D&D is like the general population - @16% are explorers willing to try new things and for whom change is easy and interesting, @33% are conservatives, unwilling to try new things and change is scary and hard, then there is the middle @51%- willing to change once the lead 16% have proved the new stuff out and shown its benefits and problems. One has to understand this as the lead group aren’t that vocal - they just move in and see how it goes. The tail end 33% are very vocal and are likely to be actively fighting the changes. The middle are fairly silent waiting for the lead group to counter the fears of the followers with actual experience. Each of us has to figure out where they fit and be aware of the existence of the others. Generally if the vocal haters are about 2:1 to the vocal testers things are proceeding apace and stuff is fine. The folks to really listen to are that lead minority, when they start saying “we’ve been trying this and it’s got problems” it’s time to abandon that idea. So far I’m seeing that 2:1 ratio and haven’t found anything horrible yet in my own exploration of 2024. Yes there are some rough spots that need a bit more work ( ranger, alchemist) but over all it’s smoother and better balanced.
Yeah, the hate for new D&D editions is nothing new—it happens every time a major update drops. I get why people are upset, especially with things like the Alchemist UA feeling underwhelming (seriously, where are the potions?!). But outside of that, the 2024 rules actually improve a lot, especially with clearer distinctions like Magic Actions vs. Attack Actions.
It sucks that your in-person group fell apart because of online negativity. The good news is that once more people actually play the new edition instead of just complaining about it, opinions might shift. D&D has always evolved, and this is just another cycle of that.
Are you planning to find a new group, or sticking with solo play for now?
I think I love you! Yes! Alchemist need more potions! Battlesmith also needs an extreme overhaul.
I have one online group I started the day the PHB released to test the system. Everyone in the group got a Sigil code too so we've been play testing it aall.The group is very on and off again so we don't play every week. It's a great group when we do get together though but mainly we just wanted to try the new rules and formed to test that.
I was DMing IRL after I played in a campaign leading up to the one I DM'd. Here is the character those campaigns were related too:
This is my main character and I love it most of all. They are an Alchemist which I started in 3.5 just to try it out enjoying it. We mostly did Planescape after being accidentally falling through a door to Sigil. Then I saw they had them for 5e when I started playing 5e so I rolled up an Alchemist and had so much fun! We did LMoP and afterwards took a year of downtime so I set up a Alchemical company known as Big Pharma training everyone in town in Alchemy and bankrolled them to set up franchised drug stores all over the Realms (Acquisitions Inc.). We then moved on to OoA but got side tracked. Instead of dealing with the daemons we rolled over Menzoberranzan and saved Blingdenstone from an invasion by the Drow who blamed them for the daemons. Basically I saved this hot Drow matron twice, her brother once, and then assassinated all her rivals until she took over as a ruling house. She married me and had my kids as part of the arrangement. The campaign ended with me onto of the world in Menzoberranzan with a baby red Dragon as a pet for the House of Vahadarr (my noble house) and a secret lab in Menzoberranzan. Then I played an AD&D 2e game where we played the Maztica campaign. I was running a Maztican campaign at the same time but more on that in a second. The AD&D campaign was set around Fort Flame. Baulderian hired us to deal with the native wild Elves. Unlike the rest of the party I refused to take part in the final encounter and supply Baulderian with the Alchemist Fire he needed to burn down their forest committing mass genocide. Baulderian kicked me out of the expedition assuming I would die in Maztica so far from civilization and home. The party was TPK'd by the Wild Elves along with Baulderian and my character was allowed to live. This was set way before the Sundering and I found the Elixir of Youth after which my character learned to make and has been drinking for years to prolong his life indefinitely. Flash forward to 5e, I was DMing a Maztican campaign at the same time as the 2e AD&D play through. In the campaign my wife T'zarah Vahadarr basically took over Big Pharma and now in a position of power in the relationship she was a real threat. So my Alchemist fled making a major mistake in the process (read the background in the link). As a result she took over completely and transformed his Alchemical company into a major Maztican drug Cartel by slowly making some of the potions produced highly addictive. Just enough to not raise suspension while at the same time actually peddling drugs to those already addicted via balckmarkets. Once she gets a victim strung out one of her shell companies send a representative to convince the victim to travel to Maztica as a colonist. However once there they have their memories wiped and are enslaved on a plantation to harvest rare Maztican Alchemical components for the company. I had four parties play the campaign I DM'd, all of whom I found on these forums, so she has at least four separate plantations of slaves going in Maztica.
So, now for D&D One my character is returning as a ruined man searching for his lost half-drow children his wife sold into slavery at a much younger age due to having drank a Elixir of Youth to deage/de-level (so I could start at level one again) himself previously after narrowly escaping his wife who he asked for a divorce from only to be refused because she is obsessed with her pet human Alchemist. BEST CHARACTER EVER!!!
The main problem is that there seems to be an assumption that the forums are like the local pub. You go there to spend time with people you like (or you want to like, but you don't know them well enough yet and want to rectify that) talking about things you like and enjoy (in this case, specifically D&S), having a good time together. That may have been the intent behind creating the forums. It would be lovely if that were the case.
