The vast majority have not even looked at the new Dragonlance stuff.
[citation needed]
The fact that every new release since then has included level 1 feats in background suggests that it hasn't hurt their business model any.
What kind of citation would satisfy you? I personally do not know anyone that has. It is all anecdotal on this forum when it come to this type of discussion.
Oddly enough, the citation isn't the key point. But the contextual reason for the citation is to establish the non-anecdotal basis for such a statement. Subtextually, there is more going on, because of the usual forum stuff since some folks just hate everything 5e and WotC and post to steal joy and drop disruptive,cherry picked strawman arguments.
The new Dragonlance has not been a runaway best seller. The setting does not appear to appeal to the majority of players. However, I will note that it was used as an example of how certain concepts are not widely known, and in that case it fails miserably as an example as the same concepts are in multiple other sources that have been extremely popular (such as the others mentioned prior to that).
However, Dragonlance is still a popular world, like Strahd and Eberron are, and while they may not have the same marketshare as Forgotten Realms, they were never meant to have that level of popularity. Those who did buy it are very fond of it, and enjoy it -- and the same features are going to end up here as part of DDB, anyway, so the whole point raised is moot.
I pose the same question to you, what citation would satisfy you, and what citation can you provide that would satisfy those of us that disagree.
A little hyperbole on an internet forum shouldn't require citations.
Well, none, because I'm not invested enough to care about the topic. I don't particularly care if dragonlance is successful or not or its value or lack therefore as an example of how the new systems are being spread out.
As for citation that I can provide, go grab the quarterly investor report.
It is an internet forum. Hyperbole has been challenged routinely since BBs -- the 1980's, pre-internet. USenet was famous for it.
As is something akin to saying "how do you know it is hyperbole?". There's been no evidence of it being hyperbole, that's a subjective reading. Uness the poster comes back and says "it's hyperbole", then we are required under good faith principles to accept it as a statement. That's basic form.
If you don't agree that's fine. Your call. I'm not going to attempt to sway you either way.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
That was not me, I do agree with the statement, and my question to you still stands. Maybe the original poster will explain what they meant and not how you interpreted the post.
Neither side of this argument can be proven to the point of the other side conceding.
That's not how debate works though; the person making an assertion (in this case JustaFarmer, sorry about that) needs to support it. I can't just say "The moon's core is made of cheese, you have to go prove me wrong if you don't agree, and if you don't I'm correct."
As for what citation would satisfy me - something that indicates the opinion of the "vast majority." That was the claim, after all, so that should be obvious.
Oddly enough, the citation isn't the key point. But the contextual reason for the citation is to establish the non-anecdotal basis for such a statement. Subtextually, there is more going on, because of the usual forum stuff since some folks just hate everything 5e and WotC and post to steal joy and drop disruptive,cherry picked strawman arguments.
The new Dragonlance has not been a runaway best seller. The setting does not appear to appeal to the majority of players. However, I will note that it was used as an example of how certain concepts are not widely known, and in that case it fails miserably as an example as the same concepts are in multiple other sources that have been extremely popular (such as the others mentioned prior to that).
However, Dragonlance is still a popular world, like Strahd and Eberron are, and while they may not have the same marketshare as Forgotten Realms, they were never meant to have that level of popularity. Those who did buy it are very fond of it, and enjoy it -- and the same features are going to end up here as part of DDB, anyway, so the whole point raised is moot.
I can't speak to Dragonlance sales (I couldn't find support for that claim either; their 10-Q doesn't go to that level of granularity obviously). But to reiterate, if there was massive distaste for things it pioneered like feats in backgrounds, they wouldn't have kept doing those things; it would be illogical on their part.
The rational side of me says I'll wait a year or so to see how it goes. See if I can borrow a copy so I can read through it first. Judge how the wind blows - I really don't want to buy in and then find that in a couple of years there's a new edition on the shelves.
