D&D (2024) Do you plan to adopt D&D5.5One2024Redux?

Plan to adopt the new core rules?

  • Yep

    Votes: 262 53.0%
  • Nope

    Votes: 232 47.0%


log in or register to remove this ad

For most DMs, it is not an authoritarian table. It is a group game, and everyone gets a vote. So while you may not want to deal with power creep, the players might want to have a (fill in the class) that they consider better.

It's still ask the DM though.

New campaign next week I'm excluding most of Tashas. Power level more 2014-17.

Players are getting another PHB type book to pick from.
 

A frequent (and often true) statement in 3.5 is a lot of incredibly broken stuff came in the PHB: Wild Shape, Righteous Might/Divine Power, Simulacrum, Polymorph Any Object, Wish, Item Creation Feats, Leadership...
That's true, but I believe it's also true that most people played 3e broken combo-free.
 


For most DMs, it is not an authoritarian table. It is a group game, and everyone gets a vote. So while you may not want to deal with power creep, the players might want to have a (fill in the class) that they consider better.
It might be a discussion, but if I do not want to run e.g. PF2, then I doubt I will. Same thing might go for power creep (haven't seen the new books yet, obviously, maybe they are better balanced rather than just buffing everyone...). There is always homebrew when I do not like something, and with 2024 I am getting more comfortable with that idea, or the idea of simply ignoring it altogether
 

I would like the forum to know that in a few years after 2024 comes out, they will only use the 2024 version on the official D&D site. This will make the adoption even more widespread, as so few young players seem to own the books. They just look stuff up online. D&D Beyond and whatever VTT they go with will only have 2024 classes.
yeah, the same will largely be true for new players buying books. If you own the 2014 version on DDB you will keep it, if you do not, then you will have no choice but to buy the 2024 version. Not exactly news...

And I would like you to know that DMs can share the books with their players, so if someone wants to stick with 2014, they can ;)
 

I care what they're called in the books, sorry but I do. If you publish another book with the same classes and the same name as the Player's Handbook, and yet insist it's somehow not a replacement, there will be confusion for some, and irritation for others. Far better to go the Essentials route and make thematically similar classes with different names.

At least, if keeping both fighters actually matters to you as a publisher.

The trouble is, You (and a lot of us here, myself included) are very literal-minded. And yet, the reason that they are called the same thing is because they ARE "replacements" unless you don't want them to be. Then you CAN, if you so desire, play the older one. OR you can replace the old ones with the new ones.

WotC HAS been clear about this, it's just that a lot of people (this time I won't include me) don't LIKE that and sometimes pretend that it's confusing, rather than just saying "I don't like it."
 

That's true, but I believe it's also true that most people played 3e broken combo-free.

Thinking any build that was XYZ 5/PrC3+ was mostly theoretical outside of corner cases.

Druid 6 natural spell (3.5 phb or 3.0 phb+ splat)or a front loaded PrC lvl 1-3 would be obvious exceptions.

Probably include most build requiring more than 1 or 2 splat books.
 



Remove ads

Top