Instead, the forums have been infected by more typical internet norms. Instead of that friendly conversation where opinions are shared and, while not everyone will agree with every opinion, those opinion are respected...instead, it's more like a political debate. A lot of sniping and attacks going on. Then occasionally when WotC manages to kick the hornets' nest somehow, things get really nasty as everyone descends upon us and makes things a hundred times worse. There is a lot of name-calling and denigration going on...and that kills positivity much faster than negativity.
If you want a positive atmosphere where people are positive about the game etc (and that's not a bad thing at all), then you have to create an environment where it's welcome. I remember asking a question on how to handle a situation to help me be a better DM. The first response was reasonable and helpful. The second went off on one, painting me as some kind of ******...by putting words in my mouth, claiming I was doing things that I wasn't, making aspersions to my character when they didn't know me and so forth. To be fair, the other person came back and pointed out that they were being grossly unfair...but that kind of thing is not uncommon here, and it wrecks the atmosphere.
I'm fairly...i don't know if neutral is the right word, perhaps non-partisan...towards WotC and the game. I enjoy it, and I think there are really good parts, but I also recognise that there are drawbacks and negative sides to them. I'm generally willing to discuss either side. I'll point out when DDB does things in a bad way. On the other hand, I got death threats from when I was defending WotC because I thought people were being unfair towards them and they didn't like that. However, if I criticise an implementation, a rule, etc, I'm often called names, denigrated, and so forth. That's why I come to the forums, I'm sure.
I don't feel like I want to share those awesome experiences I've had with the game here because of the above attitudes and experiences. Since that thread I talked about, things haven't really gotten better. I daresay others feel the same way. And if you strip away those parts of the discussion...what you're left with is the hate, the attacks, the negativity. I'm mostly here to help people with their questions and get the news. Occasionally, I find myself drawn into a debate...and almost invariably regret it within a couple of posts.
I'd like this place to be more pleasant. I'd like it to be open. A place where we can talk about all aspects of the game. Where we can talk the things we enjoy, our good experiences, but also share opinions and discuss the bits we think could be improved with respect but also be treated with respect and not be belittled or dismissed.
I think, on some level, most people would say they'd agree with that. The problem is that it doesn't take many to derail it into a race to the bottom. It's something we have to have a proactive goal on that we work towards.
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.
Is there? You are the first person I hear express any opinion, either way. I've seen lots of questions and also some critizism of specific rules or classes. But hate? Really? Hm, I guess maybe I've missed it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
I like most of what they changed (especially monks finally getting some boosts, paladins getting reined in a little, weapon masteries). I'm in a wait-and-see mode to see how the stuff I didn't like plays out (like the druid wildshape stuff, not doing enough for the ranger, linking ability score bumps to backgrounds, a variety of monster stat block changes).
As always, we'll just see what works our groups and tweak things how we want to play it. Think they did a great job overall. I was never on board with all the hate a publicly traded corporation got for maximizing profits by selling a product. I'm old enough to not be disappointed by the absolute normalcy of that. Stopped listening to a lot of youtubers back then during the Outrage Times (not that it ever ended, but it has subsided a bit).
I've played a teensy bit of full-on 2024 rules and like what I've seen so far. It's all good; I love my D&D and I suspect it's going to go as well or better with the new rules. I've been playing since the boxed sets (missed/skipped 4th edition for the most part). Weird to realize I've now been playing 5e for longer than I played 2nd edition and 3rd edition combined! It's been a great ride!
I agree that there's a lot to love about the 2024 rules. I also happen to think there's a lot to tweak.
The revamped rules as themselves, as presented in the 2024 PHB are, overall, an improvement. Once our current campaign is done, we'll be switching over. That said, I personally think WOTC should've gone farther and done a true 6.0 version of the game. There was far too much kowtowing to really loud segments.
The 2024 DMG and MM are very mixed bags, IMNSHO. While I like some of the tweaks to magic items, I think the 2014 DMG is far more useful to DMs than the new version. The new MM has some interesting changes but it doesn't feel like enough was changed to warrant it.
All of that said, personally, two things have soured my feelings about the game - really, about the company running the game. The OGL debacle still echoes - and ultimately, the harm it did is that WOTC showed what they're capable of doing, what they're willing to do, and it destroyed a lot of trust. Yes, they've course-corrected but even a lot of that was done ham-fistedly.
The second thing is how thoroughly AWFUL the addition/migration to the 2024 rules has been here on DNDB for the character builder. Hasbro did not give enough time and it's clear did not provide enough budget and people to get it done right the first time. What was once an indispensable tool has now become suspect and untrustworthy.....sort of like WOTC/Hasbro themselves.
The 2024 DMG is better at explaining the nuts and bolts of running a game as a DM, but it lacks several important tools for more in-depth DMing like even loose guidelines on how to eyeball CR on a homebrew monster.
The NPC section in the new DMG is terrible - borderline unhelpful. I also don't think including a mini guide to Greyhawk is all that helpful. It feels like there are a ton of topics that are only barely touched on in the new DMG that deserve a much bigger section or even a supplement of their own.
And yeah, the omission of anything remotely helpful in designing monsters, magic items, spells, and classes is shocking.
The 2024 DMG is better at explaining the nuts and bolts of running a game as a DM, but it lacks several important tools for more in-depth DMing like even loose guidelines on how to eyeball CR on a homebrew monster.