The more honest side recognises that I'll probably get it after three months.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
The rational side of me says I'll wait a year or so to see how it goes. See if I can borrow a copy so I can read through it first. Judge how the wind blows - I really don't want to buy in and then find that in a couple of years there's a new edition on the shelves.
The more honest side recognises that I'll probably get it after three months.
Same, at least for the PHB. Much less interested in the new DMG or MM, particularly since I’m not a fan of several of the monster changes. Bought the current iterations of both on the last flash sale to try to make sure I don’t lose that material. Was really miffed that they took down VGtM and MtoF, particularly given they offered no replacement for all the lore in them.
Same, at least for the PHB. Much less interested in the new DMG or MM, particularly since I’m not a fan of several of the monster changes. Bought the current iterations of both on the last flash sale to try to make sure I don’t lose that material. Was really miffed that they took down VGtM and MtoF, particularly given they offered no replacement for all the lore in them.
I definitely want more lore too. But not that lore. Orcs and Goliaths don't need to all be canonically ableist brutes, Lizardfolk don't need to all be sociopaths, Kenku don't need to be physically incapable of creativity etc.
Same, at least for the PHB. Much less interested in the new DMG or MM, particularly since I’m not a fan of several of the monster changes. Bought the current iterations of both on the last flash sale to try to make sure I don’t lose that material. Was really miffed that they took down VGtM and MtoF, particularly given they offered no replacement for all the lore in them.
I definitely want more lore too. But not that lore. Orcs and Goliaths don't need to all be canonically ableist brutes, Lizardfolk don't need to all be sociopaths, Kenku don't need to be physically incapable of creativity etc.
Kenku were significantly flawed, but imo most of the other lore is workable. Not every fictional culture presented in a fantasy setting needs to be a shining pillar of moral rectitude and civil equity. Plus I enjoy lore that indicates that some races are a bit more distinct than just “essentially human minds under another coat of paint”. Granted, it would probably help if it was presented in a setting book as opposed to something more universal; or at least they offered a few suggestions on areas to tweak. To be very clear, I’m not saying orc ever should be a dumb brute, but the presentation of a society formed in a harsh environment with a similarly harsh cultural trend is an invitation to explore all the possible facets of that, not a proscription to build everything in a single mold.
I am certain I will get the new releases, although I may treat it a bit like new technology/software releases where I wait a bit for things to settle first.
Unless they make huge changes to dc,ac and stuff would the biggest change be races and creation?
I'll probably jse a 1 dnd starter box if one is out by 2025 see if i prefer 5e ... I kind of want a name change though one d&d is a huge marketing buzz name to highlight the digital side that i won't be using
I am certain I will get the new releases, although I may treat it a bit like new technology/software releases where I wait a bit for things to settle first.
yes, how many "patches" break more than they fix! I'm not anti DND, I just haven't been impressed with the fixes. To be honest I have decades of official published material to get through before I even need to think about 1DND!
see this is where i'm not too sure where to start with 5e i'd love to find more full adventures outside of starter sets to supliment my homebrew stuff but i only really know of sourcebooks
Kenku were significantly flawed, but imo most of the other lore is workable. Not every fictional culture presented in a fantasy setting needs to be a shining pillar of moral rectitude and civil equity.
I don't have a problem with inequitable cultures in fantasy. What I do have a problem with is biological destiny for playable creatures, who are supposed to have free will. By all means, have a Goliath tribe, or even all the Goliaths in a specific setting, be jerks to their elderly and infirm. But don't write lore implying that all Goliaths on every plane in the multiverse act that way.
And to drag this tangent back on topic, this is yet another reason why I see value in the 2024 core books, because they're more consciously avoiding the negative implications that kind of rigid lore can have.
I am certain I will get the new releases, although I may treat it a bit like new technology/software releases where I wait a bit for things to settle first.
yes, how many "patches" break more than they fix! I'm not anti DND, I just haven't been impressed with the fixes. To be honest I have decades of official published material to get through before I even need to think about 1DND!
see this is where i'm not too sure where to start with 5e i'd love to find more full adventures outside of starter sets to supliment my homebrew stuff but i only really know of sourcebooks
That is a link to all the current adventures that are official.
