D&D 5E How Many 5Es Can There Be?

[Hussar]

What is more imaginative than directionless tinkering...? As long as the ends are kept in mind, playing with stuff like the Dance Bard or alternate crit rules are imaginative.

No, you have to remember. Changes someone likes are "visionary". Changes that someone doesn't like are "directionless tinkering".

Seeing that repeated over and over again does get rather tiring after a while though. It would be nice if people started with this isn't for me, then went away and stop widdling in everyone else's cornflakes over and over and over again, with every single post in every single thread.

Don't like 2024? Ok, no problem. No one said you have to. Message received. Loud and clear. Now, since the overwhelming majority of the fandom DOES like 2024, and we know this because of the mountain of feedback that WotC is getting, well.... what exactly are you trying to prove?

 

[Micah Sweet]

No, you have to remember. Changes someone likes are "visionary". Changes that someone doesn't like are "directionless tinkering".

Seeing that repeated over and over again does get rather tiring after a while though. It would be nice if people started with this isn't for me, then went away and stop widdling in everyone else's cornflakes over and over and over again, with every single post in every single thread.

Don't like 2024? Ok, no problem. No one said you have to. Message received. Loud and clear. Now, since the overwhelming majority of the fandom DOES like 2024, and we know this because of the mountain of feedback that WotC is getting, well.... what exactly are you trying to prove?

That popularity doesn't equal quality? If you got what you wanted, there would literally be nothing here but positive feelings punctuated by single line "this isn't for me" posts in much shorter and less active threads.

 

[Hussar]

That popularity doesn't equal quality? If you got what you wanted, there would literally be nothing here but positive feelings punctuated by single line "this isn't for me" posts in much shorter and less active threads.

There's a WIIIIIIDDDE gulf between single "this isn't for me" posts and several years of daily posts proclaiming the death of D&D and how WotC isn't producing anything creative and so on and so forth.

I dunno. I just find it endlessly baffling to talk about a game I don't play. There's a reason I don't ever go on the Paizo boards. I don't play Pathfinder. I know it's not for me. It's far too crunchy for what I want. Fair enough. It doesn't have to be for me. 2024 honestly isn't really all that much for me either. It doesn't go far enough for some of the things I would prefer to see. So, I'll talk about those things if need be, but, at a certain point, I'll just let it go.

I mean, if I go back in my posting history, I could find TONS of posts about wanting a Warlord style class in 5e. Advocated for it pretty hard for a couple of years there. Then, well, I accepted that nope, that wasn't going to happen. Which gave me two choices. Continue to endlessly bitch about the lack of a warlord, or move on. I chose the healthier approach and moved on.

I just find endless negativity such a huge turn off. I don't get it. I do not get expending energy on something I don't like. I didn't get it back in the 4e days with the endless negativity then and I don't get it now.

 

[mamba]

What is more imaginative than directionless tinkering...?

pretty much anything… I am not saying they need no ideas whatsoever for this, but to me it does not rise to the level of imaginative.

Tightening a nut a little more or a little less and seeing what the result of that is, is not imaginative. Much of the playtest is just paint by numbers, don’t tell me that using a slightly different shade of yellow for color 2 is imaginative

 

[mamba]

No, you have to remember. Changes someone likes are "visionary". Changes that someone doesn't like are "directionless tinkering".

nah, it would still be that, even if I liked more of the changes.

The criteria for a vision have nothing to do with that. As I said, MCDM’s game designers have one, and I have no idea whether I will like the end result at all / better than 5e 2024.

I also said 4e had vision, that does not mean I preferred it over 5e

since the overwhelming majority of the fandom DOES like 2024, and we know this because of the mountain of feedback that WotC is getting, well.... what exactly are you trying to prove?

nothing, no one here proves anything, other than that they have too much time on their hands

 

[mamba]

There's a WIIIIIIDDDE gulf between single "this isn't for me" posts and several years of daily posts proclaiming the death of D&D and how WotC isn't producing anything creative and so on and so forth.

I have not proclaimed the death of D&D, I am rather disenchanted with the whole playtest process however

I dunno. I just find it endlessly baffling to talk about a game I don't play.

I am not doing that

There's a reason I don't ever go on the Paizo boards. I don't play Pathfinder. I know it's not for me. It's far too crunchy for what I want.

same

Fair enough. It doesn't have to be for me. 2024 honestly isn't really all that much for me either. It doesn't go far enough for some of the things I would prefer to see. So, I'll talk about those things if need be, but, at a certain point, I'll just let it go.

I will, at a certain point, maybe sooner than the PHB playtest is over, maybe shortly after, guess we will see

I mean, if I go back in my posting history, I could find TONS of posts about wanting a Warlord style class in 5e. Advocated for it pretty hard for a couple of years there.

then I have about 21 months left before I need to move on It won’t take that long for me…

 

[Zardnaar]

It's a revision they've been straight up about that.

Mostly ignoring the playtest.

Remember the D&D next playtest? Kinda crap only liked the second packet.

Finished product was very different. There's some kinda obvious stuff that shouldn't have made it as far as the phb eg sharpshooter feat.

I want the half elf back way to early to get upset. I'll save the bitching and moaning (potentially) for the final product.

 

[Parmandur]

pretty much anything… I am not saying they need no ideas whatsoever for this, but to me it does not rise to the level of imaginative.

Tightening a nut a little more or a little less and seeing what the result of that is, is not imaginative. Much of the playtest is just paint by numbers, don’t tell me that using a slightly different shade of yellow for color 2 is imaginative

Interior design is an entire art form, and an awfully large part of it has to do with subtle color changes or rearranging furniture in am already functional space.

 

[aco175]

While I do wish that WotC would go further in its changes, I cannot really deny that they've made improvements. Even something as simple as adding a round by round saving throw to Banishment is an improvement (IMO). There is something that does get lost in these discussions. There are a LOT of little changes in 2024e. The rewriting of effects, for one, will have a pretty large impact on games.

This may bring up another potential problem at tables. If a player casts a spell like Banishment and the DM gives a save each round, but the player comes back and states he is using the 2014 version of the PHB, who wins? The DM might be playing 2024, but the player only has 2014 and is playing that version.

I know Wizards is saying you get to choose which version to play, but then the DM is supposed to have final authority over his table, so who gets upset and leaves. Granted, this may be mostly a problem in open games and not in longtime groups which will likely take rules like this and go either way, but it leaves holes in play that will be a thread someday next year on the site.

 

[Hussar]

This may bring up another potential problem at tables. If a player casts a spell like Banishment and the DM gives a save each round, but the player comes back and states he is using the 2014 version of the PHB, who wins? The DM might be playing 2024, but the player only has 2014 and is playing that version.

I know Wizards is saying you get to choose which version to play, but then the DM is supposed to have final authority over his table, so who gets upset and leaves. Granted, this may be mostly a problem in open games and not in longtime groups which will likely take rules like this and go either way, but it leaves holes in play that will be a thread someday next year on the site.

As someone who routinely plays with strangers, I don't think this will be an issue. You simply state up front which rule set you are using and if you are ok with mixing and matching and what you are mixing and matching. So, someone wants to use a 2014 monk (as a totally random example) might be perfectly fine, but the DM, before the game starts, simply says, "2024 spells take precedent". It's not like it's a major hurdle here.

Sure, there might be the odd rough patch here and there, but, again, I've been instituting Tasha's changes for a couple of years now and no one seems too terribly fussed about it.