To be fair, the 2014 DMG rules didn't work particularly well, I mostly used the blog of holding values as a default in 2014, and the 2024 version also seems fine.
I can understand not including monster creation rules -- the monster creation rules in 2014 are a bunch of page count and still don't work very well. However, they could have provided rough guidelines -- you could easily do a monster creation system at a similar level of detail to spell and item creation in a similar page count (it's really just "here are average stats; adjust those stats if the monster has traits that seem like they would make it dramatically more or less dangerous than normal").
I don't understand not including them if the explicit point of the 2024 rules overhaul was clarification and improvement. Just about everyone agrees what's in the 2014 DMG is simply too complex and inaccurate, but I don't think the right answer was effectively ignoring that large part of running a game.
The love disappeared when the company started putting profits before people, and did things the general community didn’t like and want. The new rules are great for those who don’t like what the former rules where, and those that have been playing for a fairly long time don’t care for the new rules that when actually played and throughly tested are found to be not very well thought out. Coupled with the insistent push to rush the new stuff that appears to need more work and refining, while simultaneously ignoring and disregarding the former set of rules and ease in which people could be welcomed into, and it’s no real surprise that 2024-?? D&D is not doing well or is disliked by a decently large proportion of the general D&D community.
Can’t love something that doesn’t love you back.
They are a business at the end of the day,. their entire point of existing is to make money. this whole "profits over customers" argument is asinine.
As a long time Player and DM (2nd Edition) i for one love the revised 5E rules. I have been running a campaign with them since September and so far I have not encountered a change that has not been for the better.
as for rushing the new stuff? this has been in the works for the most part since Tasha's released. they have not rushed anything.
2024 is doing well, and it is not dislike by a decently large proportion of the audience, decently loud yes, not large.
It's just that people take their personal homebrew & headcanons, as well as invoking the trope "Other Stuff Exists" to illogical degrees, and/or external author's works(Many of which are held back by outdated aspects & asymmetrical writing to canon lore) and mentally establish such as sacrosanct, leading to surprised Pikachu faces all around when all that isn't obeyed to everyone's letter.
You just have to peel all the surprised Pikachu faces & fandom shenanigans away, and it's still there.
Many of us are still working on developing a skill we didn't need before - sifting through the barrage of information through social media and public forums with an awareness of how it works.
Social media is about engagement at any cost - whatever draws people in is pushed to the top. And humans are drawn towards conflict, whether it be to participate in it or mediate it or just grab popcorn and watch it. So the hate/criticism bubbles to the top and becomes most/all of what you see.
This is pretty much a universal thing and we need to always be aware of it. The world the algorithms show us is not the real world. The 2024 basic ruleset is free to try out, your own experience with it and word of mouth from people you actually know are going to be much more reliable indicators of whether it works for you.
The love disappeared when the company started putting profits before people, and did things the general community didn’t like and want. The new rules are great for those who don’t like what the former rules where, and those that have been playing for a fairly long time don’t care for the new rules that when actually played and throughly tested are found to be not very well thought out. Coupled with the insistent push to rush the new stuff that appears to need more work and refining, while simultaneously ignoring and disregarding the former set of rules and ease in which people could be welcomed into, and it’s no real surprise that 2024-?? D&D is not doing well or is disliked by a decently large proportion of the general D&D community.
Can’t love something that doesn’t love you back.
They are a business at the end of the day,. their entire point of existing is to make money. this whole "profits over customers" argument is asinine.
As a long time Player and DM (2nd Edition) i for one love the revised 5E rules. I have been running a campaign with them since September and so far I have not encountered a change that has not been for the better.
as for rushing the new stuff? this has been in the works for the most part since Tasha's released. they have not rushed anything.
2024 is doing well, and it is not dislike by a decently large proportion of the audience, decently loud yes, not large.
So you agree that by the time TCoE came out, the quality of D&D was already heading down the drain, and the expected quality of the 2024 d&d rules was par for the course? How bad was Hasbro’s little OGL fiasco that it prompted a special visit from the SEC, and the company is sitting in the principals office? Can not be doing so well if the hate for those who are pointing out that the love for the “game” is always going to be there, but the “love” for who currently owns the brand name of the game, no longer exists. that was pointedly spelled out when the actual general community told WotC they where no longer needed and dropped subs left and right. How many are still watching and waiting expecting things to get better?
Sorry, but love took a backseat when the company decided to try and attempt to stab the general audience in the back. “Show them how much you care, when you stab them in the back with a loving stare.”
“The actual general community”? A fraction of the people who participated in the playtest surveys for the ‘24 update participated in the OGL survey, and despite Paizo’s quick move to play white knight the new core 3 sold extremely well. Is it entirely possible the numbers would have been better without the OGL drama? Sure. Does that mean the majority of WotC’s market segment noticed or cared about the OGL drama? No. It was all over the boards here because this is where you find the people who are actively following developments, but purely by the numbers of feedback we see for the various UA surveys there’s a lot more people who play the game without keeping in close touch with the larger community. These forums are not a representative sample, and if you compare the engagement with the OGL survey to UA engagement before and after, it ain’t gonna measure up.
Isnt it always the case that the haters are always loud? And the people, who are happy with 2024 dont fuss about it, they are just playing and useing the 2024 Rules.
