With the introduction of the 2024 revised rules came a lot of confusion. What would you recommend when it comes to bridging the gap? If I were in the middle of an ongoing campaign (non-adventurer's league) that's been using the 2014 rules, does everyone now change their characters to best match the 2024 rules? Can some characters use 2014 and others 2024? I could easily imagine that getting confusing. Maybe they keep using 2014 until if/when those characters die and their new ones are 2024, phasing them out? Would you just keep going with 2014 until the end of the campaign, which could go on for years? Should everybody in the campaign take a vote and we go with whichever comes out on top? What are your opinions?
I'm letting my players rebuild if they want to (and take an origin feat even if they don't), while I'm moving to the updated mechanics and spell lists.
IMO, you want to keep the mechanics and which set of spells and magic items are in use consistent for all players, but which class/species/background versions everybody's using doesn't matter that much. (Are the new ones slightly to noticeably more powerful than the old? Yes. Are they so much so that everyone sticking with old characters will feel useless? Probably not.)
I won't be changing anything until all of the books are out, and even then, I think our campaign will still be running in 5e.
The new edition adds some coold features, but without the proper monsters to combat them, and the proper rules for the DMG, it's half a release, IMHO.
For your campaign, I recommend sticking with 2014 rules until you get to a convenient point - a breathing space with a level up, or (again, IMHO) the end - before changing.
Bear in mind that the rules are, as said above, incomplete. There's no Artificer in the ne PHB (which is patently ridiculous) meaning anyone with Artificer will be a weird blend of old & new rules.
Nope, not finished enough for me. I'll stick to 5e.
I won't be changing anything until all of the books are out, and even then, I think our campaign will still be running in 5e.
The new edition adds some coold features, but without the proper monsters to combat them, and the proper rules for the DMG, it's half a release, IMHO.
For your campaign, I recommend sticking with 2014 rules until you get to a convenient point - a breathing space with a level up, or (again, IMHO) the end - before changing.
Bear in mind that the rules are, as said above, incomplete. There's no Artificer in the ne PHB (which is patently ridiculous) meaning anyone with Artificer will be a weird blend of old & new rules.
Nope, not finished enough for me. I'll stick to 5e.
Yeah, a DM for one of my games has gone on a D&D hiatus at least until all the core books are out. I can definitely understand that.
Yeah, a DM for one of my games has gone on a D&D hiatus at least until all the core books are out. I can definitely understand that.
I figure that if I didn't know the new books were out, it wouldn't make the old ones any different. I still think they're awesome. I'll be getting the new ones for drop-in games in the local club, if the lcub goes over to it, but I think the campaign will be staying with the 2014 rules.
For the one group I'm actively running right now, we are not making any changes to existing characters, and we are largely sticking to 2014 rules. (The only exceptions to that are that we are using the new rules for casting multiple spells in a turn and the new behavior for Heroic Inspiration.)
I decided this because two of my players are fairly new to D&D and I do not want them to get confused, especially since they are heavily dependent on D&D Beyond and the state of implementation of the new rules on DDB is a mess right now.
This is a great question - or set of questions ;). I agree that it is currently a bit confusing especially with the two rule sets sort of existing in the same space on D&D Beyond. Personally, I think it's something to discuss with the group you're playing with. And I think it works the most smoothly if everyone, including the DM, is using the same version - which is a bit tricky when the monster manual isn't out yet but still doable.
My brother's D&D group who've been playing for a long time have decided not to switch to the 2024 ruleset and instead continue with 2014 for the time being. Meanwhile, I've been running a few one-shots with them using 2024 characters to test it out.
I am allowing players to use the new spells - heals in particular where underpowered in 5e. the rest of it is just flavor so far. I am not letting them use weapon masteries its a nuisance and i likely will only implement a few when I run a full 2024 game.
I don't think it serves any real purpose to deny players the use of spells that are for the most part not that different. Again except the heals - but I have always HB stuff to bump the healers anyway so its not a big change for me.
My personal approach is that its all or nothing. A mix and match approach is one that makes everything more difficult for the DM. 5e is 5e, the 2024 rules are their own thing. If my group wanted to use the 2024 rules, they get nothing from outside of those new books.