There is also DMsguild, which has a whole lot of additional adventures for sale.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Unless they make huge changes to dc,ac and stuff would the biggest change be races and creation?
I’d say to check out the playtest documents for ideas about the kinds of changes. But keep in mind many of the bigger changes from earlier versions get switched back in later documents.
I think the change to backgrounds and assumptions of a level 1 feat will be pretty big. All of the classes and 4 subclasses per class will be getting a tune-up. They’ve released a number of changes to spells, and there’s most certainly more of those coming. They’ve also talked about changes to monsters to make them better reflect their CR.
But the underlying math is planned to stay the same (no changes to dc and ac and stuff). And they say a goal is you’ll be able to play a 2014 and 2024 version of a character at the same table. How well that goal is achieved will likely end up being pretty subjective — with some people who will be happy no matter what, some who will never be happy, and most somewhere in between.
Here is the thing. Many of us never allowed the new Mord's at our table. The vast majority have not even looked at the new Dragonlance stuff. If you think that a DM (and even the players) is going to tolerate having some chars far more powerful at the table (free feat, tasha's moveable attributes, different feature list) alongside chars that have been around for years, you are mistaken.
Very true. You may well have already begun to learn One D&D, but I would say that as many as 90% of players have not purchased or utilized either of those sources, and a gargantuan amount of people were appalled by M3, so it had more attention but was likely enjoyed and allowed by less than it might seem.
I’ll have to keep current if I’m to continue publishing.
I wanna star publishing ultimately too, so this definitely is a factor for me. But ultimately, I'm able to afford the new books and I wanna see what cool new stuff happens, and overall am pretty satisfied with One D&D. Worst comes to worst, I read the books, steal a couple of ideas, and keep playing fifth. But the likelihood of that happening is about as low as the chance a tarrasque would appear in the real world, because it's a couple thousand times easier to find groups for the latest edition, and I generally enjoy updates and anticipate being pleased or at least somewhat appeased by the rules I've given input on.
--
There, me being a meandering and hard to read goofball is over... Until the next post! :)
The goal of having a 2014 Ranger and a 2024 Ranger, or Paladin, or Fighter, at the same table is merely marketese. It is impossible to do when the 6e version is clearly more powerful than the 5e version. The person playing a 5e char will be very annoyed when the 6e equivalent is vastly superior.
Yeah, I don't think the playtest versions come close to "vastly superior". Are they better, in the raw damage numbers sense? Probably, at least if you try. But most people don't care that much about that. Optimizers are gonna optimize. (Also, isn't the 2014 ranger considered one of the weakest classes? Would the same comparison apply to a 2014 paladin?)
Are they better, as in they just generally play better, have more coherent mechanics, etc.? Time will tell, but that's certainly the goal.
And a DM is going to be tied up in knots trying to figure out how to either keep the 5e chars alive or the 6e chars from steam-rolling the table, when there is a mixed party at the table.
I'm not concerned about this. You already can have a broad range of effectiveness in a 5e group, depending on how much the players care about being murder machines. If before the likely range of combat effectiveness was, say 6-10 (on an arbitrary 1-10 scale), and it's now 6-11, it's not going to be a big deal, especially since the characters are going to be just as durable.
Since the playtest started, I have been DMing for a group with mixed 2014 players and UA players. Some wanted to give the playtest a try, others did not. Since that split months ago, it had caused balance problems exactly zero times.
OneD&D’s class changes do not make the classes more powerful - they change the classes. Take Monk, for example - more powerful across the board… but the nerf to Stunning Strike has drastically reduced its efficacy in other areas. But, even the things where there were improvements, those improvements are not so drastic as to really upset the balance of the game. Even an additional first level feat has not really tipped the balance of power - no more than things like Variant Human already have been doing for years.
Frankly, I am disappointed that 2014 and 2024 are not more incompatible—5e was always lacking in player customisation options, and OneD&D would have been a great time to expand them. But that is not the direction Wizards went and, if things continue on this trajectory, it looks like we’ll be seeing an updated edition that can easily be played alongside the old.