By that logic if this thread is any example, the loud group is saying the new rules are great, if so why is everyone so quick to jump on posts about not being happy? Makes a person wonder.
And how long during the UA playtest and feedback period for the new edition to be developed did it take for the company to limit the feedback availability to ether Wizards.com and DDB.com accounts only, virtually leaving out anyone publicly wanting to give feedback about the UA’s?
Must have been a shock when feedback numbers for number of account members was low, especially since they strung out the UA playtest and feedback to what, a 6-8 week per UA and feedback cycle. And the entire thing took like 2 years from first UA rules testing to official release. What the 4th or 5th UA and feedback was when they moved the ability to remark on the feedback, and people started to notice how the questions were starting to become one sided with regards to the actual ability to effectively respond to the UA proposals?
They struck the hornets nest while the Playtest was being being used to gauge community support for the new edition, and everyone knows that only a small portion of the community actually gave any feedback that was listened to. ( two copper says Ai was used to filter the feedback so the numbers could be tailored to make it seem as if a majority liked the changes. Limited feedback access means you can make the numbers look spectacular given the amount of actual feedback wasn’t as large as the initial feedback responses. )
If 2024 was so loved by the community, and did so wonderfully, how come Wizbro isn’t spreading the success “loud and proudly”, but instead barely mentioning it at all? ( could it be that the one brand that had been carrying WotC was blown away by it’s sibling “Monopoly GO”, and has/had/Is become Wizbro’s “money pit” sinkhole due to their unfortunate gamble to revoke the OGL. )
The love for WotC and Hasbro walked out the door when the OGL apology tour, drove Wizbro’s Road Map clean off a cliff. How many “golden parachutes” did it cost? When it’s radio silence, and acting as if nothing happened, and practically anyone who says otherwise is automatically singled out for calling it like it really is, labeled, ridiculed, and spoken to has if a lesser person, well then where’s the love? At least one person in this relationship is being honest about the situation, while the other just sits there rolling their eyes.
No one loves or is in a relationship with corporations in THAT way, and it is very crass & parasocial to suggest otherwise.
Likewise, no one is questioning the piety of the critical & anti-corporate.
But there IS love for things that aren't the corporation, and THAT is what OP is asking about. There are good things out there.
So maybe stick to that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM, player & homebrewer(Current homebrew project is an unofficial conversion of SBURB/SGRUB from Homestuck into DND 5e)
Once made Maxwell's Silver Hammer come down upon Strahd's head to make sure he was dead.
Always study & sharpen philosophical razors. They save a lot of trouble.
And how long during the UA playtest and feedback period for the new edition to be developed did it take for the company to limit the feedback availability to ether Wizards.com and DDB.com accounts only, virtually leaving out anyone publicly wanting to give feedback about the UA’s?
Must have been a shock when feedback numbers for number of account members was low, especially since they strung out the UA playtest and feedback to what, a 6-8 week per UA and feedback cycle. And the entire thing took like 2 years from first UA rules testing to official release. What the 4th or 5th UA and feedback was when they moved the ability to remark on the feedback, and people started to notice how the questions were starting to become one sided with regards to the actual ability to effectively respond to the UA proposals?
They struck the hornets nest while the Playtest was being being used to gauge community support for the new edition, and everyone knows that only a small portion of the community actually gave any feedback that was listened to. ( two copper says Ai was used to filter the feedback so the numbers could be tailored to make it seem as if a majority liked the changes. Limited feedback access means you can make the numbers look spectacular given the amount of actual feedback wasn’t as large as the initial feedback responses. )
If 2024 was so loved by the community, and did so wonderfully, how come Wizbro isn’t spreading the success “loud and proudly”, but instead barely mentioning it at all? ( could it be that the one brand that had been carrying WotC was blown away by it’s sibling “Monopoly GO”, and has/had/Is become Wizbro’s “money pit” sinkhole due to their unfortunate gamble to revoke the OGL. )
The love for WotC and Hasbro walked out the door when the OGL apology tour, drove Wizbro’s Road Map clean off a cliff. How many “golden parachutes” did it cost? When it’s radio silence, and acting as if nothing happened, and practically anyone who says otherwise is automatically singled out for calling it like it really is, labeled, ridiculed, and spoken to has if a lesser person, well then where’s the love? At least one person in this relationship is being honest about the situation, while the other just sits there rolling their eyes.
Almost nothing in your post is factually accurate, rendering your conclusions unsound.
Tens of thousands of people participated in the 2024 play testing - the polls consistently received 4-5 times the number of responses the OGL poll did. Your claim folks were cut out of the playtest is simply ridiculous - tens of thousands easily figured out how to get this done.
As for them not celebrating? That simply is not true. They have been bragging about how this is the largest and fastest selling set of core books in the game’s history. They have been bragging about how they consistently scored above 80% on playtests. There has been all kinds of bragging.
Finally, as the numbers indicate, the OGL did not really do all that much damage to Wizards - they actually increased subscribers and members during the course of the OGL matter. It might have hurt their image among a vocal minority, but the actual damage was not all that significant. It was a big issue within the hardcore fan base, but, as the sales data (and perhaps common sense) seems to indicate, most folks care more about playing D&D than they do a contract unrelated to their actual play.