The process for my group was as follows:
- Are we enjoying the 5e ruleset? - With the new campaign are we interested in a new ruleset? - Are there other rulesets that would suit us better (Tales of the Valiant)?
In two out of three cases, the descision has been not to get into the 2024 rules. In fact now having seen the Tales of the Valiant books, D&D 2024 isn't going to be the choice. In one case they switched to Pathfinder 2e because 'D&D has nothing new to offer the group'.
Our next review of the rules then will come when we complete a campaign or when the 2024 rules are 'complete' (DMG, PHB, MM, and Starter Set/Adventure). Until then the books get entirely ignored and we carry on with our 2014 ruleset.
My personal approach is that its all or nothing. A mix and match approach is one that makes everything more difficult for the DM. 5e is 5e, the 2024 rules are their own thing. If my group wanted to use the 2024 rules, they get nothing from outside of those new books.
The process for my group was as follows:
- Are we enjoying the 5e ruleset? - With the new campaign are we interested in a new ruleset? - Are there other rulesets that would suit us better (Tales of the Valiant)?
In two out of three cases, the descision has been not to get into the 2024 rules. In fact now having seen the Tales of the Valiant books, D&D 2024 isn't going to be the choice. In one case they switched to Pathfinder 2e because 'D&D has nothing new to offer the group'.
Our next review of the rules then will come when we complete a campaign or when the 2024 rules are 'complete' (DMG, PHB, MM, and Starter Set/Adventure). Until then the books get entirely ignored and we carry on with our 2014 ruleset.
Totally great approach - not the right approach for my groups, having someone have the ability to use Starry Wisp, Sorcerous Burst and have the fun of rolling the extra d8 if they get an 8, or healing for 2d4+Mod instead of 1d4+Mod really is a non factor in terms of complication for me. (For context my current campaigns are L8 L17 & L17)
However I did feel the weapon masteries would slow combat down and want to review them more thoroughly before I implement so that is where we drew the line. I tend to HB a lot so my melee players are always on par with casters as a rule of thumb - so not getting the masteries didn't really cause a fuss. Hell melee players where the first ones that wanted to allow the better heals lol.
It's really just all about each group (Including the DM) enjoying the sessions as much as possible. I am a big fan of whatever works for your group is best.
I'm also sticking with 2014 for my current campaign, and I have yet to make a judgement on whether I'll switch once the campaign ends and all the core books are out. My main thing is that I haven't yet been able to become familiar with the new rules, and I don't know where to start looking to find out what the major differences are without just reading the entire book. Does anyone have any insight on what the significant changes are or where to learn them?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Paladin main who spends most of his D&D time worldbuilding or DMing, not Paladin-ing.
I'm also sticking with 2014 for my current campaign, and I have yet to make a judgement on whether I'll switch once the campaign ends and all the core books are out. My main thing is that I haven't yet been able to become familiar with the new rules, and I don't know where to start looking to find out what the major differences are without just reading the entire book. Does anyone have any insight on what the significant changes are or where to learn them?
My personal summary of the alterations:
Player's Handbook
Lots of shiny player options in a few classes.
Weapon masteries alter the dynamics of melee combat a little.
Ranger is an entirely pointless class
Many spells have received alterations to their descriptions (Counterspell is a notable one here). These changes do require a change in player tactics if they are used to relying on or heavily using a spell - I'm looking at you Conjure Animals.
Subclasses are now universally attained at Lv3
Backgrounds come with a Feat
'Races' are now 'Species' and Half-Elf/Orc is gone. Some significant changes to the species benefits - mostly watering down the uniqueness of the races.
Dungeon Master's Guide
Chapter 1 & 2- A ham-handed attempted at explaining the basics of how to run a session. My own opinion and commentary here. It's a half decent attempt from mediocre writers written specifically for less experienced DMs/GMs. Compared it with the GMG for Tales of the Valiant it's a really poor showing.
Chapter 3 - Relatively pointless 'how to build backgrounds/creatures/magic items' etc. Not all that much different from existing DMG.
