Player Races Leaks from Monsters of the Multiverse

DDB is caught between a rock and a hard place, yes.  Perhaps if enough people make enough of a stink, DDB will be able to convince Wizards to allow a toggle in this one specific instance.  After all, the PHB dragonborn and the Fizban's dragonborn are still considered separate entities despite the one being, for all intents and purposes, a flat override/upgrade of the other.

The man has a right to voice his concerns.  There's not a damn thing we, or likely DDB, can do about them, but everybody has a right to voice their concerns.  Sometimes I get caught up in my own ideology and forget that, and I'm sorry.  And sometimes I will disagree vehemently with someone's concerns, for which case I'm less sorry, but still.  I do find myself frustrated and annoyed by all the folks claiming that there's nothing at all good or worthwhile coming from this new direction to the game, but eh.  I suppose that's a Yurei problem.  Just...an obnoxiously persistent one.

I think one of the oddest aspects of having all the updated races in this book, is that the Core Races feel out of date.  It is just strange to update all the optional races and monsters before updating the core of the game.  

They updated the Dragonborn in Fizbans, do you think that they will update the others in a similar fashion ahead of 2024 to be in line with these?

Quote from Golaryn >>

I think one of the oddest aspects of having all the updated races in this book, is that the Core Races feel out of date.  It is just strange to update all the optional races and monsters before updating the core of the game. 

 That's what 2024 is being sold as, isn't it?

Quote from trigojon >>

Quote from Golaryn >>

I think one of the oddest aspects of having all the updated races in this book, is that the Core Races feel out of date.  It is just strange to update all the optional races and monsters before updating the core of the game. 

 That's what 2024 is being sold as, isn't it?

 Yeah, but that is at least a 2 year gap.

Could very well be that M3 is a test/experiment to see how folks take to this new paradigm before they commit to it entirely with the core redux in 2024.  If the backlash overall is as bad as it often is here on DDB?  Maybe they'll back off.  Who knows.

Quote from Yurei1453 >>

DDB is caught between a rock and a hard place, yes.  Perhaps if enough people make enough of a stink, DDB will be able to convince Wizards to allow a toggle in this one specific instance.  After all, the PHB dragonborn and the Fizban's dragonborn are still considered separate entities despite the one being, for all intents and purposes, a flat override/upgrade of the other.

The man has a right to voice his concerns.  There's not a damn thing we, or likely DDB, can do about them, but everybody has a right to voice their concerns.  Sometimes I get caught up in my own ideology and forget that, and I'm sorry.  And sometimes I will disagree vehemently with someone's concerns, for which case I'm less sorry, but still.  I do find myself frustrated and annoyed by all the folks claiming that there's nothing at all good or worthwhile coming from this new direction to the game, but eh.  I suppose that's a Yurei problem.  Just...an obnoxiously persistent one.

 I think they have the right to complain and that those complaints are justified.  BUT... there is already a thread just for that discussion. 

Edit: But I really don't think that the outcome will be any better than the Errata kerfluffle that just happened last month.

Quote from Yurei1453 >>

Could very well be that M3 is a test/experiment to see how folks take to this new paradigm before they commit to it entirely with the core redux in 2024.  If the backlash overall is as bad as it often is here on DDB?  Maybe they'll back off.  Who knows.

 I don't think they'll back off entirely, but I do think they'll take the feedback from MMM to determine how they make the edits to the core books.

Quote from trigojon >>

Quote from Yurei1453 >>

Could very well be that M3 is a test/experiment to see how folks take to this new paradigm before they commit to it entirely with the core redux in 2024.  If the backlash overall is as bad as it often is here on DDB?  Maybe they'll back off.  Who knows.

 I don't think they'll back off entirely, but I do think they'll take the feedback from MMM to determine how they make the edits to the core books.

 Absolutely, but 2 years is still a really long time.

I think I’ve figured it out. WotC’s MO seems to have been (and will likely continue as):

1. Throw 💩 at the wall internet, see how it goes.
2. Do the thing, see how that goes.
3. Fix it in a later publication, see how that goes.
4. Consolidate everything.
5. Rinse & repeat.

They’re counting on:

• Being able to “fix it later” to overcome their mistakes.
• Being able to consolidate stuff to compensate for the bloat.
• Us “buying it anyway” to overcome their shotgun strategy.
• Us having memories like goldfish to forget the 🐂💩.

Quote from Golaryn >>

Quote from trigojon >>

Quote from Yurei1453 >>

Could very well be that M3 is a test/experiment to see how folks take to this new paradigm before they commit to it entirely with the core redux in 2024.  If the backlash overall is as bad as it often is here on DDB?  Maybe they'll back off.  Who knows.

 I don't think they'll back off entirely, but I do think they'll take the feedback from MMM to determine how they make the edits to the core books.

 Absolutely, but 2 years is still a really long time.