I will 100% be learning it, excited for this update actually. Been letting players test out the UA in our existing game and they like what they have been seeing. Ready for a bit of freshening up. Bring it on.
Unless they make huge changes to dc,ac and stuff would the biggest change be races and creation?
I’d say to check out the playtest documents for ideas about the kinds of changes. But keep in mind many of the bigger changes from earlier versions get switched back in later documents.
I think the change to backgrounds and assumptions of a level 1 feat will be pretty big. All of the classes and 4 subclasses per class will be getting a tune-up. They’ve released a number of changes to spells, and there’s most certainly more of those coming. They’ve also talked about changes to monsters to make them better reflect their CR.
But the underlying math is planned to stay the same (no changes to dc and ac and stuff). And they say a goal is you’ll be able to play a 2014 and 2024 version of a character at the same table. How well that goal is achieved will likely end up being pretty subjective — with some people who will be happy no matter what, some who will never be happy, and most somewhere in between.
The goal of having a 2014 Ranger and a 2024 Ranger, or Paladin, or Fighter, at the same table is merely marketese. It is impossible to do when the 6e version is clearly more powerful than the 5e version. The person playing a 5e char will be very annoyed when the 6e equivalent is vastly superior. And a DM is going to be tied up in knots trying to figure out how to either keep the 5e chars alive or the 6e chars from steam-rolling the table, when there is a mixed party at the table.
Um, done that.
Had a 2014 Ranger and a 2024 Ranger side by side, even.
Also, once again, you invent this whole 6e BS -- there is no 6e coming out for a minimum of at least six years, and there have been no UAs for 6e at all, so your imaginary ranger doesn't quite exist.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Unless they make huge changes to dc,ac and stuff would the biggest change be races and creation?
I’d say to check out the playtest documents for ideas about the kinds of changes. But keep in mind many of the bigger changes from earlier versions get switched back in later documents.
I think the change to backgrounds and assumptions of a level 1 feat will be pretty big. All of the classes and 4 subclasses per class will be getting a tune-up. They’ve released a number of changes to spells, and there’s most certainly more of those coming. They’ve also talked about changes to monsters to make them better reflect their CR.
But the underlying math is planned to stay the same (no changes to dc and ac and stuff). And they say a goal is you’ll be able to play a 2014 and 2024 version of a character at the same table. How well that goal is achieved will likely end up being pretty subjective — with some people who will be happy no matter what, some who will never be happy, and most somewhere in between.
The goal of having a 2014 Ranger and a 2024 Ranger, or Paladin, or Fighter, at the same table is merely marketese. It is impossible to do when the 6e version is clearly more powerful than the 5e version. The person playing a 5e char will be very annoyed when the 6e equivalent is vastly superior. And a DM is going to be tied up in knots trying to figure out how to either keep the 5e chars alive or the 6e chars from steam-rolling the table, when there is a mixed party at the table.
So, I’m guessing I know which category you’ll fall in, in terms of always, sometimes, or never happy.
As above posters said, lots of people won’t even notice the difference. Sure, some will be annoyed, but nothing is perfect for everyone. I’m in a game right now where a couple people took strixhaven backgrounds, and got the feat that goes with it, while other did not. I’m not the did not part. I didn’t even realize they had an extra feat until they said so, around 5th level. It’s really not a big deal.
And the DM should have no such knot-tying problems. The AC and HP numbers will be the same. The saving throws will be the same. 2024 characters will be no more durable than 2014.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Well, none, because I'm not invested enough to care about the topic. I don't particularly care if dragonlance is successful or not or its value or lack therefore as an example of how the new systems are being spread out.
As for citation that I can provide, go grab the quarterly investor report.
It is an internet forum. Hyperbole has been challenged routinely since BBs -- the 1980's, pre-internet. USenet was famous for it.
