D&D (2024) Just realized Sentinel is heavily nerfed! No longer works with PAM, no longer works on most enemies who Disengage.

[pukunui]

Honestly, I think JC's comments should be read in the context that he's assuming use of the 2024 rules as the baseline and is explaining how to incorporate older 5e elements that they haven't officially updated yet.

I'm not aware of any official WotC statement along the lines of "Thou shalt not mix-and-match 2014 and 2024 content as you see fit."

 

[ECMO3]

Well if he said that he’s wrong, because I can.

Sure, you can do anything you want in your game.

 

[ECMO3]

Honestly, I think JC's comments should be read in the context that he's assuming use of the 2024 rules as the baseline and is explaining how to incorporate older 5e elements that they haven't officially updated yet.

I'm not aware of any official WotC statement along the lines of "Thou shalt not mix-and-match 2014 and 2024 content as you see fit."

That is not the only time they said it. I agree that the context was using the 2024 rules. I think he is simply explaining how to do it and how it is intended to work.

 

[FrogReaver]

I'm sure the PAM attack not being an opportunity attack was intentional, but the anti-disengange function of Sentinel not working with reach weapons seems like another victim of 5.5s sloppy editing for "brevity".

It never did. I just checked 2014 rules and the 5ft requirement for OA's on a Disengage action is there as well. I don't know that anyone ever actually played it that way though?

I don't understand what you are saying. Sentinel no longer lets you attack enemies who take the disengage action except when they take that action and only if they take it when within 5 feet.

The within 5ft of you was in my 2014 PHB. So apparently that part never worked with reach weapons.

You are right that the enemy can disengage before entering your reach and will no longer take an OA in 2024. They would have in 2014. But we also have push mastery on Pikes. So even if an disengages and attempts to run by you to allies that means the enemy is doing nothing that turn. Next turn you can go Push it off the Ally with your Pike's Push Mastery. Now the enemy can't attack your ally and can't disengage without taking an OA. Since you also likely have higher accuracy in 2024 then it's much more likely you stop the enemy when the Sentinel attack does occur.

The likely higher accuracy in 2024 alone makes sentinel by itself way more useful. Now instead of a 60% chance or so to stop an enemy you have a 84% chance to stop an enemy trying to move past you.

 

[pukunui]

That is not the only time they said it. I agree that the context was using the 2024 rules. I think he is simply explaining how to do it and how it is intended to work.

Yes, with the assumption that the reader / listener intends to use the 2024 rules as their baseline. It's probably advice aimed at new DMs who are just getting into the game with the 2024 revision. "Default to the 2024 rules and only use 2014 stuff that hasn't been updated yet" is solid advice for beginners. Think of it as being the DM equivalent to the new player friendly recommendations in the PHB (e.g. "You know two cantrips of your choice from the Druid spell list. Druidcraft and Produce Flame are recommended.")

More experienced DMs know that mixing and matching both rulesets isn't going to cause any major problems. It's not like WotC is gonna send the Pinkertons to your door for using the 2014 version of the Sentinel feat in your otherwise 2024 game.

 

[ECMO3]

So even if an disengages and attempts to run by you to allies that means the enemy is doing nothing that turn.

No that is not true, usually it was done with a bonus action or haste or action surge or they had an aura up (before an aura was technically a thing) or it was to get positioning.

Most of the time disengaged is used in games I play as an action or bonus action the intent is to move past multiple enemies, in the past Sentinel would stop that (literally) if one of those PCs had it. Now it will only be stopped if he is standing next to the PC that has it when he takes the action.

The likely higher accuracy in 2024 alone makes sentinel by itself way more useful. Now instead of a 60% chance or so to stop an enemy you have a 84% chance to stop an enemy trying to move past you.

I don't see this in play. Generally the accuracy is the same except for weapon masteries as both proficiency bonus and ability bonus are the same.

When you consider masteries Vex gives a much higher accuracy both off turn and in turn against the guy you are attacking. Topple gives a little bit higher accuracy in turn when combined with extra attack (with other allies often suffering disadvantage). I don't see where the other boost to accuracy is coming until level 19 when Epic feats come online.

Most of the time Sentinel would be used though the enemy is not prone when it would otherwise provoke and it is usually not an enemy you attacked last turn so Vex would not help.

 

[ECMO3]

Yes, with the assumption that the reader / listener intends to use the 2024 rules as their baseline. It's probably advice aimed at new DMs who are just getting into the game with the 2024 revision. "Default to the 2024 rules and only use 2014 stuff that hasn't been updated yet" is solid advice for beginners. Think of it as being the DM equivalent to the new player friendly recommendations in the PHB (e.g. "You know two cantrips of your choice from the Druid spell list. Druidcraft and Produce Flame are recommended.")

More experienced DMs know that mixing and matching both rulesets isn't going to cause any major problems. It's not like WotC is gonna send the Pinkertons to your door for using the 2014 version of the Sentinel feat in your otherwise 2024 game.

I don't know I am a pretty experienced DM and so are many of the DMs I play with and those who switched to 2024 are using that guideline.

Based on my experience, I think as a starting point it is solid advice period, certainly any table can play with any variations they want. Just like a table can decide to ban shield or that Fireball should be 6d6 instead of 8d6 or change any of the actual written rules.

