D&D (2024) New Jeremy Crawford Interviews

[Micah Sweet]

Sure, I’ll deal with it when it shows up at my table.

Optimizers will optimize the fun out of the game as always.

And yes, I do find it silly to believe all a paladin does is smiting.

I see no reason to assume the 2014 paladin player isn't having fun nova-ing monsters with smite.

 

[mamba]

I am clearly talking about a dispute between DM and player here. The DM, regardless of the rule legitimacy of their reasons, is telling the player to accept a nerf. If the player liked the old paladin why should they just roll over on that?

because the group moved to the 2024 rules. There is no discussion to be had, if WotC errataed this then there would not be a discussion either

If a player absolutely insisted then I would have them stay completely with the 2014 ruleset, no weapon masteries, none of the other tweaks. Not sure they would actually be any better off than the 2024 paladin, they certainly would be a lot less flexible

 

[Micah Sweet]

because the group moved to the 2024 rules. There is no discussion to be had, if WotC errataed this then there would not be a discussion either

You think every 4e table used the hundreds of changes in that editions "Elminster's Complete Errata Handbook"? "Because WotC doesn't want you to" isn't a good enough reason to me not to mix and match as the table sees fit.

 

[Xamnam]

You're not the paladin player. They have every right to feel differently, especially since all the other classes are getting cool stuff and one of theirs is being taken away. If this were 6e it would be different; new world order and all that. But this is presented as an "update" to the existing rules that actively makes their PC less powerful. In my experience most players are against that.

I'm a current paladin player, and I will push to use the new rules, because I think the new design is better, and have always felt that Divine Smite was off in its execution. Knowing that that power ceiling will drop does nothing to keep me away from it, especially when more than balanced by all the buffs to other components of the class.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I'm a current paladin player, and I will push to use the new rules, because I think the new design is better, and have always felt that Divine Smite was off in its execution. Knowing that that power ceiling will drop does nothing to keep me away from it, especially when more than balanced by all the buffs to other components of the class.

Good for you. Do you think other 2014 paladin players should fall in line behind you?

 

[Xamnam]

Good for you. Do you think other 2014 paladin players should fall in line behind you?

No, obviously? But I think lots will share either my reasoning, or the end result for different reasons (wanting to be on the current edition, never played a 2014 paladin, don't want to deal with split-table-rules hassle), to the point that it's not helpful to claim that people are going to generally argue against it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

No, obviously? But I think lots will share either my reasoning, or the end result for different reasons (wanting to be on the current edition, never played a 2014 paladin, don't want to deal with split-table-rules hassle), to the point that it's not helpful to claim that people are going to generally argue against it.

I never said it was a general issue. I said that people who have a problem with it have a legit grievance.

 

[mamba]

You think every 4e table used the hundreds of changes in that editions "Elminster's Complete Errata Handbook"?

no, but I doubt there was a discussion for every single errata whether to use it or not. Either you used them or you did not

"Because WotC doesn't want you to" isn't a good enough reason to me not to mix and match as the table sees fit.

the table can do whatever they want, but the consequences of that are on them.

WotC said what their recommended approach is and if the player manages to convince or strongarm the DM into giving in over the recommendation that is not on WotC - and even then the Paladin is not more broken than it was for the last 10 years already, and it is not like we had constant complaints then

 

[Xamnam]

I never said it was a general issue. I said that people who have a problem with it have a legit grievance.

You asked

Why wouldn't you play the 2014 one instead?

I answered, with what I feel are very reasonable arguments, as well as additional alternative ones. I don't think they are so esoteric as to be rare among players.

 

[Clint_L]

It is not my position, but allowing for the maximum degree of good faith, I think what some people considered as backwards compatible was essentially switching out the 2014 PHB classes/species with later, improved versions from Tasha's and Xanathar's, plus a healthy smattering of errata for problem rules/spells/features. In other words, greater continuity between the 2014 rules and the 2024 rules.

WotC has not done that. They have revised just about every facet of the game, to the degree that, say, even the 2014 Champion Fighter and the 2024 Champion Fighter are two distinct things now. And so now, a player and/or a group has to make a distinct decision: 2024 rules or 2014 rules? And if the former, are 2014 options still available?

We’ve been running UA characters with one 2014 character and one Tasha’s character and it hasn’t been a problem.