I'm pretty sure MMM is not the only product that will come out telegraphing what WotC Project D&D 2024 RED will look like.  It's also not "floating an idea".  WotC uses UA to float ideas.  A hardback is definitive growth and change to the system.  I really doubt MMM will be the only product realigning mechanics and lore in the next two years.  MMM teases were very clear that "this is the way" stat blocks were going to be handled in the future.  I doubt the book is presenting "the way" of monster stat blocks for the future and then "oh, and we're sorta thinking about doing races this way, what do you all think?" for the PC race options.  It's going to be equally definitive for the game going forward.  Will it be exactly as presented in WotC Project D&D 2024 RED?  Maybe or maybe not, but my guess is the final product will be closer to this "new" than the present.  

Quote from IamSposta >>

I think I’ve figured it out. WotC’s MO seems to have been (and will likely continue as):

1. Throw 💩 at the wall internet, see how it goes.
2. Do the thing, see how that goes.
3. Fix it in a later publication, see how that goes.
4. Consolidate everything.
5. Rinse & repeat.

They’re counting on:

• Being able to “fix it later” to overcome their mistakes.
• Being able to consolidate stuff to compensate for the bloat.
• Us “buying it anyway” to overcome their shotgun strategy.
• Us having memories like goldfish to forget the 🐂💩.

 A lot of us here like the changes. If you don't vote with your wallet.

Quote from MidnightPlat >>

Quote from Golaryn >>

Quote from trigojon >>

Quote from Yurei1453 >>

Could very well be that M3 is a test/experiment to see how folks take to this new paradigm before they commit to it entirely with the core redux in 2024.  If the backlash overall is as bad as it often is here on DDB?  Maybe they'll back off.  Who knows.

 I don't think they'll back off entirely, but I do think they'll take the feedback from MMM to determine how they make the edits to the core books.

 Absolutely, but 2 years is still a really long time.

 

I'm pretty sure MMM is not the only product that will come out telegraphing what WotC Project D&D 2024 RED will look like.  It's also not "floating an idea".  WotC uses UA to float ideas.  A hardback is definitive growth and change to the system.  I really doubt MMM will be the only product realigning mechanics and lore in the next two years.  MMM teases were very clear that "this is the way" stat blocks were going to be handled in the future.  I doubt the book is presenting "the way" of monster stat blocks for the future and then "oh, and we're sorta thinking about doing races this way, what do you all think?" for the PC race options.  It's going to be equally definitive for the game going forward.  Will it be exactly as presented in WotC Project D&D 2024 RED?  Maybe or maybe not, but my guess is the final product will be closer to this "new" than the present.  

 This is what I think as well.  That is why I suspect we will see more of the core races getting similar updates the way the Dragonborn did to bring them closer to what is in MMM

Quote from trigojon >>

Quote from IamSposta >>

I think I’ve figured it out. WotC’s MO seems to have been (and will likely continue as):

1. Throw 💩 at the wall internet, see how it goes.
2. Do the thing, see how that goes.
3. Fix it in a later publication, see how that goes.
4. Consolidate everything.
5. Rinse & repeat.

They’re counting on:

• Being able to “fix it later” to overcome their mistakes.
• Being able to consolidate stuff to compensate for the bloat.
• Us “buying it anyway” to overcome their shotgun strategy.
• Us having memories like goldfish to forget the 🐂💩.

 A lot of us here like the changes. If you don't vote with your wallet.

 
First of all, why did you feel compelled to write that?

Second, I do. It was 5e that pulled me out of a 10 year boycott on all WorC products, and I haven’t spent a dime on WotC content since Tasha’s Midden.

Quote from IamSposta >>

Quote from trigojon >>

Quote from IamSposta >>

I think I’ve figured it out. WotC’s MO seems to have been (and will likely continue as):

1. Throw 💩 at the wall internet, see how it goes.
2. Do the thing, see how that goes.
3. Fix it in a later publication, see how that goes.
4. Consolidate everything.
5. Rinse & repeat.

They’re counting on:

• Being able to “fix it later” to overcome their mistakes.
• Being able to consolidate stuff to compensate for the bloat.
• Us “buying it anyway” to overcome their shotgun strategy.
• Us having memories like goldfish to forget the 🐂💩.

 A lot of us here like the changes. If you don't vote with your wallet.

 
First of all, why did you feel compelled to write that?

Second, I do. It was 5e that pulled me out of a 10 year boycott on all WorC products, and I haven’t spent a dime on WotC content since Tasha’s Midden.

 Why did you feel compelled to write your complaint? Could it be because we're on a public forum and having a discussion? You said the changes are shit. I said a lot of people are happy with them.

I wonder if the Racial Feats will get an update in the updated Xanathar's in this set.

Also, With the changes to Sunlight Sensitivity, Trance and Fey Ancestry in MMM, I think Elves will be next in line for an optional update in some upcoming book. 

Quote from IamSposta >>

I think I’ve figured it out. WotC’s MO seems to have been (and will likely continue as):

1. Throw 💩 at the wall internet, see how it goes.
2. Do the thing, see how that goes.
3. Fix it in a later publication, see how that goes.
4. Consolidate everything.
5. Rinse & repeat.