Chapter 4 - A reasonable and better than DMG 2014's attempt to describe how to create shorter adventures (with EXAMPLES!!)
Chapter 5 - A transparent attempt to sell the Greyhawk setting which masquerades as a guide to creating campaigns.
Magic items now have some values attached.
Bastions have been developed in an attempt to bleed away the treasure and monies that characters collect. They're cool if your players want to try out base building but the DM kinda needs to be willing to have those bastions attacked or beseiged otherwise they end up as magic item generators.
Missing - Dungeon Master's Workshop. This is the section of 2014 DMG which contained the optional rules like healer's kit requirements, or like injuries, Plot Points or Healing Surges. This to my mind is the biggest omission from the new DMG. These options really could have been reworked and given much better support and guidance for the DM. In doing so the writers would have given some nice and very fun tools to the DM. It is these missing features that to me signal that this new iteration of the D&D system is one where DMs should expect little to no goodies for themselves, but all the things for the players.
There are also some changes to the way that monster stat blocks work, and I am assuming (hoping) to see changes to the way many monsters work now but we won't know until the new Monster Manual drops.
Summary - My assessment, and that of a few people in my play groups (I run several groups) is that the new stuff is interesting but enough has changed - specifically in the area of combat - that this is a new edition if you are running 'faithful' to the books as written. There are those I've spoken to who claim that the information is all still there, it's just been reworded or laid out better. I disagree with this characterisation personally. In the one-shot games I've tried using the new ruleset what has been that it was as much as a learnign curve as switching to a new system. Therein lies the weakness of these new books. We all know the players who 'don't have time to learn new rules'. I've seen players frustrated by the way some of the new spells work. Conjure Animals for example are now no longer seperate fey creatures/spirits. Instead they are an intangible pack of spirits in animal form. This removes some of the utility of the spell - Rangers now can't use the animals as a way to block off a small hallway, or surround an enemy, or even deploy the animals in different formations. However it also removes specific weakness of said animals - no longer being considered Fey means that they don't flag up with Detect Evil and Good should you have an evil ranger NPC attempting to ambush the party. This is where the real friction of the new system is created. My assessment is of players annoyed by having to relearn how their spells work. It's tedious and as one of my players put it - why would I learn the spells I already use rather than switch to a new system?
I would say the best bet is to talk to your group. IMO, the whole point is for everyone to have a good time, and having everyone on the same page is a good start.
Both groups I am a part of have chosen to keep using the 2014 rules (with the homebrew stuff we've come up with) until the end of our current campaigns. Between campaigns we plan to play some one-shot games at various levels so we can all get a solid feel for the 2024 ruleset. It will also give us an idea of what character builds we want to use for the next game.
One group I am in did run a level 4 one-shot game with 2024 rules and to us it felt incomplete since the 2024 MM isn't out yet. So there is that.
My home game started using the 2014 rules and is close enough to the end of the campaign that I won't switch to 2024. It would just cause needless confusion.
The other game I run is Adventurer's League and we switched the characters and ruleset over to 2024 without much hassle. For converting characters on Beyond, they just removed the 2014 class and selected the 2024 class. Similarly for species if it was updated. Everyone added Origin feats and adjusted ASI/feats taken as the characters progressed since a lot of feats now have a level 4 prerequisite. There were often several tweaks needed to obtain characters with a similar vibe/concept in some cases.
For example a 2014, GWM hexblade - blade pact melee warlock which originally had 8 strength and 14 dex ended up switching to a strength build (eg 14 str, 8 dex) because GWM requires level 4 and 13+ strength for 2024 and it gives +1 strength. Since a warlock can't wear heavy armor they also took 1 level in fighter for heavy armor proficiency. The +1 strength from GWM gives the character 15+ strength and the ability to use heavy armor without a speed penalty. In the end, the character has a similar feel to it but some compromise was required to get there.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
With the introduction of the 2024 revised rules came a lot of confusion. What would you recommend when it comes to bridging the gap? If I were in the middle of an ongoing campaign (non-adventurer's league) that's been using the 2014 rules, does everyone now change their characters to best match the 2024 rules? Can some characters use 2014 and others 2024? I could easily imagine that getting confusing. Maybe they keep using 2014 until if/when those characters die and their new ones are 2024, phasing them out? Would you just keep going with 2014 until the end of the campaign, which could go on for years? Should everybody in the campaign take a vote and we go with whichever comes out on top? What are your opinions?