As is something akin to saying "how do you know it is hyperbole?". There's been no evidence of it being hyperbole, that's a subjective reading. Uness the poster comes back and says "it's hyperbole", then we are required under good faith principles to accept it as a statement. That's basic form.
If you don't agree that's fine. Your call. I'm not going to attempt to sway you either way.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
That's not how debate works though; the person making an assertion (in this case JustaFarmer, sorry about that) needs to support it. I can't just say "The moon's core is made of cheese, you have to go prove me wrong if you don't agree, and if you don't I'm correct."
As for what citation would satisfy me - something that indicates the opinion of the "vast majority." That was the claim, after all, so that should be obvious.
I can't speak to Dragonlance sales (I couldn't find support for that claim either; their 10-Q doesn't go to that level of granularity obviously). But to reiterate, if there was massive distaste for things it pioneered like feats in backgrounds, they wouldn't have kept doing those things; it would be illogical on their part.
The rational side of me says I'll wait a year or so to see how it goes. See if I can borrow a copy so I can read through it first. Judge how the wind blows - I really don't want to buy in and then find that in a couple of years there's a new edition on the shelves.
The more honest side recognises that I'll probably get it after three months.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Same, at least for the PHB. Much less interested in the new DMG or MM, particularly since I’m not a fan of several of the monster changes. Bought the current iterations of both on the last flash sale to try to make sure I don’t lose that material. Was really miffed that they took down VGtM and MtoF, particularly given they offered no replacement for all the lore in them.
I didn't think "sweeping assertions should be supported to be credible" needed to be offered as a "solution" 🤨 It's sort of... blindingly obvious.
I definitely want more lore too. But not that lore. Orcs and Goliaths don't need to all be canonically ableist brutes, Lizardfolk don't need to all be sociopaths, Kenku don't need to be physically incapable of creativity etc.
Kenku were significantly flawed, but imo most of the other lore is workable. Not every fictional culture presented in a fantasy setting needs to be a shining pillar of moral rectitude and civil equity. Plus I enjoy lore that indicates that some races are a bit more distinct than just “essentially human minds under another coat of paint”. Granted, it would probably help if it was presented in a setting book as opposed to something more universal; or at least they offered a few suggestions on areas to tweak. To be very clear, I’m not saying orc ever should be a dumb brute, but the presentation of a society formed in a harsh environment with a similarly harsh cultural trend is an invitation to explore all the possible facets of that, not a proscription to build everything in a single mold.
I am certain I will get the new releases, although I may treat it a bit like new technology/software releases where I wait a bit for things to settle first.
Unless they make huge changes to dc,ac and stuff would the biggest change be races and creation?
I'll probably jse a 1 dnd starter box if one is out by 2025 see if i prefer 5e ... I kind of want a name change though one d&d is a huge marketing buzz name to highlight the digital side that i won't be using
in a hole in the ground you notice a halfling
see this is where i'm not too sure where to start with 5e i'd love to find more full adventures outside of starter sets to supliment my homebrew stuff but i only really know of sourcebooks
in a hole in the ground you notice a halfling
I wasn't aware that my response was somehow unplugging their router and keeping them from venting 🤨
I don't have a problem with inequitable cultures in fantasy. What I do have a problem with is biological destiny for playable creatures, who are supposed to have free will. By all means, have a Goliath tribe, or even all the Goliaths in a specific setting, be jerks to their elderly and infirm. But don't write lore implying that all Goliaths on every plane in the multiverse act that way.
And to drag this tangent back on topic, this is yet another reason why I see value in the 2024 core books, because they're more consciously avoiding the negative implications that kind of rigid lore can have.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources#Adventures
That is a link to all the current adventures that are official.
There is also DMsguild, which has a whole lot of additional adventures for sale.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
I’d say to check out the playtest documents for ideas about the kinds of changes. But keep in mind many of the bigger changes from earlier versions get switched back in later documents.
I think the change to backgrounds and assumptions of a level 1 feat will be pretty big. All of the classes and 4 subclasses per class will be getting a tune-up. They’ve released a number of changes to spells, and there’s most certainly more of those coming. They’ve also talked about changes to monsters to make them better reflect their CR.
