D&D 5E D&D New Edition Design Looks Soon?

WotC’s Ray Winninger has hinted on Twitter that we may be seeing something of the 2024 next edition of D&D soon — “you’ll get a first look at some of the new design work soon.”.

 

[Reynard]

The thing I am most excited about regarding the 2024 edition is how bad the fight is going to be over "how much of a change" it is going to be among fans. I mean, everyone could just wait and see. But they won't. They will argue endlessly in the lead up and ALL end up being wrong.

I know quoting yourself is a faux pas, but I this is feeling really relevant about now.

 

[Oofta]

Simple solution was to not play 3E at high levels. The similar solution for 4E was, alas, ro not play 4E at low levels.

I think 3E held together fairly well until somewhere around 15th level and honestly we never played higher than that. For 4E it was probably more like 10th; at 20+ it was painful.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

As written, there are a number of ways of getting an OK AC as an arcane caster. You can give up a daily spell slot and cast mage armor. You can be a dragonborn (or draconic sorcerer) and enjoy your protective scales. You can be a mountain dwarf and wear armor. You can be a warlock and wear armor. I figure they're all roughly balanced considering opportunity costs. But in the larger scheme of things, AC 13+Dex isn't that special. At first level, giving up one of your three spell slots per day is definitely a cost you need to consider, but once you're up to level 5 or so, who cares, so it might as well be at will?

again... since you can be a mountain dwarf ____ in armor, or a warlock (2nd level to get it) with mage armor at will, or dragon sorcerer... I will again say why is mage armor a spells slot resource?

But shield adds on top of your regular AC, and can push it pretty high. In addition, you can cast it retroactively, so it's never wasted: if your AC is 14 and someone rolled a 22, you don't need to waste the resource. So shield is a strong spell, but it makes up for it by only lasting a short while.

and again this shows how 1st level spells are not equal... and if they didn't all draw on slots would make more sense.

The main difference is that mage armor at will is extremely close to mage armor 1/day in practical effect, while shield at will is essentially a +5 bonus to AC, which is very different. I don't think anyone would protest against a warlock invocation that let you cast shield 1/day, or even 1/short rest.

again... if mage armor at will is close to mage armor 1/day why does it need the same slot that shield does?

 

[Staffan]

again... since you can be a mountain dwarf ____ in armor, or a warlock (2nd level to get it) with mage armor at will, or dragon sorcerer... I will again say why is mage armor a spells slot resource?

Because a spell slot is one of the ways you can pay for a moderate AC on your caster. Opportunity costs are costs too – dragonborn or mountain dwarves generally speaking are not very good choices for wizards (no Int bonus or anything else that makes them better at actually casting).

and again this shows how 1st level spells are not equal... and if they didn't all draw on slots would make more sense.

again... if mage armor at will is close to mage armor 1/day why does it need the same slot that shield does?

They are close when evaluating them as a whole. A small AC bonus that lasts all day, or a big AC bonus that lasts one round? Yeah, that seems balanced to me. They just have their power in different parts of the spell: mage armor has a long duration, and shield has a strong effect. It's like asking what makes a bigger hole: a shovel, or a stick of dynamite. The dynamite can make a pretty big hole once detonated, but probably not as big a hole as you could get working with a shovel all day long (assuming reasonably loose soil). But if someone offers you a whole crate of shovels, or a whole crate of dynamite, that changes things. More shovels won't be useful, because you can still only use one at a time. Sure, it might be neat to have an extra in case the one you're using breaks, but that's a marginal issue. But a whole crate of dynamite means you can set them off one after another and make a REALLY big hole. That doesn't mean that "stick of dynamite" is a better digging tool than "shovel", only that the shovel hits diminishing returns much sooner.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Again, those are quick and east stuff any decent DM could have done themselves but needed the official stamp to get allowed.

um…no, they’re not.

Not only is the “any decent DM” thing kinda silly, but none of those options in the post you replied to are fixes for anything. They fill in some still missing avenues of specialization, or just provide a fun new option, but none of them seem to be there to fix anything.

 

[Shardstone]

I like 5E, I like the direction 5E is taking, I am excited for 2024.

For god's sake include EVERYTHING ON THE WILDERNESS DM SCREEN AND KIT IN THE BOOK!!! THIS THING IS A GOLD MINE!!!! Just got it today, and I'd like this game a LOT MORE IF I HAD THIS ALL IN ONE SPOT IN THE PHB!!!

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I would looove a 5e ified SWSE...

Someone did one, that Dimension20 used for Starstruck Odyssey, but they added like 20% additional complexity.

I just want SWSE with bounded accuracy, and vastly cleaned up feats and talents, mostly.

Every build you could make in that game could be done with about half as many feats and talents.

Oh, and frontload characters a little more so you aren’t waiting to level 7 to be playing an assassin or whatever.