You say there is not a problem with mixing and matching for experienced DMs, but we have plenty of people on this board complaining about the backwards compatibility not working well in their games. Also some of the old rules that were replaced just flat won't work with the new 2024 design. If you run a chaotic "rule in the moment" style game I think mixing and matching works better. When I DM though I like to set a baseline on expectations and rules in session 0 and if you are mixing and matching that is a heck of a lot of rules to cover. It is a lot easier, simpler and more elegant to just say 2024 rules trump anything also in 2014 .... then let's make these specific exceptions for this particular campaign.

Here are some examples:

In a game I play in one of the players really liked the old 2014 version of Inflict Wounds. Mostly because he liked to play a Gish Deatg Cleric and use Hold Person and follow it with a 5th level or so Inflict Wounds rolled with advantage for 14d10+25 on a hit. He did not like the new Inflict Wounds and said so in session 0. So we house ruled it, both the old and new version exist but they are separate spells and you prepare one or the other (or use 2 preparation slots and prepare both). It is a lot easier to set a baseline and then make adjustments IME.

In another game based on my first 2024 game, I did not like the way the new Mage Slayer Feat or Indomitable worked, so as DM in session 0 for a 2024 game I started recently I said those two things used 2014 rules. In the first campaign we played them all the way to the end as written in 2024, but when I DMed after that experience I changed it up. This was session 0 so players knew that was the deal.

 

[Blue]

We were told repeatedly by WOTC that if something is reprinted/changed you should only use the new reprinted version. I realize that level of detail is lost to many (most?) and it also is not written in the 2024 rulebooks like it should be.

If you follow this though it is highly compatible for example:

2014 Wizard - don't use has been reprinted
2014 Illusion subclass - don't use has been reprinted
2014 Enchantment subclass - Can use with 2024 Wizard class and works well

This is a pretty simple and elegant solution, it is easy to implement and if you follow this guideline it works very well IME. It is far easier than making a list of 100 things you are going to use from 2014 and 100 things you aren't going to use.

Telling you which to use doesn't address the point you were replying to, which is about rules traps. Things of the same name but significantly different results. Not "oh, this adds proficiency instead of Wisdom" but "Oh, they took out the main combo you see for this feat (PAM+Sentinel) so it doesn't work anymore".

Now, I already agreed that the players should read, but give a little credit to inertia that if something does something significantly different then perhaps renaming it instead is the right choice. Wizards did this with some spells, so we know they see that as a valid option and one they were willing to implement.

 

[FrogReaver]

No that is not true, usually it was done with a bonus action or haste or action surge or they had an aura up (before an aura was technically a thing) or it was to get positioning.

That's fair. I would consider all of those things to be extremely rare for enemies. But sure, if they have them that is correct.

Most of the time disengaged is used in games I play as an action or bonus action the intent is to move past multiple enemies, in the past Sentinel would stop that (literally) if one of those PCs had it. Now it will only be stopped if he is standing next to the PC that has it when he takes the action.

It didn't work that way in 2014 either. As an example: An enemy is 15ft away. You have a reach weapon and sentinel. The enemy disengages and moves such that he enters your 10ft reach but never comes any closer to you and then leaves your reach - in 2014 he wouldn't take an OA when he left your reach either. He would have had to move within 5ft of you in 2014 before you would get the OA in this scenario.

It's still worse in 2024, but there was some major fiddliness with it and reach weapons in 2014 as well.

I don't see this in play. Generally the accuracy is the same except for weapon masteries as both proficiency bonus and ability bonus are the same.

Between vex, reckless attack carrying over to the start of your next turn now, default rogue getting steady aim, vengance Paladins advantage ability being movable to new enemies when yours dies and a feat that gives inspiration to allies for rerolls and no -5/+10's to worry about, accuracy tends to be much higher. Then you still have things like precision attack, bardic inspiration, bless, advantage granting debufss with typically increased low level spell casts (magic initiate, etc). If I really wanted to make use of Sentinel in 2024 I would pick one of the accuracy increasing options to help ensure it lands.

When you consider masteries Vex gives a much higher accuracy both off turn and in turn against the guy you are attacking. Topple gives a little bit higher accuracy in turn when combined with extra attack (with other allies often suffering disadvantage). I don't see where the other boost to accuracy is coming until level 19 when Epic feats come online.

I never look to level 19.

Most of the time Sentinel would be used though the enemy is not prone when it would otherwise provoke

I agree with this.

and it is usually not an enemy you attacked last turn so Vex would not help.

Your game must be different than mine in this respect.

 

[Blue]

They've been quite clear on what they meant. The only way to not have any difference would have been to not make any change.

That's a mighty leap of putting words in my mouth. I explicitly called out just rules traps, and you are saying that I would only be satisfied with no changes at all between 2014 and 2024. That's a fairly huge difference, and I ask you not to twist what I said.

We have some spells that Wizards renamed. Like Befuddlement instead of Feeblemind. It doesn't reduce Int or Charisma to 1, still allows communication, etc. It's clear from the renaming that there are large differences between what Feeblemind did and what Befuddlement does.

Here we have the most common use (PAM+Sentinel) completely nerfed, without a name change. Yes, players should read but there's some expectations that something will act somewhat the same. Maybe something grants uses per long rest instead of short rest, or Proficiency modifier instead of an ability score. Changes, but keeping expected functionality intact. If they want it to act differently, do like they have already done with the 2024 rules and rename.