folks then claimed that Volo's was a new edition of the game. It's patently absurd.</blockquote>

Verification