I'm letting my players rebuild if they want to (and take an origin feat even if they don't), while I'm moving to the updated mechanics and spell lists.
IMO, you want to keep the mechanics and which set of spells and magic items are in use consistent for all players, but which class/species/background versions everybody's using doesn't matter that much. (Are the new ones slightly to noticeably more powerful than the old? Yes. Are they so much so that everyone sticking with old characters will feel useless? Probably not.)
I won't be changing anything until all of the books are out, and even then, I think our campaign will still be running in 5e.
The new edition adds some coold features, but without the proper monsters to combat them, and the proper rules for the DMG, it's half a release, IMHO.
For your campaign, I recommend sticking with 2014 rules until you get to a convenient point - a breathing space with a level up, or (again, IMHO) the end - before changing.
Bear in mind that the rules are, as said above, incomplete. There's no Artificer in the ne PHB (which is patently ridiculous) meaning anyone with Artificer will be a weird blend of old & new rules.
Nope, not finished enough for me. I'll stick to 5e.
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
Yeah, a DM for one of my games has gone on a D&D hiatus at least until all the core books are out. I can definitely understand that.
I figure that if I didn't know the new books were out, it wouldn't make the old ones any different. I still think they're awesome. I'll be getting the new ones for drop-in games in the local club, if the lcub goes over to it, but I think the campaign will be staying with the 2014 rules.
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
For the one group I'm actively running right now, we are not making any changes to existing characters, and we are largely sticking to 2014 rules. (The only exceptions to that are that we are using the new rules for casting multiple spells in a turn and the new behavior for Heroic Inspiration.)
I decided this because two of my players are fairly new to D&D and I do not want them to get confused, especially since they are heavily dependent on D&D Beyond and the state of implementation of the new rules on DDB is a mess right now.
pronouns: he/she/they
I keep some of the rules from 2014 like monster manual stuff, but I changed classes and spells.
This is a great question - or set of questions ;). I agree that it is currently a bit confusing especially with the two rule sets sort of existing in the same space on D&D Beyond. Personally, I think it's something to discuss with the group you're playing with. And I think it works the most smoothly if everyone, including the DM, is using the same version - which is a bit tricky when the monster manual isn't out yet but still doable.
My brother's D&D group who've been playing for a long time have decided not to switch to the 2024 ruleset and instead continue with 2014 for the time being. Meanwhile, I've been running a few one-shots with them using 2024 characters to test it out.
I am allowing players to use the new spells - heals in particular where underpowered in 5e. the rest of it is just flavor so far. I am not letting them use weapon masteries its a nuisance and i likely will only implement a few when I run a full 2024 game.
I don't think it serves any real purpose to deny players the use of spells that are for the most part not that different. Again except the heals - but I have always HB stuff to bump the healers anyway so its not a big change for me.
$.02
My personal approach is that its all or nothing. A mix and match approach is one that makes everything more difficult for the DM. 5e is 5e, the 2024 rules are their own thing. If my group wanted to use the 2024 rules, they get nothing from outside of those new books.
The process for my group was as follows:
- Are we enjoying the 5e ruleset?
- With the new campaign are we interested in a new ruleset?
- Are there other rulesets that would suit us better (Tales of the Valiant)?
In two out of three cases, the descision has been not to get into the 2024 rules. In fact now having seen the Tales of the Valiant books, D&D 2024 isn't going to be the choice. In one case they switched to Pathfinder 2e because 'D&D has nothing new to offer the group'.
Our next review of the rules then will come when we complete a campaign or when the 2024 rules are 'complete' (DMG, PHB, MM, and Starter Set/Adventure). Until then the books get entirely ignored and we carry on with our 2014 ruleset.
