D&D (2024) How excited are you for the new 2024 edition d&d?

[wedgeski]

4. Yes, I am excited, and happy to say so. This has been a successful edition for my tables, and we're ready to see the next evolution of the game without losing the core of what has worked for us.

 

[delericho]

Not at all. Honestly, I'm more interested in arguing over whether this is or is not a new edition than the content itself. And, for the avoidance of doubt, I have no interest in debating that either.

 

[delericho]

Much of what 5.5e changes (as of the most recent playtest doc) is stuff I don't really feel fixes any of the issues, it just shuffles them around.

The older I get, the more I think that's true of every revision to the game ever.

 

[Corinnguard]

Much of what 5.5e changes (as of the most recent playtest doc) is stuff I don't really feel fixes any of the issues, it just shuffles them around.

They're hoping we don't succeed with our Perception and Investigation checks.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

2 on the excitement level.

They made some nice QoL changes, while undoing other things I liked. While addressing none of the actual issues I have with 5e. All while splitting the playerbase.

If you want the three new core books, you have to basically shell out £100 for a balance patch.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

The older I get, the more I think that's true of every revision to the game ever.

Perhaps. I doubt I need to say which edition I think fixed the actually difficult problems.

 

[Neonchameleon]

That's too bad. I haven't looked, was hoping the classes would be freshened up.

Most of them are being, although they are still basically the same classes. (Artificer isn't). Wizards and paladins get the least because they are already at the top. Monks get a huge tune-up. And there are a few targeted nerfs (such as to low level moon druids).

Much of what 5.5e changes (as of the most recent playtest doc) is stuff I don't really feel fixes any of the issues, it just shuffles them around.

A few of the changes are really quite good, but rarely go far enough (e.g. the Playtest 7 Warlock gets...1/day half their spell slots back. Woop-de-friggin-do. But it also makes pacts into invocations, which is great.)

This is a good illustration of where the changes actually are. If you're playing the old hotness of an Eldritch Blast spamming Fiendlock who has spent their invocations boosting Eldritch Blast that's all you get. Because you were already good.

If on the other hand you wanted to play a Bladelock you now get to attack with Cha rather than Str or Dex - and you can take medium armour and a shield as a first level feat. And as a fiendlock you don't just have to take someone to 0hp, you also get the temp HP if they drop within 10' of you through someone else's actions. You can front line bully weaker foes.

Meanwhile if you want to use invocations to side-buff your being a bladelock the Jump spell was massively upgraded (so that's now a good invocation), and the two Invisibility invocations were merged at fifth level (so you can turn invisible in dim light at will); all the higher level ones came down to a level where they are now good. You're now an oddly moving nightmare.

And if you want to go for a different pact, for example the Archfey, that got a massive tune-up; it's now based round Misty Step (and you get free Misty Steps that have effects when you use them). So you're a weapon wielding, oddly moving, teleporting nightmare. When before you'd have been trying to hit with dex, wearing light armour, and not bothering with Jump. Is this combo stronger than the old Fiend with multiply boosted Eldritch Blasts? I don't know - but it's now a conversation worth having and hella fun.

Overall, I think it will be better; I just struggle to summon enthusiasm for 5.5e because of how dim my view of 5.0 is.

To me the major problems with 5e are on the DM side not the players side. And we haven't seen that.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

To me the major problems with 5e are on the DM side not the players side. And we haven't seen that.

Oh, don't get me wrong, it's definitely worse on the DM side. I'm just saying that there are issues on the player-facing side and while some are getting half-heartedly addressed, most are simply having the parts rearranged into a new pattern. Change without difference, one might say.

 

[schneeland]

Not excited (1). And by that I don't mean that I think it will be bad.
Yet given that this will be essentially a cleaned up version of 5e and I have already closed the books on 5e, there's nothing to be excited about.
I would get way more excited, or at least interested, if it was a new edition with major changes to the current design. But I think that might take a while.

 

[Yaarel]

Not excited (1). And by that I don't mean that I think it will be bad.
Yet given that this will be essentially a cleaned up version of 5e and I have already closed the books on 5e, there's nothing to be excited about.
I would get way more excited, or at least interested, if it was a new edition with major changes to the current design. But I think that might take a while.

If WotC introduces a brand new setting for 5e, such as futuristic scifi or whatever, would that interest you?