D&D (2024) Is anyone going to use the new 2024 backgrounds?

Acting like any video or written opinion only exists for clicks is ridiculous.


Why does anyone keep fighting for something they believe in? Why you do you keep posting? Silly question.

In order to make change happen, something needs to be spoken out against. By discussing what is wrong with a product, people start to have more reason to explore other options, instead of lining up like lemmings to buy and use the 5.5E books as if that's the only option. If a product starts trending downwards, and other similar products upward, then a company is incentivized to do something about it. Like what happened with trash 4th edition.
So you think people who liked 4e and the changes in 5.5 are too stupid to make an informed decision?

I have not read a single post of you that made me suddenly realize that the changes are bad and that there is a better product out there.

The only things I see in your post are baseless claims.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Yes, Magic Initiate is OP for an origin feat, but it's not a big deal. The other two are good, but not over the top. Either way most full "half feats" would work fine as origin feats if you ditch the ASI.
I think one cantrip and one slot 1 spell per day would be fine. Say good cantrips like Minor Illusion is worth about 2½ points and a slot 1 per day is about 1½ points. It works out to be about the 4 points that are a solid half-feat.
 

I think one cantrip and one slot 1 spell per day would be fine. Say good cantrips like Minor Illusion is worth about 2½ points and a slot 1 per day is about 1½ points. It works out to be about the 4 points that are a solid half-feat.

What really buffs magic initiate in the new version is being able to use spell slots with it.

If Shield is unchanged (a big if, but that is what the tea leaves are telling me), then Magic Initiate with the Shield spell will be awesome on Cleric, Druid, Ranger or most Paladin builds. Like really awesome.

4th level Paladin with Warcaster and Defense could rock a 26 AC with shield without multiclassing at all.

Another huge boon is being able to change the spell and cantrips for the feat every time you level.
 


What really buffs magic initiate in the new version is being able to use spell slots with it.
For me, spell slots are a separate resource and at low levels a precious resource. So allowing a player to spend that resource doesnt really affect the balance of the feat in itself. Spending slots is a normal part of spells and caster classes. A Champion Fighter wouldnt benefit from the permission to use slots, for example.


For a similar reason I feel every character should be allowed to attempt to cast a magic ritual, using a pertinent skill check. Rituals are their own design space, separate from combat spells. Failing the skill check means the ritual fails. (To seriously fail a ritual means something went horribly wrong.) Casters can spend a slot to guarantee a success, but most would want to save their slots for combat, and risk a skill check for the ritual. Each ritual has its own requirements and its own effects, and really can be for anything − except combat since a ritual should typically take 10 minutes to an hour to perform.


If Shield is unchanged (a big if, but that is what the tea leaves are telling me), then Magic Initiate with the Shield spell will be awesome on Cleric, Druid, Ranger or most Paladin builds. Like really awesome. 4th level Paladin with Warcaster and Defense could rock a 26 AC with shield without multiclassing at all.
I agree Shield is a big deal, but the problem is the description of a specific spell.


Another huge boon is being able to change the spell and cantrips for the feat every time you level.
Again, this is resource management. Swapping in a new spell, means losing access to the previous spell. So the overall balance remains in dynamic equilibrium.

Also swapping spells is a mercy, since many spells are subpar, and even a spell that might have been good turns out to be less good in the assumptions of the current campaign one finds oneself in. Swaps are part of balance in this sense as well.
 

Show me a single negative reaction video on YouTube about D&D 2024 that isn't there for Clicks
Trying to rectify any bad review in your head with it being for clicks is just ignorance.

Why are there THOUSANDS of comments across various platforms that have similar opinions, hmm?

Do you imagine for a moment if you persuade me to dislike something I currently like, that I have the ability to make it different for you?
It's not about you. But clearly you think it is. There are tons of people reading. Who knows how many might be interested in trying other things out, or decide not to purchase 5.5, because of seeing commentary about why it's flawed and/or not worth the expense.

Now you're just insulting your peers who dissent from your view. We're not lemmings for liking something you dislike any more than you are a lemming for liking those other options that you like.

Nope, that's not it. You don't seem to understand the power of branding. There are millions of people out there who are never even aware of other products. D&D is what they see on the shelves at the game store, it's what they hear about. Thus, that's all they ever play, because it's the known thing, it's what everyone around them is doing. For the sake of ALL these people, and the entire genre, I want the best game out there. It won't happen if complacency reigns. I've played D&D since I was a kid and can only imagine how much better sessions would have been with a better ruleset (or how much worse, if some of my groups had just followed the rules exactly, which is the situation some people will be stuck in).
 

Trying to rectify any bad review in your head with it being for clicks is just ignorance.

Why are there THOUSANDS of comments across various platforms that have similar opinions, hmm?
Platforms are self selecting. I have started to read reddit comments and the hyperbole and jumping to conclzsion without substantial info is really strong there. And rants are upvoted there. Reasonable comments are voted down.
It is just how it works.
It's not about you. But clearly you think it is. There are tons of people reading. Who knows how many might be interested in trying other things out, or decide not to purchase 5.5, because of seeing commentary about why it's flawed and/or not worth the expense.
Why your personal opinion is that it is flawed. It certainly is not perfect.
Please show me your perfect product and I am all in.
Nope, that's not it. You don't seem to understand the power of branding. There are millions of people out there who are never even aware of other products. D&D is what they see on the shelves at the game store, it's what they hear about. Thus, that's all they ever play, because it's the known thing, it's what everyone around them is doing. For the sake of ALL these people, and the entire genre, I want the best game out there.
You should either create it yourself or at least take part in playtests. As others said: you are 1.5 years too late.
It won't happen if complacency reigns. I've played D&D since I was a kid and can only imagine how much better sessions would have been with a better ruleset (or how much worse, if some of my groups had just followed the rules exactly, which is the situation some people will be stuck in).
I have seen this sentiment a lot. People house rule because they think their rule is better and make the game worse. And then complain that the rules are bad.

I have just played monopoly by the book. And it was actually a better game.
 

The new Lucky is not the same as the old Lucky and appears far weaker. From the text you choose to give a roll advantage or disadvantage and this means you would decide before the roll. This is fundamentally different and WAY less powerful than forcing a reroll on something that is already a failure or a success .... or a critical.
I like this version a lot more. I think the 2014 is both overpowered and bad for the narrative aspect of the game.
 

Unfortunately true. Very glad I found the Level Up lifeboat.
I think it’s very sad that so many people seem to feel wedded to the output of a single company. When I started playing in the early 80s there were a whole bunch of different RPGs, and people wear generally happy to give them a try. And there was lots of 3rd party stuff produced for D&D and other games. And no one worried who the publisher was. And magazines like White Dwarf were not locked into a particular game,

If there is one idea that’s pretty much central to capitalism, it’s that a lack of competition is bad for everyone.
 


Trending content

Remove ads

Top