D&D 5E Not upgrading? What version of D&D 5e are you sticking with?

[Distracted DM]

I agree that Tasha's an imperfect but good line. I'd fall into the pre-Tasha's group. There were a couple things in Xanathar's that, in hindsight, I did not care for (Toll the Dead) but overall I thought it was a necessary and quality addition to the game since it added a bunch of rules for things that I wanted rules for, like downtime and additional tool uses (btw don't sleep on the tool uses, check them out!).

I really despise Tasha's for the IMO poor design. I still can't believe the Twilight cleric made it out of the gate like that.

 

[Remathilis]

Stuff like that. I'll guess I'll wait and see if that happens or not. Usually my predictions turn out to be right, but on this I don't have a confident prediction, so I'll have to see.

This may be tipping my hand, but the results are starting to bear out my suspicions: the players who were predisposed to playing 5.1 (that is, those who liked the changes Tasha harbingered) are the ones who will move on to other, even more different versions (like A5E or 2024). Those who will stick to vanilla 5e will revert to a pre Tasha version.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

I like some options in Tasha’s…but not floating ASIs.

We don’t use mordenkainen’s guide either.

Basically Tasha’s is ok with exceptions.

Edit: twilight cleric is a bit much. Toll of the dead is a bit much. But I trust my friends so…

 

[Micah Sweet]

This may be tipping my hand, but the results are starting to bear out my suspicions: the players who were predisposed to playing 5.1 (that is, those who liked the changes Tasha harbingered) are the ones who will move on to other, even more different versions (like A5E or 2024). Those who will stick to vanilla 5e will revert to a pre Tasha version.

To me, the changes that began in earnest with Tasha's and have continued into 5.5 are quite different from the changes in A5e. Different goals, certainly.

 

[ezo]

This may be tipping my hand, but the results are starting to bear out my suspicions: the players who were predisposed to playing 5.1 (that is, those who liked the changes Tasha harbingered) are the ones who will move on to other, even more different versions (like A5E or 2024). Those who will stick to vanilla 5e will revert to a pre Tasha version.

It would certainly be my suspicion as well. Tasha's moved some things in a better direction for some players. For example, most people like the Tasha's Ranger over the 2014 Ranger. I find the 2014 Ranger broader and more fulfilling in general--which the class should be IMO--but the 2014 design lacked certain things:

1. Damage to favored foes. This is based on the giant-class opponents from AD&D and all you have to do is add proficiency bonus to damage. Done.

2. "Being better" in favored terrains-- grant advantage to all ability checks, not double proficiency bonus just to INT and WIS. A ranger should be better at climbing, swimming, hiding, etc. in favored terrains IMO but without resorting to "expertise".

3. Move features to come sooner, like Vanish.

Ranger player: Hey, I can Hide as a bonus action now that I've reached 14th level!
Rogue player: HA-HA-HA! Are you kidding? I've been able to do that since 2nd! falls on floor laughing

4. Advance spell progression to match full-casters, but with fewer spell slots. (Not just Rangers)

Ranger player: Yes! Tier 4 baby! Steel Wind Strike... here I come!!!
Wizard player: (Looks dumbfounded) Um... my bladesinger's been doing that since 9th level... and you just figured out how?
Paladin player: Sigh... don't feel bad, Ranger Player, that is how I felt about my Find Greater Steed when I reached 13th, until that stupid Bard Player reminded me how they summoned one back at 10th level with his stupid (air quotes) "magical secrets".
Bard player: (laughing) Yeah, that was great!

Frankly, it is moronic design IMO.

5. A better capstone feature: Foe Slayer sucks incredibly and I can't believe it didn't get an update.

So, Tasha's "fixed" the Ranger, but not how I would have done it, so I can't really enjoy using it.

For most of us, I think also keeping racial ASIs and not allowing any custom race (jumps up with hands in the air oh, me, me, me... pick me!) with darkvision.

 

[the Jester]

I"m not a fan of a lot of the changes since, and including, Tasha's: floating ASIs, the massive amount of power creep, etc. I am likely to stick to the 2014 rules, when I am not running my own homebrew system. But I'm also likely to try out the 2024 stuff and see how it sits with me.

I don't think increased damage across the board for cantrips is a good thing, nor do I think that increased healing capacity is good, nor do I think that a lot of the changes that will slow down the game are great. I do think there's room for martials to get some quality of life improvements, but casters did NOT need them- the whole point of giving martials more is to make up some of the difference between spellcasters and non-spellcasters. But all that is on paper analysis, not from trying it out in play.

 

[CellarHeroes]

Just sticking with my 2014 core...PHB, DMG, MM. I still haven't seen or heard anything about 2024 that I feel is an improvement.

 

[jayoungr]

I think the only thing I use from Tasha's is steady aim for rogues. And I wouldn't fuss if a player wanted to use the floating ASIs, but I don't think anyone has in the groups I run for. Apart from that, it's all pre-Tasha rules.

 

[Remathilis]

To me, the changes that began in earnest with Tasha's and have continued into 5.5 are quite different from the changes in A5e. Different goals, certainly.

Yeah, I'm not saying the reasons are the same, just those who would be the type to use Tasha changes are more likely to keep moving on rather than just stop after them.

 

[Lakesidefantasy]

I stopped collecting after Tasha's. That's about the time that things had gotten real political in the community. I now don't feel comfortable playing. I feel like I'm walking on eggshells, and am always concerned that I may hurt someone and make them mad at me. I have feelings too and I'm scared.