When it comes down to it, your post holds no real water - your entire premise is flawed, based on your incorrect perception of reality rather than the actual reality and information available. This level of denying reality to spread conspiracies and dislike of 2024 is exactly what OP is complaining about.
Responding just for OP’s sake, since I can see the above dialogue is not going to go anywhere but circles. It does, however, demonstrate the exact kind of behavior that led OP’s friends astray, and thus makes a useful case study on why certain types of poses might lead to distrust for unwarranted reasons. I expect there might be some users who respond to this very post by tripling down on misinformation and exaggeration of issues and support - I am not going to respond to those individually, other than to incorporate them into this post as further evidence of my point.
There are things Wizards has done to annoy some elements of the community - and those elements of the community truly believe that they speak for the game as a whole. The data shows they do not (Wizards gained more sales than they lost during the OGL issue; the OGL poll only had about 10,000 responders, while the 2024 playtest polls brought in 40-50,000 responses, clearly showing which topic the greater community cared more about). This is all data released in videos, article posts, and sales figures - all of which could carry legal penalties for false information about sales data or customer interest.
On the other side, you have folks like the above saying this legally-binding information is fake. They hold the burden of proving this as they are the ones trying to refute legally binding claims - but they simply do what they do above, repeating their claims over and over without providing hard data (and anecdotal data about their insular groups does not count - sales data is global and trumps personal experience). The goal seems to be using volume to drown out fact, hoping repeating unsubstantiated claims will create its own substantiation.
Why do they do this? The reasons are myriad. Some are just afraid of a new version of the game - this type of hate dates back decades, even if it is more visible now. As the user above mentioned, some do it because of bigotry - that happens a lot on this particular forum, with some of the loudest voices against 2024 being the exact same people complaining about Wizards’ efforts to remove Gygax’s self-proclaimed bigotry from the game. There are people who genuinely hate Wizards and want Wizards to fail - sometimes with legitimate gripes or sometimes due to gripes that are mountains they made from molehills. Sometimes they are fans of other games, and think D&D failing will help their chosen game. Sometimes they just want to cause chaos or want to get page or video views. Sometimes they actually tried the game and did not like it. And, sometimes, they are just parroting what they saw others say, not having firsthand experience - from your post, it looks like your friends might fall into this category.
The sad thing - it works, as the existence of that last category shows. Through volume, this very vocal minority creates a perception of consensus, even when data (which is always more boring to read and harder to find than poorly-informed or intentionally malignant hot takes) shows the contrary.
But, ultimately, none of that matters. If you are having fun, OP, that is what truly matters. And, with luck, your fun will prove infectious and convince your friends to give the rules set you want to use a try. History shows that to be fairly successful - every iteration of D&D is met with skepticism, but folks generally come around in the end.
Edit: It appears the posts this was in response to were deleted.
D&D is like the general population - @16% are explorers willing to try new things and for whom change is easy and interesting, @33% are conservatives, unwilling to try new things and change is scary and hard, then there is the middle @51%- willing to change once the lead 16% have proved the new stuff out and shown its benefits and problems. One has to understand this as the lead group aren’t that vocal - they just move in and see how it goes. The tail end 33% are very vocal and are likely to be actively fighting the changes. The middle are fairly silent waiting for the lead group to counter the fears of the followers with actual experience. Each of us has to figure out where they fit and be aware of the existence of the others. Generally if the vocal haters are about 2:1 to the vocal testers things are proceeding apace and stuff is fine. The folks to really listen to are that lead minority, when they start saying “we’ve been trying this and it’s got problems” it’s time to abandon that idea. So far I’m seeing that 2:1 ratio and haven’t found anything horrible yet in my own exploration of 2024. Yes there are some rough spots that need a bit more work ( ranger, alchemist) but over all it’s smoother and better balanced.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
I think I love you! Yes! Alchemist need more potions! Battlesmith also needs an extreme overhaul.
I have one online group I started the day the PHB released to test the system. Everyone in the group got a Sigil code too so we've been play testing it aall.The group is very on and off again so we don't play every week. It's a great group when we do get together though but mainly we just wanted to try the new rules and formed to test that.
