D&D (2024) New Jeremy Crawford Interviews

[Micah Sweet]

Because you are wrong?

Every subclass got buffed
Lay on Hands got buffed
Weapon Mastery is a Buff
Channel Divinity and all of its uses got buffed
Every Smite Spell got buffed
Getting 1st level spells at level 1 is a buff
Getting access to all Fighting styles is a buff
Free Prepared spells like Find Steed is a buff
There official ability to use most of their smites and radiant strikes with unarmed attacks is a buff

I seriously struggle to find a single nerf in the entire paladin class EXCEPT for Divine Smite, which is now in line with other smite spells.

And, if you look at buffs across the board, and a nerf to Divine Smite, and say the entire Paladin is a straight nerf? Then Divine Smite NEEDED to be nerfed, because it is literally overshadowing every other aspect of the entire paladin class.

I've been corrected on this. It definitely sounds like a legit choice to me, unlike all the other classes.

 

[mamba]

Maybe, but I'm not going to forget that "D&D is undermonetized" comment any time soon. Given how successful the game was at that point, there's no non-greed way to look at that.

I do not think that comment was about D&D the TTRPG and printed books, but about their VTT, novels, computer games, movies, and merchandise

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Maybe, but I'm not going to forget that "D&D is undermonetized" comment any time soon. Given how successful the game was at that point, there's no non-greed way to look at that.

It is no computer game. The brand is strong. So yeah, it WAS undermometized back then. BG3 might have changed that.

And then it was a pitch for investors. Where you talk such nonsense.

 

[Chaosmancer]

And what if your player insists on playing the 2014 paladin?

I don't say that as in a gotchya. I say that because I can already see the bot filled threads on Reddit having this exact question: "My player insists that WotC said you could mix and match, so now he is playing the broken 2014 paladin with a touch of warlock, and it's throwing encounters way off. What do I do?"

And then we'll see a bunch of people mention session zero and to communicate. Then the DM will respond with, "I didn't think it would matter, as WotC said we could mix and match. So it's only become a problem now that they are level 8."

What if your player is playing a 2014 Paladin with Warlock now? It is literally the exact same issue, with the exact same solutions.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I do not think that comment was about D&D the TTRPG and printed books, but about their VTT, novels, computer games, movies, and merchandise

Probably not specifically no. But it is indicative of an attitude towards the property that I have no reason to believe won't infect every aspect of it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It is no computer game. The brand is strong. So yeah, it WAS undermometized back then. BG3 might have changed that.

And then it was a pitch for investors. Where you talk such nonsense.

Have they not been pushing to monetize the brand heavily since that meeting? Doesn't sound like nonsense to me. It sounds like a business philosophy.

 

[mamba]

Probably not specifically no. But it is indicative of an attitude towards the property that I have no reason to believe won't infect every aspect of it.

the attitude of looking for ways to make more money? Again, that sounds like something all companies do

 

[UngeheuerLich]

That is quite insulting. As if people can't think for themselves.

And to add something:

Never forget this episode...
https://www.southpark.de/en/episodes/13y790/south-park-gnomes-season-2-ep-17

Only because something is popular does not mean it is bad.

 

[Micah Sweet]

the attitude of looking for ways to make more money? Again, that sounds like something all companies do

When you are as successful with your flagship products as WotC was at the time, it is a good opportunity to look into other priorities as a company rather than looking for ways to further monetize it. Diversification is a good example of something they could have chosen to do.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Have they not been pushing to monetize the brand heavily since that meeting? Doesn't sound like nonsense to me. It sounds like a business philosophy.

Please elaborate. I have forgotten the exact timeline.