They’re counting on:

• Being able to “fix it later” to overcome their mistakes.
• Being able to consolidate stuff to compensate for the bloat.
• Us “buying it anyway” to overcome their shotgun strategy.
• Us having memories like goldfish to forget the 🐂💩.

 As a Magic player for about a decade, I could've told you that. That's how they operate. Change everything about once a season, get feedback, change some of it back. It's not uncommon in the games industry. It necessitates the participation of a lot of people who will gladly (no, not gladly -- reliably) buy and play whatever comes out, and as such its results are largely influenced by said people's opinions, which don't always align with yours, because you don't do that. But the game has never actually been designed to be played that way. There's never been a rule set for D&D that was designed to run completely unmodified using every available piece of content. I mean, it's impossible on its face, right? There's something like a thousand or so different monsters, you can't fight them all in one game. (Though, it might be fun to try...) The game works best with 3-5 players, but there's 13 classes. You couldn't use everything even if you wanted to.

It's frustrating because a lot of us are used to the "live update" or "changing meta" standard of video games or competitive games like Magic, where you have to keep up with every rules change because that's the only way you can actually play the game with other people. But that's not how D&D works, has ever worked, or, I hope, will ever work. You have your Player's Handbook. It still works as well today as it did when it came out, and that's no secret. You can still find games with just that. With newbies who don't want to buy everything, oldheads who don't want to buy everything, or just people who prefer the core rules. If a new piece of content doesn't add value to your game, don't add it to your game. I don't need to tell you this, you already said this is how you do things, I'm just saying it for other people. (It would be great if you could somehow trust that every piece of content released would be a perfect fit for your personal game, just because of its pedigree, but that obviously doesn't make sense, right? See above. So I don't hold it against Wizards.)

I played M:tG from the end of Unlimited/beginning of Revised through until Future Sight. When hey announced D&D4e in fall of 2007 was when I officially started boycotting WotC. I lifted that boycott for this edition because I thought they had finally gotten their 💩 together and came back to D&D (still don’t play M:tG anymore). Looks like Tasha’s Chamberpot might be the last thing I ever purchase from them.

Quote from ChoirOfFire >>

Quote from IamSposta >>

I think I’ve figured it out. WotC’s MO seems to have been (and will likely continue as):

1. Throw 💩 at the wall internet, see how it goes.
2. Do the thing, see how that goes.
3. Fix it in a later publication, see how that goes.
4. Consolidate everything.
5. Rinse & repeat.

They’re counting on:

• Being able to “fix it later” to overcome their mistakes.
• Being able to consolidate stuff to compensate for the bloat.
• Us “buying it anyway” to overcome their shotgun strategy.
• Us having memories like goldfish to forget the 🐂💩.

 As a Magic player for about a decade, I could've told you that. That's how they operate. Change everything about once a season, get feedback, change some of it back. It's not uncommon in the games industry. It necessitates the participation of a lot of people who will gladly (no, not gladly -- reliably) buy and play whatever comes out, and as such its results are largely influenced by said people's opinions, which don't always align with yours, because you don't do that. But the game has never actually been designed to be played that way. There's never been a rule set for D&D that was designed to run completely unmodified using every available piece of content. I mean, it's impossible on its face, right? There's something like a thousand or so different monsters, you can't fight them all in one game. (Though, it might be fun to try...) The game works best with 3-5 players, but there's 13 classes. You couldn't use everything even if you wanted to.

It's frustrating because a lot of us are used to the "live update" or "changing meta" standard of video games or competitive games like Magic, where you have to keep up with every rules change because that's the only way you can actually play the game with other people. But that's not how D&D works, has ever worked, or, I hope, will ever work. You have your Player's Handbook. It still works as well today as it did when it came out, and that's no secret. You can still find games with just that. With newbies who don't want to buy everything, oldheads who don't want to buy everything, or just people who prefer the core rules. If a new piece of content doesn't add value to your game, don't add it to your game. I don't need to tell you this, you already said this is how you do things, I'm just saying it for other people. (It would be great if you could somehow trust that every piece of content released would be a perfect fit for your personal game, just because of its pedigree, but that obviously doesn't make sense, right? See above. So I don't hold it against Wizards.)

We're 9 editions into D&D in it's history.  Original, AD&D, Basic Set, AD&D 2nd, 3rd, 3.5, 4th, Essentials and now 5th.  It's always how its worked.

Quote from Golaryn >>

This is what I think as well.  That is why I suspect we will see more of the core races getting similar updates the way the Dragonborn did to bring them closer to what is in MMM

 To be fair, the important change to dragonborn in Fizban's wasn't floating attribute bonuses (Str/Cha is not the most useful, but it's not horrible), it was making their breath weapon actually useful.

Quote from Pantagruel666 >>

Quote from Golaryn >>

This is what I think as well.  That is why I suspect we will see more of the core races getting similar updates the way the Dragonborn did to bring them closer to what is in MMM

 To be fair, the important change to dragonborn in Fizban's wasn't floating attribute bonuses (Str/Cha is not the most useful, but it's not horrible), it was making their breath weapon actually useful.

 Of course.  It is also the type of changes we are seeing in MMM for all the races printed pre Tasha's.