D&D (2024) Dungeons and Dragons future? Ray Winninger gives a nod to Mike Shea's proposed changes.

[darjr]

Im sorry, if you gotta argue that two years isn’t several in order to support calling people liers you’ve lost me.

 

[Yaarel]

Yeah. I forgot how vague "several" is. It's still 2 years from Tasha's to announcement, though. So not several.

They are already compiling the 50 anniversary now.

An anniversary isnt something that can be late or half asked.

Winninger knew enough about it looks like to make comparisons.

 

[Yaarel]

Im sorry, if you gotta argue that two years isn’t several in order to support calling people liers you’ve lost me.

I didnt read it that way. @Maxperson cares about technical details.

 

[Yaarel]

I think defaulting prodigy would kill it. They're already not used much due to people viewing +1s to mostly useless secondaries as better than a feat of their choice and proficiency of their choice. Limiting that feat to one good, but not great feat would cause even fewer to pick it.

As for the background feats, everyone will get them, so they can't be used when assessing racial abilities. I don't think they will kill the race the way you propose. The racial feat will probably remain open to any feat allowable to humans.

In my eyes, the feat choice is good flavor for humans.

But I suspect the human design will be as simple as possible for the sake of newbie players.

 

[payn]

Two words.
Tom Bombadil.

The only good thing in LotR.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Okay, I'll bite: what exact number does the purposefully inexact word 'several' imply?

 

[Maxperson]

Im sorry, if you gotta argue that two years isn’t several in order to support calling people liers you’ve lost me.

I don't. They didn't say the rules would only be optional until 5.5, and I don't believe for a second that they didn't intend for the rules to be in 5.5 when Tasha's was released. Had those rules been horribly received they may have backed away from the plan, but that doesn't make stating that the rules were optional not a lie. The truth would have been "Temporarily optional."

 

[Reynard]

Okay, I'll bite: what exact number does the purposefully inexact word 'several' imply?

More than a few, less than a lot.

 

[Yaarel]

.

More than a few, less than a lot.

Few is like several.

More than 2, but less than "many".

Probably, 10 starts the "many" range.


Perhaps several emphasizes meaningful "choices" to choose from. Whereas "few" might be a lump.

 

[Vaalingrade]

More than a few, less than a lot.

Hmm... but where does that leave 'many'?