D&D 5E (2024) Is 5E better because of Crawford and Perkins leaving?

[eclair~]

I'll note as well that there is a pretty big difference between "if you take a certain combination of player options, you get a pretty strong combination" and "player options A, B, and C are each very strong while player options X, Y, and Z are each very weak".

This is especially the case if the designers were to take options A, B, and C and make those options even stronger, while X, Y, and Z are either unchanged or made worse for some reason.

 

[Charlaquin]

Is it really any different than a monk or rogue being able to dash as a bonus action? It's clearly defined as an action after all. Specific overrides general and it's not a big deal unless you're trying to prove that the people who wrote the rules are ignorant. Since I don't think they're ignorant I assume they just used a term that has clear a definition, unless some detail of the implementation is overridden by a new rule.

Dashing as a bonus action is significantly different than dashing as a reaction. Because what dashing does is gives you more of a resource, called movement, which you spend on your turn to change your character’s location. If you Dash as a bonus action, you gain movement equal to your speed, which you can spend because it’s still your turn. If you Dash as a reaction, you gain movement equal to your speed, but can’t do anything with that movement because it isn’t your turn. This is why the Ready Action specifies that you can Ready to move up to your speed. Because the designers knew that moving as a reaction was a desirable option, but Readying to Dash would be useless under the rules they wrote. For some reason they seem to have forgotten that fact here.

 

[tetrasodium]

Why couldn't they just write it out how it was intended to work? Because as it is, it doesn't do what we all know it should do.

"Eh, they'll figure it out" is lazy design.

Because"natural language" is still being treated as an improvement rather than acknowledged as a bridge or six too far. For whatever reason there is this , (erroneous) idea of that technical writing required and immediate catapult into the realm of knockoff ikea engrish assembly instructions. The proofreading for something like d&d should (at minimum) be filtered through something like technical writing for dummies if not a full on technical writing set of courses rather than perpetuating a bucket of bad pixie dust.

 

[Lanefan]

That is not what I am saying. I am saying there are best options and having them is a good thing. That is an argument against trying to balance classes, but that is fundamentally different than "sabotaging" classes.

Saying we need to make the Fighter weaker so the Wizard looks better is bad design. Saying we need to make the Wizard weaker, or saying we need to make the Fighter more powerful to be balanced is also bad design.

Having the Fighter and Wizard make sense thematically and being fun to play without tacking on cheesy mechanics to make them "balanced" and letting the chips fall with one of them being objectively better than the other is a good design.

Perhaps, but only to a point. Ideally they've all got enough to contribute that they're fun to play.

Where they mess it up, I think, is in trying to make the classes balanced at every moment all the time; where instead a more macro balance where a class is the best sometimes and the worst at other times works better. Example: a Druid rocks in the woods but is nowhere near as useful underground.

No it isn't. It is a game, there is nothing fundamentally wrong or anti-social with wanting to be the best at it. That is not my cup of tea and maybe it is not yours, but that doesn't make it a problem. You do you!

Again I agree, and again only to a point. Over-optimizers take the fun out of it, just like over-coaching takes the fun out of a lot of sports.

I'd rather have (or develop) the best character in the party not through optimizing its mechanics but simply by being better in-game - doing more, getting involved more, taking more risks, and so on. Problem is, if that isn't rewarded with individual xp then I'm merely sticking my character's neck out for no good reason.

 

[bedir than]

Dashing as a bonus action is significantly different than dashing as a reaction. Because what dashing does is gives you more of a resource, called movement, which you spend on your turn to change your character’s location. If you Dash as a bonus action, you gain movement equal to your speed, which you can spend because it’s still your turn. If you Dash as a reaction, you gain movement equal to your speed, but can’t do anything with that movement because it isn’t your turn. This is why the Ready Action specifies that you can Ready to move up to your speed. Because the designers knew that moving as a reaction was a desirable option, but Readying to Dash would be useless under the rules they wrote. For some reason they seem to have forgotten that fact here.

I was going to argue more about this, because I thought I had an interesting thought, BUT
STEALTH ERRATA

Lorwyn Changeling now reads

Unpredictable Movement. Whenever you roll Initiative, you can immediately move up to half your Speed, provided you don't have Disadvantage on the Initiative roll.

 

[Charlaquin]

I was going to argue more about this, because I thought I had an interesting thought, BUT
STEALTH ERRATA

Lorwyn Changeling now reads

So, I guess they must have caught wind of people on social media noticing this and, recognizing how incredibly embarrassing a mistake it was, just quietly changed it instead of broadcasting the mistake with proper, public errata. I guess that’s one of the benefits (for WotC) of it being a digital-only release. No need for a record of changes made, they can just re-write whatever they want and in time it’ll be as if it had always been that way. Gross.

 

[bedir than]

So, I guess they must have caught wind of people on social media noticing this and, recognizing how incredibly embarrassing a mistake it was, just quietly changed it instead of broadcasting the mistake with proper, public errata. I guess that’s one of the benefits (for WotC) of it being a digital-only release. No need for a record of changes made, they can just re-write whatever they want and in time it’ll be as if it had always been that way. Gross.

They've practiced stealth errata for a couple years now.
Also, this one includes a nerf, not merely the clarification.

 

[Charlaquin]

You know, in all the discussion of whether or not the unpredictable movement feature actually functioned as intended, I kinda forgot to consider if it would even be any good. Move up to your speed (now half your speed) as a Reaction when you roll initiative…? Maybe this is just me, but my experience has always been that, if you’re using a battle map, the DM generally gives the players the opportunity to position themselves on the map at the beginning of combat anyway. What good does being able to move before anyone has had the opportunity to act even do in that scenario?

 

[Charlaquin]

They've practiced stealth errata for a couple years now.

You can’t stealth errata a physical book. Unless they’re hiring ninjas to sneak into my house and swap the book for one with different text while I’m asleep.

Also, this one includes a nerf, not merely the clarification.

Yeah, that’s kind of surprising. Even as intended it seems like a very weak feature to me, I wonder why they felt the need to make it even worse.

 

[ECMO3]

Perhaps, but only to a point. Ideally they've all got enough to contribute that they're fun to play.

I agree, but there is a wide gap between "all contribute" and "balanced:"

I've played many games where there was a gap in terms of mechanics or in some cases extremely wide gaps due to difference in ability scores due to one player rolling very bad and one player rolling very good, but I have never had it where no one contributes.

I'd rather have (or develop) the best character in the party not through optimizing its mechanics but simply by being better in-game - doing more, getting involved more, taking more risks, and so on. Problem is, if that isn't rewarded with individual xp then I'm merely sticking my character's neck out for no good reason.

When it comes to effective play, optimization and mechanical superiority is a distant fourth after knowledge of the rules, luck (dice) and player personality in that order.