 

[Ancalagon]

It IS, but will they, though? I mean, I hope so, but I always get my hopes up that glaringly obvious and widely-known issues will get fixed, and they often aren't.

Usually... some of the problems are fixed, some new cool things are added, ... and some cool old things are removed, and new problems are introduced. If we are lucky and the designers were good, we get more of the first 2 and less of the latter. But... we'll see I guess?

 

[Ancalagon]

I don't know if you consider that good or bad. I've certainly seen a lot more 4e talk lately than even a couple years ago.

I think that's a good thing, and I say that as someone who didn't like 4e. Clearly, there is a subsection of D&D players for whom 4e works great, and I hope they get to play 4e.

The thing is with 5e, there seems to be a lot of resistance to try any other system. And that's a darn shame, because there is a subsection of those 5e players who probably would enjoy another system much better, and a portion of those would like 4e quite a lot.

That's why I try to mention alternatives that I enjoyed - like troika! or warhammer 2nd ed, or the GLOG, yoon-suin, UVG... I like 5e, and I liked those, and I bet a decent bit of 5e players would like them if they only tried.

Because that should be the goal - people matched with compatible players and a system they all enjoy.

 

[Ancalagon]

IF the 50th Anniversary stuff is going to be fully (or near-fully) backwards compatible, then the big room for innovation comes in presentation. If you will indulge me: I'd like to talk a little about what I'd like to see in that area.

I think the no. 1 thing (rules all being the same, or same-ish) that the game could use is presenting complex rules subsets (such as spells, feats, and some class abilities) TWICE officially. Once, for the full, complex rulings, which could include discussions of corner-cases and how the elements interact with other parts of the game, and 2nd, in a concise "character-sheet friendly" format.

If that's not clear, here's a homemade example:

(Current PHB version, which would be type 1 in the above, though they could add more to it, if it was a spell more complicated than this example is):

Detect Magic
Concentration Ritual
LEVEL 1st
CASTING TIME 1 Action Ritual
RANGE/AREA Self (30 ft )
COMPONENTS V, S
DURATION Concentration 10 Minutes
SCHOOL Divination
ATTACK/SAVE None
DAMAGE/EFFECT Detection
For the duration, you sense the presence of magic within 30 feet of you. If you sense magic in this way, you can use your action to see a faint aura around any visible creature or object in the area that bears magic, and you learn its school of magic, if any.
The spell can penetrate most barriers, but it is blocked by 1 foot of stone, 1 inch of common metal, a thin sheet of lead, or 3 feet of wood or dirt.

(My version 2)
Detect Magic (R)(VS). For 10 min (C), you can use your action to sense the presence (& school) of magic within 30 ft. of you if it is not blocked by 1' stone, 1 ft. metal or 3 ft. of wood or dirt or hidden by invisibility.

Heck, they could ditch that last bit about what blocks it if they just make a common standard for what typically blocks divinations.

These "V2" rules could be used on Monster Stat-blocks and Character Sheets, for quicker reference. I don't think that it would be a waste of space and would (IMO) vastly improve the game's playability if it were built-in. I mean, sure, we can all make up our own, but to have a consistent, accepted version? Much better.

I like your idea, but, since we are talking about presentation, something else I would like to see fixed is a common problem with the description of many spells and class powers.

Basically, most have the format of a title, a sentence of fluff/flavor, then a mechanical decryption. But HOW FREAKING OFTEN does the first sentence not really match the mechanics?!?

So we had an encounter with a weird monster (I'm GMing gates of firestorm peak, an excellent 2e adventure I converted to 5e.) and the party paladin decided to "detect evil, paladins can do that right?"

So here is the power. I have put the first "fluff" sentence in italic

Divine Sense​

The presence of strong evil registers on your senses like a noxious odor, and powerful good rings like heavenly music in your ears. As an action, you can open your awareness to detect such forces. Until the end of your next turn, you know the location of any celestial, fiend, or undead within 60 feet of you that is not behind total cover. You know the type (celestial, fiend, or undead) of any being whose presence you sense, but not its identity (the vampire Count Strahd von Zarovich, for instance). Within the same radius, you also detect the presence of any place or object that has been consecrated or desecrated, as with the hallow spell.

The player tried to argue that the effect would detect evil... but it doesn't! It detects fiends, celestials and undead (and consecrated/desecrated stuff). The thing was plenty evil, but it was technically speaking an aberration but it was such a vile one that I ruled it as detecting evil, but RAW (and probably RAI) it shouldn't have.

In my experience, a lot of casual players are... not super aware what their powers/spells do. So they look at the name of a power, read the first line, think "that looks cool and makes sense for this situation, let's do that!" And all these powers/spells that have a miss-match trip up these casual players, and there is no need for it. There is no reason why the first sentence couldn't have said "The presence of extraplanar beings and undead register on your... "

I had a player make a 3rd level arcane trickster take friend and true strike as his 2 cantrips...