D&D 5E (2024) New Jeremy Crawford Interviews

[AnsaArlasta]

I'm very interested to see how the ranger will perform in real gameplay

 

[Alzrius]

I can answer them on Sage Advice btw - either burn it to the ground and pretend it never happened, don't do it in future, or actually expend real effort on properly considering and answering questions with more than one person being involved in answering each and more reasoning being given for their answers. Pick a lane. Giving half-arsed, frankly obviously flippant answers which often make problems worse, and rules messier, is just not helpful, and that was an awful lot of the previous Sage Advice answers.

Glad someone else is saying this. I saw how many people kept treating 5E's Sage Advice with a lot more seriousness than it seemed to warrant, and I kept wondering if it was just me.

 

[Aldarc]

I'm very interested to see how the ranger will perform in real gameplay

Without investing in a high Charisma and the Perform skill, probably not that well.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Glad someone else is saying this. I saw how many people kept treating 5E's Sage Advice with a lot more seriousness than it seemed to warrant, and I kept wondering if it was just me.

I dunno I feel like people were over-serious for like 3-4 years then literally every single person here who'd read any Sage Advice had seen enough flippant or prima-facie ridiculous/silly answers that pretty much everyone stopped taking it seriously, on ENworld at least. I do think they still take them too seriously on the subreddit though, especially as newer players/DMs tend to think they're more "holy writ" rather than dashed-off stuff.

Certainly it's basically junk info. The vast bulk of the answers aren't considered or thoughtful or even really helpful. They get a whole bunch of false gravitas and meaning by being collected together in PDFs, too. Like, literally, if they were just screenshots of Tweets, it'd be so much more honest, and people would understand the vibe better.

 

[Argyle King]

What mechanical mess...? Paladins were half-casters already, they are half-casters now. Why make a special rule that an ability that uses Spell Slots acts juat like a Spell, but not make it a Spell...?

Warlocks are spellcasters, yet function different.

Monks can produce spell-like effects.

Clerics have channel divinity.

Etc, etc.

Those classes (especially the warlock) appear to be well liked, so there are examples of successfully doing things differently with mechanics to produce a more-unique aesthetic and class identity.

My suggestion was to move the paladin further away from traditional D&D spell slots. Doing so could have achieved better balance (a 2024 design goal) while also retaining more of a unique paladin style (which would better satisfy those wanting something more similar to the 2014 paladin and less similar to a full caster).

 

[TiQuinn]

I can answer them on Sage Advice btw - either burn it to the ground and pretend it never happened, don't do it in future, or actually expend real effort on properly considering and answering questions with more than one person being involved in answering each and more reasoning being given for their answers. Pick a lane. Giving half-arsed, frankly obviously flippant answers which often make problems worse, and rules messier, is just not helpful, and that was an awful lot of the previous Sage Advice answers.

Spitting some righteous fire here. Sage advice should’ve been a way to get some advance info on errata out there and answer common questions officially, and a means for them to see what wasn’t working well. Not become an unofficial soapbox for Crawford to fire off terse, unhelpful remarks.

 

[mellored]

My suggestion was to move the paladin further away from traditional D&D spell slots. Doing so could have achieved better balance (a 2024 design goal) while also retaining more of a unique paladin style (which would better satisfy those wanting something more similar to the 2014 paladin and less similar to a full caster).

That would require a rewrite, not just a modification. So maybe for 6e.

But I agree more variation would be nicer.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Spitting some righteous fire here. Sage advice should’ve been a way to get some advance info on errata out there and answer common questions officially, and a means for them to see what wasn’t working well. Not become an unofficial soapbox for Crawford to fire off terse, unhelpful remarks.

Yeah I don't really mean to "spit fire" here lol, it's just like, such an obviously poorly-done deal that it's hard to not hit the easy (and I think correct) criticisms. They just need to pick a lane. Either take it seriously, or don't do it at all.

I do think even if they stop Sage Advice, obviously 2024 should still have errata and clarifications - but they shouldn't like, one guy's opinion, they should official WotC rulings, and sure you can apply them or not, but here's WotC's official take.

An alternative to stopping it entirely would be to use the exist "brand name" - i.e. Sage Advice - for something more productive, like an official WotC series on DMing advice, going above and beyond the DMG.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I can answer them on Sage Advice btw - either burn it to the ground and pretend it never happened, don't do it in future, or actually expend real effort on properly considering and answering questions with more than one person being involved in answering each and more reasoning being given for their answers. Pick a lane. Giving half-arsed, frankly obviously flippant answers which often make problems worse, and rules messier, is just not helpful, and that was an awful lot of the previous Sage Advice answers.

The latter would be lovely. Unfortunately, this is how 5e was designed, so this is how 5e will be explained. Refusing to pick lanes defines 5e.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The latter would be lovely. Unfortunately, this is how 5e was designed, so this is how 5e will be explained. Refusing to pick lanes defines 5e.

Ain't that the truth! That really is what 5e is all about. The funny thing is, being honest about that stance in public would be picking a lane, so it is in their design intent to prevaricate about whether or not they're prevaricating.