D&D (2024) You're not planning on getting 2024 D&D? Why is that?

[Aldarc]

Right, 5.5e is faaaaaaaaaaaaaaar from as locked down as 4e. But in my case "too much" can easily be defined as "more than 5e." And 5.5e is clearly more locked down than 5e, even if not by much.

That unsurprisingly sounds like an unhelpful metric that is meant to make something trivially insignificant seem much larger of an issue than it actually is through the intentional use of vague language.

 

[Daztur]

That unsurprisingly sounds like an unhelpful metric that is meant to make something trivially insignificant seem much larger of an issue than it actually is through the intentional use of vague language.

Why would I spend a bunch of time to learn rules that I like less than the rules that I already have? Seems like a waste of time. It took YEARS to get 3.5eisms out of my head when running 5e. I don't want to deal with that naughty word again unless a new edition is CLEARLY superior.

 

[Aldarc]

Why would I spend a bunch of time to learn rules that I like less than the rules that I already have? Seems like a waste of time. It took YEARS to get 3.5eisms out of my head when running 5e. I don't want to deal with that naughty word again unless a new edition is CLEARLY superior.

No one here is trying to convince you to buy D&D 2024 or forcing you to learn these rules - least of all me who has already posted at length my reasons for not buying D&D 2024 - but I don't really see how what you are saying here is pertinent to the present discussion we were having.

I think that it is far easier and more accurate to simply say that you don't like these rules and the added complexity they bring to running/playing the game than it is to claim that a small molehill of vaguely 4e design moves it vertically closer to being a 4e mountain.

 

[AnotherGuy]

For instance, take Weapon Masteries… I appreciate the effort to give fighter-types something more to do, but in 4e a fighter had an array of special attacks and tactical choices they could make from round to round. Weapon Masteries to me just seem like we’ve given them “one cool trick” that they can do over and over, unless they have a golf bag of weapons. It reminds me of Trip-Spamming in the 3e days.

Far be it for me to defend 5e, but that is an uncharitable take as you are taking a full-blown 4e fighter and comparing it to Weapon Masteries and ignoring the entire fighter chassis as well as the subclass.
I mean Weapon Masteries is additional to the Battle Master's maneuvers.

 

[PvtTommyAtkins]

I decided a while ago to boycot Hasbro D&D. Which I will admit has been hard as there have been some very pretty cover options- but overall I wasn't that impressed with 5e anyway and so Hasbro OGL fiasco just put the final nail in the coffin.

 

[ezo]

I must admit my surprise after all this time the leading cause is the first option:

 

[Quickleaf]

I decided a while ago to boycot Hasbro D&D. Which I will admit has been hard as there have been some very pretty cover options- but overall I wasn't that impressed with 5e anyway and so Hasbro OGL fiasco just put the final nail in the coffin.

Escaping the orbit of being publicly traded with a board is… it’s extremely difficult to navigate from what I’ve gathered. I like many of the D&D designers. I like their push for D&D at schools (and I think prisons now?). I like their focus on inclusivity. But there’s just been so much negative stuff, and I agree that the corporate side is adversely impacting the game’s design.

I think we’re in the minority, however, even here on ENWorld. The good thing is that a rising tide of D&D has (I think) tended to benefit the industry as a whole.

 

[PvtTommyAtkins]

Escaping the orbit of being publicly traded with a board is… it’s extremely difficult to navigate from what I’ve gathered. I like many of the D&D designers. I like their push for D&D at schools (and I think prisons now?). I like their focus on inclusivity. But there’s just been so much negative stuff, and I agree that the corporate side is adversely impacting the game’s design.

I think we’re in the minority, however, even here on ENWorld. The good thing is that a rising tide of D&D has (I think) tended to benefit the industry as a whole.

I agree that a rising tide of D&D has tended to benefit the industry as a whole. That was part of what initiated the OGL in 3rd ed. They did market research and found that people who play other RPGs eventually get around to trying the grand daddy of them all. So it was beneficial to them as an individual company to help everyone- and we saw a lot of growth in other publishers, and the OSR movement and indie games and stuff that is continuing to blossom still. I think them trying pull the rug out from under that, for reasons I do not understand- as you say it is complicated, rubbed me the wrong way.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I must admit my surprise after all this time the leading cause is the first option:

View attachment 388405

The OGL thing destroyed a lot of people's trust in the company that makes a game many of us love. Never discount emotion in these things.

 

[ezo]

The OGL thing destroyed a lot of people's trust in the company that makes a game many of us love. Never discount emotion in these things.

Which is why I find it fascinating! Because in my circles no one cared in the least at all about it...