But the underlying math is planned to stay the same (no changes to dc and ac and stuff). And they say a goal is you’ll be able to play a 2014 and 2024 version of a character at the same table. How well that goal is achieved will likely end up being pretty subjective — with some people who will be happy no matter what, some who will never be happy, and most somewhere in between.
Very true. You may well have already begun to learn One D&D, but I would say that as many as 90% of players have not purchased or utilized either of those sources, and a gargantuan amount of people were appalled by M3, so it had more attention but was likely enjoyed and allowed by less than it might seem.
I wanna star publishing ultimately too, so this definitely is a factor for me. But ultimately, I'm able to afford the new books and I wanna see what cool new stuff happens, and overall am pretty satisfied with One D&D. Worst comes to worst, I read the books, steal a couple of ideas, and keep playing fifth. But the likelihood of that happening is about as low as the chance a tarrasque would appear in the real world, because it's a couple thousand times easier to find groups for the latest edition, and I generally enjoy updates and anticipate being pleased or at least somewhat appeased by the rules I've given input on.
--
There, me being a meandering and hard to read goofball is over... Until the next post! :)
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.Yeah, I don't think the playtest versions come close to "vastly superior". Are they better, in the raw damage numbers sense? Probably, at least if you try. But most people don't care that much about that. Optimizers are gonna optimize. (Also, isn't the 2014 ranger considered one of the weakest classes? Would the same comparison apply to a 2014 paladin?)
Are they better, as in they just generally play better, have more coherent mechanics, etc.? Time will tell, but that's certainly the goal.
I'm not concerned about this. You already can have a broad range of effectiveness in a 5e group, depending on how much the players care about being murder machines. If before the likely range of combat effectiveness was, say 6-10 (on an arbitrary 1-10 scale), and it's now 6-11, it's not going to be a big deal, especially since the characters are going to be just as durable.
Since the playtest started, I have been DMing for a group with mixed 2014 players and UA players. Some wanted to give the playtest a try, others did not. Since that split months ago, it had caused balance problems exactly zero times.
OneD&D’s class changes do not make the classes more powerful - they change the classes. Take Monk, for example - more powerful across the board… but the nerf to Stunning Strike has drastically reduced its efficacy in other areas. But, even the things where there were improvements, those improvements are not so drastic as to really upset the balance of the game. Even an additional first level feat has not really tipped the balance of power - no more than things like Variant Human already have been doing for years.
Frankly, I am disappointed that 2014 and 2024 are not more incompatible—5e was always lacking in player customisation options, and OneD&D would have been a great time to expand them. But that is not the direction Wizards went and, if things continue on this trajectory, it looks like we’ll be seeing an updated edition that can easily be played alongside the old.
I will 100% be learning it, excited for this update actually. Been letting players test out the UA in our existing game and they like what they have been seeing. Ready for a bit of freshening up. Bring it on.
Um, done that.
Had a 2014 Ranger and a 2024 Ranger side by side, even.
Also, once again, you invent this whole 6e BS -- there is no 6e coming out for a minimum of at least six years, and there have been no UAs for 6e at all, so your imaginary ranger doesn't quite exist.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
I'll try it for sure, i hope to migrate the current game i'm DMing in a smooth way to the new rulesets as soon as possible.
I don’t plan to purchase anything new for D&D anymore.
So, I’m guessing I know which category you’ll fall in, in terms of always, sometimes, or never happy.
As above posters said, lots of people won’t even notice the difference. Sure, some will be annoyed, but nothing is perfect for everyone. I’m in a game right now where a couple people took strixhaven backgrounds, and got the feat that goes with it, while other did not. I’m not the did not part. I didn’t even realize they had an extra feat until they said so, around 5th level. It’s really not a big deal.
And the DM should have no such knot-tying problems. The AC and HP numbers will be the same. The saving throws will be the same. 2024 characters will be no more durable than 2014.