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

[Nebulous]

2024 is a great game, but so was 2014 and I don't know that 2024 is any better.

2024 has not been enthusiastically embraced by most of the community, reviews are mixed.

Personally for me it is new, it is different, but I don't know that it is any better than 2014. Some things are better, some things aren't better. Some 2014 problems were fixed, some 2014 problems weren't fixed, some new problems were created.

I personally cannot stand the Weapon perks where "these weapons cause Disadvantage, these weapons create Advantage, these slow you down," etc. It is such blatant and illogical power creep, solely for some "balancing" issue the designers thought was necessary. I will only minimally run 2024 and shift to other games that don't make me angry when I think about the rules. D&D wants superheroes who don't die. Fine. That is a legitimate play style. FWIW, low level 2024 should still play fine, albeit a tad stronger than 2014. I would probably go no higher than 5th level.

 

[tetrasodium]

I personally cannot stand the Weapon perks where "these weapons cause Disadvantage, these weapons create Advantage, these slow you down," etc. It is such blatant and illogical power creep, solely for some "balancing" issue the designers thought was necessary. I will only minimally run 2024 and shift to other games that don't make me angry when I think about the rules. D&D wants superheroes who don't die. Fine. That is a legitimate play style. FWIW, low level 2024 should still play fine, albeit a tad stronger than 2014. I would probably go no higher than 5th level.

They dredge up flashbacks to the times I sat at a table with time & fun sucking spiked chain trip builds for me. I cannot fathom how they went through to publication without stomping move attack question the gm move attack question the gm repeat or locking down what is in your hand when rather than being even more explicitly quantum.

 

[TiQuinn]

Because there’s no record of the change. It’s just snuck in (hence the term “stealth”) under the radar, in hopes no one notices, and the original version is lost to history. I don’t know what to tell you if the reason that’s bad isn’t obvious. Archival is an intrinsic good. Actively trying to circumvent it is bad.

That’s another inherent risk of digital products. I’m very unlikely to buy a digital-only product for reasons that folks like SlyFlourish have gotten into before.

But is not keeping a public record of the errata capital-B bad? I have a hard time getting worked up over it.

 

[ECMO3]

Why is that a big deal?

Stealth errata is a problem. I am reading my PHB and another player has the PHB open on DNDBeyond and they are saying different things.

So now which one do we use?

What makes it even more problematic is how bad the DNDBeyond engine and interactive parts are, so it is like you can't even trust DNDBeyond to be RAW.

 

[ECMO3]

if using a d10 instead of a d8 or adding a + to something is a mechanic, then everything is a mechanic.

Yes everything that is a mathematical construct is a mechanic.

In that case, yeah so what, tweak the mechanics to achieve balance.

Balance is not important at all. I don't think it improves the play experience one bit. I realize that may be unpopular, but it is based on extensive play and there is no compelling evidence or proof to the contrary.

Balance is more important than some unsocialized jerks being able to feel superior because they could bully others into taking inferior options

The ones name calling and worrying about how other PCs want to play are the "unsocialized jerks" IMO.

You be you. You have the same choices and options as everyone else at the table, with the same balance implications. Pick the options for how you want to play.

 

[TiQuinn]

Stealth errata is a huge problem. I am reading my PHB and another player has the PHB open on DNDBeyond and they are saying different things.

So now which one do we use?

What makes it even more problematic is how bad the DNDBeyond engine and interactive parts are, so it is like you can't even trust DNDBeyond to be RAW.

So, I’m not a player who really cares about the strictness of RAW. In a case like that, I defer to the DM, and if I’m the DM, I try to make the fairest most understandable choice I can make - usually benefiting the player.

 

[Weiley31]

So now which one do we use?

FIGHT!

The Victor is just and right!

 

[tetrasodium]

So, I’m not a player who really cares about the strictness of RAW. In a case like that, I defer to the DM, and if I’m the DM, I try to make the fairest most understandable choice I can make - usually benefiting the player.

That's easy to say when talking about a nebulous hypothetical, but that's not how or why it plays out at the table. Disagreements like the one @ECMO3 mentioned come to headbutting because the answer to his "which one do we use" question can determine if the player can make use of some cool thing that they thought was possible or if the gm is right about the player just trying to exploit some misreading of/unupdated error in the rules.

 

[Yaarel]

Man, everybody being savage in here.

I was thinking the same thing.

The expression of opinions in posts comes across overly negative. A bit like doom-scrolling. Seems less psychologically healthy.

It reminded me to recenter and try express my opinions more constructively.

 

[TiQuinn]

That's easy to say when talking about a nebulous hypothetical, but that's not how or why it plays out at the table. Disagreements like the one @ECMO3 mentioned come to headbutting because the answer to his "which one do we use" question can determine if the player can make use of some cool thing but hey thought was possible or if the gm is right about the player just trying to exploit some misreading of/unupdated error in the rules.

It’s not a nebulous hypothetical. I don’t experience problems where the game comes down to headbutting over rules.