I was DMing IRL after I played in a campaign leading up to the one I DM'd. Here is the character those campaigns were related too:
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/story-lore/214086-my-alchemist-2024-rules-background
This is my main character and I love it most of all. They are an Alchemist which I started in 3.5 just to try it out enjoying it. We mostly did Planescape after being accidentally falling through a door to Sigil. Then I saw they had them for 5e when I started playing 5e so I rolled up an Alchemist and had so much fun! We did LMoP and afterwards took a year of downtime so I set up a Alchemical company known as Big Pharma training everyone in town in Alchemy and bankrolled them to set up franchised drug stores all over the Realms (Acquisitions Inc.). We then moved on to OoA but got side tracked. Instead of dealing with the daemons we rolled over Menzoberranzan and saved Blingdenstone from an invasion by the Drow who blamed them for the daemons. Basically I saved this hot Drow matron twice, her brother once, and then assassinated all her rivals until she took over as a ruling house. She married me and had my kids as part of the arrangement. The campaign ended with me onto of the world in Menzoberranzan with a baby red Dragon as a pet for the House of Vahadarr (my noble house) and a secret lab in Menzoberranzan. Then I played an AD&D 2e game where we played the Maztica campaign. I was running a Maztican campaign at the same time but more on that in a second. The AD&D campaign was set around Fort Flame. Baulderian hired us to deal with the native wild Elves. Unlike the rest of the party I refused to take part in the final encounter and supply Baulderian with the Alchemist Fire he needed to burn down their forest committing mass genocide. Baulderian kicked me out of the expedition assuming I would die in Maztica so far from civilization and home. The party was TPK'd by the Wild Elves along with Baulderian and my character was allowed to live. This was set way before the Sundering and I found the Elixir of Youth after which my character learned to make and has been drinking for years to prolong his life indefinitely. Flash forward to 5e, I was DMing a Maztican campaign at the same time as the 2e AD&D play through. In the campaign my wife T'zarah Vahadarr basically took over Big Pharma and now in a position of power in the relationship she was a real threat. So my Alchemist fled making a major mistake in the process (read the background in the link). As a result she took over completely and transformed his Alchemical company into a major Maztican drug Cartel by slowly making some of the potions produced highly addictive. Just enough to not raise suspension while at the same time actually peddling drugs to those already addicted via balckmarkets. Once she gets a victim strung out one of her shell companies send a representative to convince the victim to travel to Maztica as a colonist. However once there they have their memories wiped and are enslaved on a plantation to harvest rare Maztican Alchemical components for the company. I had four parties play the campaign I DM'd, all of whom I found on these forums, so she has at least four separate plantations of slaves going in Maztica.
So, now for D&D One my character is returning as a ruined man searching for his lost half-drow children his wife sold into slavery at a much younger age due to having drank a Elixir of Youth to deage/de-level (so I could start at level one again) himself previously after narrowly escaping his wife who he asked for a divorce from only to be refused because she is obsessed with her pet human Alchemist. BEST CHARACTER EVER!!!
"Life is Cast by Random Dice"
Burn my candle twice.
I have done my life justice
Against random dice.
The main problem is that there seems to be an assumption that the forums are like the local pub. You go there to spend time with people you like (or you want to like, but you don't know them well enough yet and want to rectify that) talking about things you like and enjoy (in this case, specifically D&S), having a good time together. That may have been the intent behind creating the forums. It would be lovely if that were the case.
Instead, the forums have been infected by more typical internet norms. Instead of that friendly conversation where opinions are shared and, while not everyone will agree with every opinion, those opinion are respected...instead, it's more like a political debate. A lot of sniping and attacks going on. Then occasionally when WotC manages to kick the hornets' nest somehow, things get really nasty as everyone descends upon us and makes things a hundred times worse. There is a lot of name-calling and denigration going on...and that kills positivity much faster than negativity.
If you want a positive atmosphere where people are positive about the game etc (and that's not a bad thing at all), then you have to create an environment where it's welcome. I remember asking a question on how to handle a situation to help me be a better DM. The first response was reasonable and helpful. The second went off on one, painting me as some kind of ******...by putting words in my mouth, claiming I was doing things that I wasn't, making aspersions to my character when they didn't know me and so forth. To be fair, the other person came back and pointed out that they were being grossly unfair...but that kind of thing is not uncommon here, and it wrecks the atmosphere.
I'm fairly...i don't know if neutral is the right word, perhaps non-partisan...towards WotC and the game. I enjoy it, and I think there are really good parts, but I also recognise that there are drawbacks and negative sides to them. I'm generally willing to discuss either side. I'll point out when DDB does things in a bad way. On the other hand, I got death threats from when I was defending WotC because I thought people were being unfair towards them and they didn't like that. However, if I criticise an implementation, a rule, etc, I'm often called names, denigrated, and so forth. That's why I come to the forums, I'm sure.
I don't feel like I want to share those awesome experiences I've had with the game here because of the above attitudes and experiences. Since that thread I talked about, things haven't really gotten better. I daresay others feel the same way. And if you strip away those parts of the discussion...what you're left with is the hate, the attacks, the negativity. I'm mostly here to help people with their questions and get the news. Occasionally, I find myself drawn into a debate...and almost invariably regret it within a couple of posts.
I'd like this place to be more pleasant. I'd like it to be open. A place where we can talk about all aspects of the game. Where we can talk the things we enjoy, our good experiences, but also share opinions and discuss the bits we think could be improved with respect but also be treated with respect and not be belittled or dismissed.
I think, on some level, most people would say they'd agree with that. The problem is that it doesn't take many to derail it into a race to the bottom. It's something we have to have a proactive goal on that we work towards.
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.
Is there? You are the first person I hear express any opinion, either way. I've seen lots of questions and also some critizism of specific rules or classes. But hate? Really? Hm, I guess maybe I've missed it.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
I'm excited to try out 2024 rules!
I like most of what they changed (especially monks finally getting some boosts, paladins getting reined in a little, weapon masteries). I'm in a wait-and-see mode to see how the stuff I didn't like plays out (like the druid wildshape stuff, not doing enough for the ranger, linking ability score bumps to backgrounds, a variety of monster stat block changes).
As always, we'll just see what works our groups and tweak things how we want to play it. Think they did a great job overall. I was never on board with all the hate a publicly traded corporation got for maximizing profits by selling a product. I'm old enough to not be disappointed by the absolute normalcy of that. Stopped listening to a lot of youtubers back then during the Outrage Times (not that it ever ended, but it has subsided a bit).
