D&D (2024) What's Your Experience Like with '24?

[Xamnam]

Sure, I get why you would play. I just don't personally understand the value of paying another $150 for a slightly better version of the game I'm already playing (and for the record, I see Level Up as quite a bit more than a slight improvement over WotC 5e).

I mean, all you really need rules wise is the PHB, I paid less than $50 for my pre-order, and that's a pretty small price to pay to upgrade a game I've enjoyed for quite some time, and want to continue with.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I mean, all you really need rules wise is the PHB, I paid less than $50 for my pre-order, and that's a pretty small price to pay to upgrade a game I've enjoyed for quite some time, and want to continue with.

Fair enough. $50 for that degree of improvement is still too much for me, and it would be hard not to eventually get the other books if I got the PH, so it's probably still $150.

 

[Mort]

Fair enough. $50 for that degree of improvement is still too much for me, and it would be hard not to eventually get the other books if I got the PH, so it's probably still $150.

If you're in a group using D&D beyond (and the DM has a master tier subscription) then, assuming they bought the digital books, all players in the campaign get access to them for no cost.

Not a comfort if you prefer the physical books, but still a great deal.

 

[Micah Sweet]

If you're in a group using D&D beyond (and the DM has a master tier subscription) then, assuming they bought the digital books, all players in the campaign get access to them for no cost.

Not a comfort if you prefer the physical books, but still a great deal.

Makes sense if DDB is your thing. I never used D&D Beyond for anything more than picking up a la cart materials and copying them to an offline document immediately.

 

[Oofta]

Don't most PCs cast spells? Seems like nonmagical immunity wouldn't be that big a hurdle in modern D&D. And silver isn't exactly rare.

Half or more of the characters rely primarily on weapons in most games I've played. Some, like a paladin, can add a bit of oomph to their attacks with spells (and that's been improved with the 24 release) but it doesn't make their attack magic. Much of the time the full time casters are relying on cantrips which do significantly less damage, especially at lower levels.

 

[Mort]

Don't most PCs cast spells? Seems like nonmagical immunity wouldn't be that big a hurdle in modern D&D. And silver isn't exactly rare.

Except for Eldritch Knights, fighters don't (with the odd feat as an exception).

Plus the whole immune/resistant to non-magic weapons was a bit too binary IMO.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Half or more of the characters rely primarily on weapons in most games I've played. Some, like a paladin, can add a bit of oomph to their attacks with spells (and that's been improved with the 24 release) but it doesn't make their attack magic. Much of the time the full time casters are relying on cantrips which do significantly less damage, especially at lower levels.

Ok. Still works from my perspective, but if you need to keep the DPR up I understand that would be a problem.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Except for Eldritch Knights, fighters don't (with the odd feat as an exception).

Plus the whole immune/resistant to non-magic weapons was a bit too binary IMO.

That's why I mentioned the relative commonplace nature of silver.

And I have no problem with specific immunities. It is quite evocative of the fiction.

 

[Oofta]

Ok. Still works from my perspective, but if you need to keep the DPR up I understand that would be a problem.

The issue is that if I throw something that had resistance to magic weapons I have to do adjustments based on the equipment the PCs have. It's not hard, but I don't see much value to it in the first place.

A truly legendary monster requires research and special weapons to defeat? Cool, that makes them a unique standout. A significant percentage of monsters at lower CR? Just an annoyance.

 

[ezo]

Are you done threadcrapping now? And does one need to make every post a "+" post just to avoid threadcrappers? Because, if that's the case, that really says a lot about this fandom and community.

My points are simple:

• if you don't make threads a (+) thread, you should expect posts like #4, which you felt was not contributive to the thread.
• if you choose to engage with such posts, I recommend doing so to challenge why they posted as they did instead of just "thanks for nothing" responses--which ALSO contributes nothing to the thread.
• or better yet in most cases, don't engage with the post and let it go.
• without being a (+) thread, anyone can post, whether or not they meet your desires, and chime in. Engage with those at your own risk.

Was all of this in my responses "threadcrapping"? I hope not, but since you felt so pardon my interference. I'll leave. Cheers.