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

[Hriston]

Again, I disagree. A sailor that can always, guaranteed, find a buddy wherever they are is improbable to the point of impossible.

I'm not arguing about what my opinion is any more.

I agree the existence of such a sailor would be improbable. Luckily, the existence of Ship's Passage as a background feature does not imply the existence of such a sailor!

 

[Hriston]

If you read the two paragraphs you wrote, there is a certain irony in your post…

I edited this for clarity since you seem to have taken a different meaning than I intended. Let's just say there's a pretty large difference between requesting clarification to increase understanding and posting a kneejerk reaction based on a lack thereof.

 

[mamba]

I edited this for clarity since you seem to have taken a different meaning than I intended. Let's just say there's a pretty large difference between requesting clarification to increase understanding and posting a kneejerk reaction based on a lack thereof.

my problem is that you frequently keep asking for clarification on the most basic things, and no amount of clarification moves the needle forward. You happily ignore it and reiterate the same refuted point another five times. So no, I am not interested in clarifying things over and over for no reason, you have 200 pages to figure this stuff out, at this point another five won’t make a difference

 

[CreamCloud0]

I'm not sure what part of what I said you're disagreeing with, but okay.

you've been at this single issue for literally over 200 pages, probably closer to 300 (there was already quite the backlog in this thread when i came into it and i didn't backread), if you don't understand their views at this point i don't think that's on them.
(edit: ninja'd by mamba)

 

[Oofta]

I'm not sure what part of what I said you're disagreeing with, but okay.

I'm done having this same endless argument with you in general on any variation.

Spoiler added to summarize my thoughts. Feel free to ignore, just trying to make my opinion clear.

Spoiler

It doesn't bother me how you play the game (why would it?). When I DM or play it is my preference that the player only controls PC says and does. I will work with players on backstory if they want and we may work together to establish details outside of game time or during a session 0. But, unless I ask for specific details or clarification as DM I am 100% responsible for the world outside of the PC. For example that means the DM decides how a king will respond to a noble's request for audience, whether a sailor can find free passage, whether a criminal can find a contact, whether there are any libraries available for a scholar's research.

I view the background features as examples and will use backgrounds and more importantly backstories to give PCs benefits if I think it's appropriate. They might also have penalties as well, a noble in a "hive of scum and villainy" might get a negative response if recognized as an example.

I don't think it's a bad thing for the DM to make a ruling (or house rule) that makes sense to them. It is not inherently adversarial nor is it taking away the agency of a player. They still have full agency over what their PC says and does. I'm not doing it to nullify what the PC can do, I do it because it makes sense to me as a DM and it's the best way I know how to make a game that is enjoyable for everyone at the table.

 

[Oofta]

If you're right, then by saying they plan to do it after 5.2 comes out they are at least being intentionally disingenuous, if not outright lying to the public. Is that your claim?

Umm ... I'm saying they may will look at it when someone as free time. I also don't know if there was any "official" announcement or "promise". Frequently people take a comment out of context and sometimes people make statements about things they'd like to do without knowing everything involved and without official authorization.

Basically I don't think it's a high priority. We'll likely see 3.x put into CC in 2025, I have no idea what the current state of or what they're planning or said about TSR versions.

 

[Hriston]

that works both ways, for me it is obvious that it should not work. For you it seems clear that it always does, no matter what, hence the discussion. If everyone agreed then we would not be talking about this.

Not "always", just when the feature's actually used does it work.

there is no secret backstory here, just lore that anyone has access to. The player knows as well as the DM that they are on a world they have never been to

If it's not a secret that the player's feature is offline, then why is the player trying to use it? Sounds dysfunctional.

Again, Ravenloft is just an example, you could end up on Krynn as well and nothing relevant would change about the scenario

Why am I the only person who's ever been to Krynn from wherever it is I'm from?

 

[Hriston]

That seems to be the real issue here. D&D isn't designed to have the player control or decide anything outside of their PC's thoughts and actions. That makes the background features, as you interpret them, a clear outlier from the rest of the game. Therefore people who don't want to go against the core D&D constructs of the DM being fully responsible for the world, the players being fully responsible for their characters ignore or alter the background features.

Even though it goes against the assumptions of the game system you can, of course, have collaborative world building in D&D if you want. Personally, I don't unless it's discussions that happen outside of game time and even then I retain editorial control.

You're speaking as though the 2014 background features are outside the "core" design of D&D, yet they're published in the PHB, one of the core rulebooks. They are part of how D&D is designed. People who don't play like you do aren't going against D&D's core.

 

[Hriston]

Yep, we disagree. One line of text isn't going to override how I approach D&D as a player or DM. I'm not going to argue about the rest.

No one, not even the designers, is trying to override how you approach D&D.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I think we see it in 2025. It's just going to be after 5E24 is done.

Yeah, I think that implies that the person meant to do it is VERY BUSY with the 2024 Core. Why they can't get someone else to do it is anybody's guess, but it seems likely that this is the case.