D&D General Reification versus ludification in 5E/6E

[Maxperson]

The fact that we're not told what the CR of a character built by PC rules is does make it difficult to employ one as an antagonist, however. If I eyeball it, a 1st-level Fighter might be equal to a CR 1/4, but their AC would be quite high. Other classes get a bit stranger- like a 1st-level Wizard would be closer to a CR 1/8.

But things rapidly get out of hand. The CR 5 Gladiator has 100 hit points and 3 attacks per round, making them more like an 11th-level Fighter. So I think this way of building NPC's is best used for ones that are either allies or won't see combat.

I think the build the NPC like a PC rules were intended more for NPCs that adventure with the party. If I have 3 players and they need a 4th PHB built character to really shine, since the game is balanced around 4, I can make a Paladin or Cleric NPC to go with them if I want.

My point, though, is that it is RAW for NPCs to be built like PCs, so NPCs as PC classes are a part of the fiction.

 

[Remathilis]

No, I don't believe that's the case. I'm pretty sure that they said we could use the 5e rules instead of the new ones if we want. And they definitely said the 5e classes could adventure with the 5.5e classes in the same game.

It's a mix and match thing. Obviously a game can't use two mutually exclusive rules simultaneously, but the DM is free to pick from either 5e or 5.5e for which valid rule he is going to be using.

What's new in the 2024 Version?
p5
This is the 2024 version of the fifth edition Player's Handbook. If you've read the 2014 version, much of this book will feel familiar, since the fundamental rules of the game are the same. But the book contains many new or redesigned elements, and the versions of things in this book replace versions from older books. Here are highlights:

Of course, you are free to do whatever the hell you want at your table, but the design Philosophy is that newest version trumps older when multiple versions exist. (This was true in 2014; see the three versions of the orc race).

 

[Maxperson]

This will make "what is RAW, really" quite a question for discussions. You might have to set ground rules in the initial posts, lest you get "well, see, in 5e2024 any 5e content (that wasn't updated) is viable for use, so applicable to this discussion!".

Without ground rules in the OP, all the 5e and 5.5e rules are applicable, because in a general discussion about rules, we can't assume that any particular DM/Table won't be using any particular rule from either edition.

You would need a good reason to exclude, though. Like, "I need help coming up with an encounter to challenge my players. I'm only using the 5.5e rules, so please keep your responses confined to 5.5e." You shouldn't exclude the valid 5e rule set just because you don't feel like dealing with it in a general discussion.

 

[James Gasik]

I think the build the NPC like a PC rules were intended more for NPCs that adventure with the party. If I have 3 players and they need a 4th PHB built character to really shine, since the game is balanced around 4, I can make a Paladin or Cleric NPC to go with them if I want.

My point, though, is that it is RAW for NPCs to be built like PCs, so NPCs as PC classes are a part of the fiction.

I mean, that's pretty much true for many campaign settings. Forgotten Realms is lousy with Wizards, it would be hard if nobody was a Wizard. Now if a given NPC has the same abilities as the Wizard class is somewhat up in the air, even if WotC provided a class tag for them.

Of course it gets a little stranger with less defined classes. Wizard and Sorcerer accurately depict what a person is, but referring to someone as a Fighter, Barbarian, or Rogue in-universe might get you funny looks or even a punch in the face, lol.

 

[James Gasik]

Without ground rules in the OP, all the 5e and 5.5e rules are applicable, because in a general discussion about rules, we can't assume that any particular DM/Table won't be using any particular rule from either edition.

You would need a good reason to exclude, though. Like, "I need help coming up with an encounter to challenge my players. I'm only using the 5.5e rules, so please keep your responses confined to 5.5e." You shouldn't exclude the valid 5e rule set just because you don't feel like dealing with it in a general discussion.

I'm just thinking about a recent discussion about martials and casters where someone brought up Bladesingers and immediately someone protested with "there are no Bladesingers in 5e2024"*.

Oh well, not like people will ever run out of things to argue about, lol.

*Outside of UA, at least as of this post.

 

[Maxperson]

What's new in the 2024 Version?
p5
This is the 2024 version of the fifth edition Player's Handbook. If you've read the 2014 version, much of this book will feel familiar, since the fundamental rules of the game are the same. But the book contains many new or redesigned elements, and the versions of things in this book replace versions from older books. Here are highlights:

Of course, you are free to do whatever the hell you want at your table, but the design Philosophy is that newest version trumps older when multiple versions exist. (This was true in 2014; see the three versions of the orc race).

I know I've seen them say differently. Trying to remember where.

 

[Remathilis]

I know I've seen them say differently. Trying to remember where.

The video interviews around the PHB release stated you could run a 2014 made PC alongside a 2024, as long as you are using the 2024 ruleset. A similar statement was made by KP that you could run a 2014 D&D PC in TotV as long as you are using the TotV rules. In both cases, that was not an invitation to pick and choose, only that your old PC would function in the new ruleset (something you could not do moving from 2e to 3e, for example).

 

[TwoSix]

Even so, I do allow PCs to become wizards without that, because they are in my world men and women of destiny, but it still takes at least some time in game learning from a PC or NPC wizard how to do things. Not just POOF, I'm a wizard right now without ever even thinking about becoming one, just because I leveled.

I mean, I do have a generalized expectation that players will take levels that complement their character's core identity. So I would assume their "wizard training" is somewhere in their backstory.

But for me, a wizard "in fiction" and a person with levels in the wizard class are two very different things.

 

[mamba]

The fact that we're not told what the CR of a character built by PC rules is does make it difficult to employ one as an antagonist, however.

5.5 levels the playing field by not telling us the CR for custom monsters either…

 

[Stormonu]

The video interviews around the PHB release stated you could run a 2014 made PC alongside a 2024, as long as you are using the 2024 ruleset. A similar statement was made by KP that you could run a 2014 D&D PC in TotV as long as you are using the TotV rules. In both cases, that was not an invitation to pick and choose, only that your old PC would function in the new ruleset (something you could not do moving from 2e to 3e, for example).

Heh, though you could use a 1E PC in a 2E game, so 2014/2024 is closer to the changes in 1E -> 2E than 2E -> 3E.