D&D 5E (2024) Rate D&D 2024

[Zardnaar]

Hard to do still testing it out.

Its better than 5.0 imho and I woukd probably rate that dsirly high by D&D edition standards.

BUT 10 years of 5.0 no matter how good 5.5 is the excitement can't be there.

So i would give it +0.5-1 point over 5.0in a vacuum.

Positives.

1. Generally the art.

2. New monster design.

3. Better class design. Would play 8/12 classes 1-20 vs 4 in 5.0.

4. New encounter building rules are an improvement.

Negatives.

1. Update of 5.0 monsters not so great vs 5.5 exclusive ones.

2. Lots of power creep. Worse than Tashas.

3. Complexity. More complex than 5.0. Makes DM life harder.

4. Chunky. Weighs a lot.

5. Bit to polished.
So overall its probably the best modern D&D. Probably the best one yet unless you like simple (B/X is best for that imho).

Complexity not as bad as 3.5 or 4E. If you pull out those books they have not aged well.

So i think the genesis of 6E is in there somewhere. After 10 years though you kinda get sick of 5E and its more of the same. Its hard to get excited about an edition. The flaws of 5E are still there eg HP inflation, weak defenses, weak monsters vs PC power they're glorified sacks of HP.

So best modern edition yet imho (go reread 3.x or 4E and get back to me). Playstyles still being worked out as im running it RAW and encounter design budget means more monsters and/or tougher ones of 2014.

We had level 6 Players breeze though a level 9 5.0 dungeon using 2024 monsters.

In a vacuum its probably a 9 so I'll give it that. Outside a vacuum though probably a 6 or 7 even though its better than 5.0 that I woukd rate higher.

After running sone AD&D modules this year and rereading a bit of 3.X, 4E, Pathfinder etc its the best modern edition right here right now. Excitement just not there though.

5.5 9
5.0 (peak) 8.5 (post tashas 8.0)
B/X 8.5 (if you like simple)
2E 8.0 (let down by AD&D base, great innovation)
BECMI 7.5 (rules cyclopedia)
3.5 7 (great concepts, executions off)
3.0 5 (aged very badly)
1E 5.0 (good modules, rules suck, book keeping the treasure)
4E (playstyle don't like it, unplayable later levels unless you like grind)
OD&D 3 (barely playable)

 

[Adamant]

I voted 7 (purely from a player's perspective rather than a DM's) because 7.5 wasn't an option. It would have been an 8 or even 9 if they hadn't gone totally backward on some areas of design. Rangers are so clunky with bonus actions that the PHB Beast Master doesn't even work properly (not to mention some older subclasses like Horizon Walker), and the new Background system is nice in theory, but way too limited unless you make a custom one (which was moved to the DMG for some weird reason). Hiding rules also got more confusing, and removing the ability to move between attacks for anything other than the Attack action (even if very few people noticed the change) is annoying. I'm also not a fan of Halflings (which I like a lot in 2014) being pigeonholed into the sneaky roles with hiding behind allies. Why not give a choice like in 2014? Tieflings are also not so interesting, but that was the case in 2014 as well.

Overall I feel like post-Tasha's 2014 5e is better, but not by much (I'd probably rate it an 8). Many aspects of 2024 are better but a couple (Ranger, PHB Backgrounds) are so much worse it's nearly impossible to use them.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Yeah, I'm with @Whizbang Dustyboots. I think it's too early for me to give it a one to ten. I also agree with @TheSword - the books are the best they've been. But that sure as heck doesn't mean that they're perfect. IDK, if I had to, I'd maybe say 7 or 8? But I will always come back to: Compared to What?

 

[Reynard]

But I will always come back to: Compared to What?

I don't think rating a thing needs to be in comparison to anything else. I liked Superman 2025. Great fun movie. I don't need to rate it in comparison to any of the other Superman things.

 

[CleverNickName]

Well I'm not playing with the updated 2024 rules at the moment, and we have no plans to adopt them in the future, so I voted "no opinion."

But if you twisted my arm and demanded me to give my opinion, I'd say "five out of ten." There are a few things that I would have to house-rule away (damage on a miss, for example) if we were to ever adopt them, but that's been true with every single book I've ever bought, from any publisher--there is no such thing as a "perfect" set of rules IMO. Honestly the cost is what keeps my gaming group from adopting the 2024 updated rules at the moment.

 

[CleverNickName]

Huh. I didn't expect to be the only "no opinion" vote. Y'all are an opinionated bunch today.

 

[Zardnaar]

Yeah, I'm with @Whizbang Dustyboots. I think it's too early for me to give it a one to ten. I also agree with @TheSword - the books are the best they've been. But that sure as heck doesn't mean that they're perfect. IDK, if I had to, I'd maybe say 7 or 8? But I will always come back to: Compared to What?

I compared PHB to PHB.
. 5E golden age imho was 2016-19. Strahd, Xanathars, Eberron, Tomb of Annihilation, Ghosts of Saltmarsh etc.

5.5 needs to have a few hits sooner rather than later imho.
I've also played some older material recently so not relying on nostalgia or Nandela memories.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Y'all are an opinionated bunch today.

The ENWorld motto.

 

[CleverNickName]

There are a few things that I would have to house-rule away (damage on a miss, for example) if we were to ever adopt them, but that's been true with every single book I've ever bought, from any publisher--there is no such thing as a "perfect" set of rules IMO. Honestly the cost is what keeps my gaming group from adopting the 2024 updated rules at the moment.

Spoiler: I stand corrected.

 

[SkidAce]

I misunderstood and thought it was a 5e overall poll. My bad.