I've played a teensy bit of full-on 2024 rules and like what I've seen so far. It's all good; I love my D&D and I suspect it's going to go as well or better with the new rules. I've been playing since the boxed sets (missed/skipped 4th edition for the most part). Weird to realize I've now been playing 5e for longer than I played 2nd edition and 3rd edition combined! It's been a great ride!
I agree that there's a lot to love about the 2024 rules. I also happen to think there's a lot to tweak.
The revamped rules as themselves, as presented in the 2024 PHB are, overall, an improvement. Once our current campaign is done, we'll be switching over. That said, I personally think WOTC should've gone farther and done a true 6.0 version of the game. There was far too much kowtowing to really loud segments.
The 2024 DMG and MM are very mixed bags, IMNSHO. While I like some of the tweaks to magic items, I think the 2014 DMG is far more useful to DMs than the new version. The new MM has some interesting changes but it doesn't feel like enough was changed to warrant it.
All of that said, personally, two things have soured my feelings about the game - really, about the company running the game. The OGL debacle still echoes - and ultimately, the harm it did is that WOTC showed what they're capable of doing, what they're willing to do, and it destroyed a lot of trust. Yes, they've course-corrected but even a lot of that was done ham-fistedly.
The second thing is how thoroughly AWFUL the addition/migration to the 2024 rules has been here on DNDB for the character builder. Hasbro did not give enough time and it's clear did not provide enough budget and people to get it done right the first time. What was once an indispensable tool has now become suspect and untrustworthy.....sort of like WOTC/Hasbro themselves.
The 2024 DMG is better at explaining the nuts and bolts of running a game as a DM, but it lacks several important tools for more in-depth DMing like even loose guidelines on how to eyeball CR on a homebrew monster.
The NPC section in the new DMG is terrible - borderline unhelpful. I also don't think including a mini guide to Greyhawk is all that helpful. It feels like there are a ton of topics that are only barely touched on in the new DMG that deserve a much bigger section or even a supplement of their own.
And yeah, the omission of anything remotely helpful in designing monsters, magic items, spells, and classes is shocking.
To be fair, the 2014 DMG rules didn't work particularly well, I mostly used the blog of holding values as a default in 2014, and the 2024 version also seems fine.
2014 version: https://www.blogofholding.com/?p=7338
2024 version: https://www.blogofholding.com/?p=8469
Spells and especially classes I can see, but yeah the lack of support on the other two is pretty bad.
I would not say that https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dnd/dmg-2014/dungeon-masters-workshop#CreatingaMagicItem is notably better than https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dnd/dmg-2024/dms-toolbox#CreatingaMagicItem, or that https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dnd/dmg-2014/dungeon-masters-workshop#CreatingaSpell is notably better than https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dnd/dmg-2024/dms-toolbox#CreatingaSpell.
I can understand not including monster creation rules -- the monster creation rules in 2014 are a bunch of page count and still don't work very well. However, they could have provided rough guidelines -- you could easily do a monster creation system at a similar level of detail to spell and item creation in a similar page count (it's really just "here are average stats; adjust those stats if the monster has traits that seem like they would make it dramatically more or less dangerous than normal").
I wouldn't mind something on the level of detail of https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dnd/dmg-2014/dungeon-masters-workshop#ModifyingaClass, but is it really all that valuable?
I don't understand not including them if the explicit point of the 2024 rules overhaul was clarification and improvement. Just about everyone agrees what's in the 2014 DMG is simply too complex and inaccurate, but I don't think the right answer was effectively ignoring that large part of running a game.
They are a business at the end of the day,. their entire point of existing is to make money. this whole "profits over customers" argument is asinine.
As a long time Player and DM (2nd Edition) i for one love the revised 5E rules. I have been running a campaign with them since September and so far I have not encountered a change that has not been for the better.
as for rushing the new stuff? this has been in the works for the most part since Tasha's released. they have not rushed anything.
2024 is doing well, and it is not dislike by a decently large proportion of the audience, decently loud yes, not large.
AGAIN, love is there.
It's just that people take their personal homebrew & headcanons, as well as invoking the trope "Other Stuff Exists" to illogical degrees, and/or external author's works(Many of which are held back by outdated aspects & asymmetrical writing to canon lore) and mentally establish such as sacrosanct, leading to surprised Pikachu faces all around when all that isn't obeyed to everyone's letter.
You just have to peel all the surprised Pikachu faces & fandom shenanigans away, and it's still there.
DM, player & homebrewer(Current homebrew project is an unofficial conversion of SBURB/SGRUB from Homestuck into DND 5e)
Once made Maxwell's Silver Hammer come down upon Strahd's head to make sure he was dead.
Always study & sharpen philosophical razors. They save a lot of trouble.
Many of us are still working on developing a skill we didn't need before - sifting through the barrage of information through social media and public forums with an awareness of how it works.
Social media is about engagement at any cost - whatever draws people in is pushed to the top. And humans are drawn towards conflict, whether it be to participate in it or mediate it or just grab popcorn and watch it. So the hate/criticism bubbles to the top and becomes most/all of what you see.
