D&D (2024) Does anyone else think that 1D&D will create a significant divide in the community?

[mamba]

They're not going to make any given monster more or less powerful, so the statblock doesn't matter. That's why they said it was backwards compatible with adventures.

yes, but if they made the chars more or less powerful, that also would affect things.

Also, I believe they will make the higher CR ones tougher

 

[Benjamin Olson]

Strictly speaking, if even one person sticks with an older version, there is a "split". I just don't see the updated books causing some major schism that will much of any negative impact for WotC, D&D, or the hobby as a whole.

I mean that's a fair distinction. Really the question here is not "will there be a split" but rather "will there be an unusually large split for an edition change".

I personally suspect it will, for a time, be an unusually large split, at least for the tiny amount of stuff there is to actually split over. OneD&D seems to offer so little, while at the same time managing to step on may hardcore 5e lovers' toes with what little it does offer, and while also at the same time promising to empower people to keep their same old books and still play new official adventures, etc, thereby de-incentivizing switching. I think a lot of casual 5e players will, at least for a while, blow it off as a sorry excuse to make them re-buy core books, and a lot of hardcore 5e players will reject it on x, y, or z grounds of minor changes they dislike (for me personally the prepared spellcasting system is the dealbreaker, but plenty of other people will have there own reasons). Also current WotC management will probably figure out another way to completely alienate their customers in the next year, and even if they don't I think the number of people who will immediately be champing at the bit to try the new system for the sake of trying the newest offering from WotC, even in its initial state of just core books, is not what it was a few months ago.

I don't think it will be a permanent schism. I imagine a lot of holdout 5e groups will eventually switch years down the line when they get new players who can't track down a classic 5e PHB, or when they have actually used up the player options of or generally got a bit more tired of 5e, and presumably by that point there will be enough new OneD&D player facing content to make it worth playing over 5e on those grounds.

 

[mamba]

for me personally the prepared spellcasting system is the dealbreaker

did that change from 5e?

 

[Benjamin Olson]

did that change from 5e?

Well first off they are seemingly foisting it on all spellcasters, and second off they are tying the number of spells you have prepared of each level to the specific number of slots at each level. Thus a level 5 caster has exactly four level 1 spells, three level 2 spells and two level 3 spells prepared.

I prefer playing a prepared spellcaster, but some people don't and I prefer the lore of memorized spellcasting. And the spell level locked preparation system is a dumb, arbitrary system rooted in WotC's current belief that lack of choice equals accessibility.

So that's my dealbreaker. It wouldn't be by any means if OneD&D was brimming with things I liked, but it's mostly just brimming with things I consider lateral moves at best.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Well first off they are seemingly foisting it on all spellcasters, and second off they are tying the number of spells you have prepared of each level to the specific number of slots at each level. Thus a level 5 caster has exactly four level 1 spells, three level 2 spells and two level 3 spells prepared.

I prefer playing a prepared spellcaster, but some people don't and I prefer the lore of memorized spellcasting. And the spell level locked preparation system is a dumb, arbitrary system rooted in WotC's current belief that lack of choice equals accessibility.

So that's my dealbreaker. It wouldn't be by any means if OneD&D was brimming with things I liked, but it's mostly just brimming with things I consider lateral moves at best.

And probably if you reintroduced the 2014 memorization rules to the 2024 game, it would work perfectly fine.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

And probably if you reintroduced the 2014 memorization rules to the 2024 game, it would work perfectly fine.

Sure, which is why it might not be a dealbreaker for me (to play at tables where I had that level of rules control) if the 2024 game offered things I really liked. Heck, I would probably be happy just adding up the total number of spells I can prepare at all levels and preparing that many, no need to even import a 2014 element.

But, as is, OneD&D is shaping up to offer nothing I really like near well enough to justify putting up with the things I dislike, so even one endemic thing I despise makes it a hard pass for me.

And even just being a wash isn't good enough to persuade me to buy new books and, more importantly, spend numerous hours confused about slightly, arbitrarily different rules rather than playing by rules I have already mastered. And frankly OneD&D just looks like a shoddy, unappealing product to me, and I anticipate there being other 5e clones available by 2024 with actual selling points, rather than just D&D branding.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

Most players seem to have problems remembering one set of rules, I certainly wouldn't expect smooth play when everyone has to deal with two rulebooks where a lot of things have the same names but are subtly different.

In my games we'll be using either the 2024 books or the 2014 books, perhaps with some house rules inspired by the other books.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

Not even sure what being an "active player on D&D Beyond" means.

In my games, I use it to look up things in game. Usually spells. Sometimes monsters, if I don't have them stated up properly in my VTT.

I have one player who uses the DDB character sheet and does her rolls in DDB. The rest all just use it to update the character sheets and I sync it to my VTT.

Most of my time in DDB is between games when doing prep.

So are we all "active players", just the player who uses the character sheet and dice rolling in game, just her and me as the DM using it to look things up? Would simply using it to update your character sheet between session not be considered an active player?

I'm guessing that they look at frequency of logins and maybe time spent on the site. Those are the numbers they would really care about, I would think. Whether that time is spent with a character sheet open and rolls being made versus searching for and reading content probably is less important.

I have a Beyond account. I have only used it to d/l free materials like the play tests. I don't use it for playing the game and haven't spent any money there.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

And even just being a wash isn't good enough to persuade me to buy new books and, more importantly, spend numerous hours confused about slightly, arbitrarily different rules rather than playing by rules I have already mastered. And frankly OneD&D just looks like a shoddy, unappealing product to me, and I anticipate there being other 5e clones available by 2024 with actual selling points, rather than just D&D branding.

I think calling it shoddy is dismissive towards people who actually like the changes. They don't seem shoddy to me. The changes also don't seem arbitrary to me. Actually they do make a lot of sense and Crawford even explained them.

Unappealing for you would have been perfectly fine. Especially if you have have a hard time memorizing changes you don't agree with.

Also, I also don't think we are the real target group. We already own our books. We would not have bought new books anyway. I see oneDnD as future proofing the rules. 2014 mechanics are not really top notch anymore. Having a more cohesive rules base for new people seems lile the best way to keep it appealing for new people.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I’d say 2014 spells, 2024 conditions (not class specific…), 2014 feats. If you do it differently that is ok too, but houseruling to me


no they cannot learn each others feats, no they cannot be double lucky

again showing that you can take sections of one to replace those sections of the others but you can't just use both books... aka (IMO) not compatable... not any more then 1e/2e or 3e/3,5... and most likely not any more or less then every d200 game since 200 with each othe