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
Totally great approach - not the right approach for my groups, having someone have the ability to use Starry Wisp, Sorcerous Burst and have the fun of rolling the extra d8 if they get an 8, or healing for 2d4+Mod instead of 1d4+Mod really is a non factor in terms of complication for me. (For context my current campaigns are L8 L17 & L17)
However I did feel the weapon masteries would slow combat down and want to review them more thoroughly before I implement so that is where we drew the line. I tend to HB a lot so my melee players are always on par with casters as a rule of thumb - so not getting the masteries didn't really cause a fuss. Hell melee players where the first ones that wanted to allow the better heals lol.
It's really just all about each group (Including the DM) enjoying the sessions as much as possible. I am a big fan of whatever works for your group is best.
I'm sticking with the 2014 version (which I'm still learning myself) until I see a need to change.
I'm also sticking with 2014 for my current campaign, and I have yet to make a judgement on whether I'll switch once the campaign ends and all the core books are out. My main thing is that I haven't yet been able to become familiar with the new rules, and I don't know where to start looking to find out what the major differences are without just reading the entire book. Does anyone have any insight on what the significant changes are or where to learn them?
Paladin main who spends most of his D&D time worldbuilding or DMing, not Paladin-ing.
My personal summary of the alterations:
Player's Handbook
Dungeon Master's Guide
There are also some changes to the way that monster stat blocks work, and I am assuming (hoping) to see changes to the way many monsters work now but we won't know until the new Monster Manual drops.
Summary - My assessment, and that of a few people in my play groups (I run several groups) is that the new stuff is interesting but enough has changed - specifically in the area of combat - that this is a new edition if you are running 'faithful' to the books as written. There are those I've spoken to who claim that the information is all still there, it's just been reworded or laid out better. I disagree with this characterisation personally. In the one-shot games I've tried using the new ruleset what has been that it was as much as a learnign curve as switching to a new system. Therein lies the weakness of these new books. We all know the players who 'don't have time to learn new rules'. I've seen players frustrated by the way some of the new spells work. Conjure Animals for example are now no longer seperate fey creatures/spirits. Instead they are an intangible pack of spirits in animal form. This removes some of the utility of the spell - Rangers now can't use the animals as a way to block off a small hallway, or surround an enemy, or even deploy the animals in different formations. However it also removes specific weakness of said animals - no longer being considered Fey means that they don't flag up with Detect Evil and Good should you have an evil ranger NPC attempting to ambush the party. This is where the real friction of the new system is created. My assessment is of players annoyed by having to relearn how their spells work. It's tedious and as one of my players put it - why would I learn the spells I already use rather than switch to a new system?
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
I would say the best bet is to talk to your group. IMO, the whole point is for everyone to have a good time, and having everyone on the same page is a good start.
Both groups I am a part of have chosen to keep using the 2014 rules (with the homebrew stuff we've come up with) until the end of our current campaigns. Between campaigns we plan to play some one-shot games at various levels so we can all get a solid feel for the 2024 ruleset. It will also give us an idea of what character builds we want to use for the next game.
One group I am in did run a level 4 one-shot game with 2024 rules and to us it felt incomplete since the 2024 MM isn't out yet. So there is that.
My home game started using the 2014 rules and is close enough to the end of the campaign that I won't switch to 2024. It would just cause needless confusion.
The other game I run is Adventurer's League and we switched the characters and ruleset over to 2024 without much hassle. For converting characters on Beyond, they just removed the 2014 class and selected the 2024 class. Similarly for species if it was updated. Everyone added Origin feats and adjusted ASI/feats taken as the characters progressed since a lot of feats now have a level 4 prerequisite. There were often several tweaks needed to obtain characters with a similar vibe/concept in some cases.
For example a 2014, GWM hexblade - blade pact melee warlock which originally had 8 strength and 14 dex ended up switching to a strength build (eg 14 str, 8 dex) because GWM requires level 4 and 13+ strength for 2024 and it gives +1 strength. Since a warlock can't wear heavy armor they also took 1 level in fighter for heavy armor proficiency. The +1 strength from GWM gives the character 15+ strength and the ability to use heavy armor without a speed penalty. In the end, the character has a similar feel to it but some compromise was required to get there.