This is pretty much a universal thing and we need to always be aware of it. The world the algorithms show us is not the real world. The 2024 basic ruleset is free to try out, your own experience with it and word of mouth from people you actually know are going to be much more reliable indicators of whether it works for you.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
“The actual general community”? A fraction of the people who participated in the playtest surveys for the ‘24 update participated in the OGL survey, and despite Paizo’s quick move to play white knight the new core 3 sold extremely well. Is it entirely possible the numbers would have been better without the OGL drama? Sure. Does that mean the majority of WotC’s market segment noticed or cared about the OGL drama? No. It was all over the boards here because this is where you find the people who are actively following developments, but purely by the numbers of feedback we see for the various UA surveys there’s a lot more people who play the game without keeping in close touch with the larger community. These forums are not a representative sample, and if you compare the engagement with the OGL survey to UA engagement before and after, it ain’t gonna measure up.
By that logic if this thread is any example, the loud group is saying the new rules are great, if so why is everyone so quick to jump on posts about not being happy? Makes a person wonder.
No one loves or is in a relationship with corporations in THAT way, and it is very crass & parasocial to suggest otherwise.
Likewise, no one is questioning the piety of the critical & anti-corporate.
But there IS love for things that aren't the corporation, and THAT is what OP is asking about. There are good things out there.
So maybe stick to that.
DM, player & homebrewer(Current homebrew project is an unofficial conversion of SBURB/SGRUB from Homestuck into DND 5e)
Once made Maxwell's Silver Hammer come down upon Strahd's head to make sure he was dead.
Always study & sharpen philosophical razors. They save a lot of trouble.
Almost nothing in your post is factually accurate, rendering your conclusions unsound.
Tens of thousands of people participated in the 2024 play testing - the polls consistently received 4-5 times the number of responses the OGL poll did. Your claim folks were cut out of the playtest is simply ridiculous - tens of thousands easily figured out how to get this done.
As for them not celebrating? That simply is not true. They have been bragging about how this is the largest and fastest selling set of core books in the game’s history. They have been bragging about how they consistently scored above 80% on playtests. There has been all kinds of bragging.
Finally, as the numbers indicate, the OGL did not really do all that much damage to Wizards - they actually increased subscribers and members during the course of the OGL matter. It might have hurt their image among a vocal minority, but the actual damage was not all that significant. It was a big issue within the hardcore fan base, but, as the sales data (and perhaps common sense) seems to indicate, most folks care more about playing D&D than they do a contract unrelated to their actual play.
When it comes down to it, your post holds no real water - your entire premise is flawed, based on your incorrect perception of reality rather than the actual reality and information available. This level of denying reality to spread conspiracies and dislike of 2024 is exactly what OP is complaining about.
Responding just for OP’s sake, since I can see the above dialogue is not going to go anywhere but circles. It does, however, demonstrate the exact kind of behavior that led OP’s friends astray, and thus makes a useful case study on why certain types of poses might lead to distrust for unwarranted reasons. I expect there might be some users who respond to this very post by tripling down on misinformation and exaggeration of issues and support - I am not going to respond to those individually, other than to incorporate them into this post as further evidence of my point.
There are things Wizards has done to annoy some elements of the community - and those elements of the community truly believe that they speak for the game as a whole. The data shows they do not (Wizards gained more sales than they lost during the OGL issue; the OGL poll only had about 10,000 responders, while the 2024 playtest polls brought in 40-50,000 responses, clearly showing which topic the greater community cared more about). This is all data released in videos, article posts, and sales figures - all of which could carry legal penalties for false information about sales data or customer interest.
On the other side, you have folks like the above saying this legally-binding information is fake. They hold the burden of proving this as they are the ones trying to refute legally binding claims - but they simply do what they do above, repeating their claims over and over without providing hard data (and anecdotal data about their insular groups does not count - sales data is global and trumps personal experience). The goal seems to be using volume to drown out fact, hoping repeating unsubstantiated claims will create its own substantiation.
Why do they do this? The reasons are myriad. Some are just afraid of a new version of the game - this type of hate dates back decades, even if it is more visible now. As the user above mentioned, some do it because of bigotry - that happens a lot on this particular forum, with some of the loudest voices against 2024 being the exact same people complaining about Wizards’ efforts to remove Gygax’s self-proclaimed bigotry from the game. There are people who genuinely hate Wizards and want Wizards to fail - sometimes with legitimate gripes or sometimes due to gripes that are mountains they made from molehills. Sometimes they are fans of other games, and think D&D failing will help their chosen game. Sometimes they just want to cause chaos or want to get page or video views. Sometimes they actually tried the game and did not like it. And, sometimes, they are just parroting what they saw others say, not having firsthand experience - from your post, it looks like your friends might fall into this category.
The sad thing - it works, as the existence of that last category shows. Through volume, this very vocal minority creates a perception of consensus, even when data (which is always more boring to read and harder to find than poorly-informed or intentionally malignant hot takes) shows the contrary.
But, ultimately, none of that matters. If you are having fun, OP, that is what truly matters. And, with luck, your fun will prove infectious and convince your friends to give the rules set you want to use a try. History shows that to be fairly successful - every iteration of D&D is met with skepticism, but folks generally come around in the end.
Edit: It appears the posts this was in response to were deleted.