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

[clearstream]

pretty sure that is the point they were making… 2014 was rulings, not rules, 2024 is rules, not rulings. At least they would not be the first ones to make that point

Could well have been they meant that rather than "5e" as they wrote. IIRC where 5e (2014) most suggests "rulings not rules" is in the DMG, so it'd surprise me if they came out with any unambiguous "rules not rulings" text in the new PHB.

In a WotC designers' discussion on the 2014 release, they mention that in playtests they found that most groups drifted D&D rules. Mainly by just playing the way they'd learned to play. They cited something like only a third of rules were actually followed by groups, so they developed their principle of the "high wall": meaning that for a structural rule (so not a class feature or feat etc.) to make it into the book it had to be something they believed most groups would find useful.

To my observation, the designed rules of human-interpreted TTRPGs are essentially normative. I suppose the fear could be that the designers could exert whatever authority is ceded to them to encourage following the rules over making rulings. That would be preferred for some modes and cultures of play, and not preferred for others.

 

[Undrave]

Nobody to play with

 

[the Jester]

I'm going to buy it but I don't know that I'll run it. I will almost certainly use some elements of it.

 

[Stoutstien]

The big issue is none of the changes seem like it has a clear goal or design ethos. Changes for the sake of it rather than addressing anything that was actively bothersome in 5e.

Change for the sake of it.

 

[Quickleaf]

Why is this thread titled like a shady interviewer's leading question?

Cool seeing everyone's reasons though. I'll be getting 2024, but I like the perspectives on why people aren't; a lot of them seem to be going for a more pick-and-choose method.

What on earth?

I was trying to be as clear as possible that the poll was directed to a niche of folks not interested in purchasing D&D. I say as much.

It's not about assuming anything about overall purchasing trends. I say as much. I cite the previous poll that we had on ENWorld.

Whatever you're reading into it, I don't see and is absolutely not my intent.

 

[Shardstone]

What on earth?

I was trying to be as clear as possible that the poll was directed to a niche of folks not interested in purchasing D&D. I say as much.

It's not about assuming anything about overall purchasing trends. I say as much. I cite the previous poll that we had on ENWorld.

Whatever you're reading into it, I don't see and is absolutely not my intent.

My man I was joking, sorry to offend.

 

[Quickleaf]

My man I was joking, sorry to offend.

Ah, apologies, that wasn't clear to me.

 

[borringman]

#1 is "concerns about WotC's practices" but I see it's not represented in the comments. OK, I'll be That Guy.

It's reason enough for me, but let me head off the "who cares, every company is evil" fallacy by pointing out that EVEN IF all companies are the exact same stink on the ethical spectrum (they're not, but for the sake of argument), deeply unethical companies can still prioritize the customer because they think they'll make money that way. The reasons vary, from market share to targeting a particular niche, but it's not unusual. On the extreme end, organized crime rings will deal in luxury goods because it's lucrative.

Even within that deeply nihilistic worldview, WotC is the furthest thing from a customer-minded business.

WotC is publicly infamous for openly treating their customers with contempt, saying we're "not monetized enough" and using the Pinktertons to resolve disputes, among other things. Even if you're not bothered by these moves, that's not the profile of a company that puts out product with value. It's the sort that cuts budgets, screws their employees, accelerates timelines, overrules QA, threatens whistleblowers, and the outcome is invariably subpar at best. (Also FWIW, companies like this are generally known to spend inordinate amounts on astroturfing social media.)

Nothing I've seen or heard about 5.24 indicates it's anything more than a massively overhyped (and surprisingly janky) incremental revision, but maybe that's self-fulfilling prophecy. I'm a hater looking for reasons to hate. Fine, my opinion is invalid.

Then don't take my word for it! Just consider what 5.24 is by announced design intent: not different enough that it took major investment to make, but different enough that your old books are obsolete so you have to buy new ones. Whatever spin they might've put out about backwards compatibility, most people are replacing their rulebooks anyway, right? How convenient for WotC.

 

[J-H]

I voted Other as one of my reasons, which would include unhappiness with the design direction of WOTC from Tasha's on. I don't trust them to actually make improvements.

My somewhat houseruled 5e games march on. I've taken the few things I like from 5.24.

 

[Malmuria]

I don't need the new books to play 5e, and I'd rather play other games at this point