I think everyone would benefit from taking a step back and realizing we all just want the game we love to have a good future. And that can mean different things for different people. Wishing misfortune on someone, name calling, and characterizing each other as monsters doesn't help the conversation at all. DnD should be for everyone, not a reason to drive each other away.
Hopefully by listening to each other and seeing different points of view, we can work together to make the best game we can. A lot of people don't get this opportunity for so much involvement in their favorite game's direction. We're pretty lucky. Let's make the most of it.
Totally agreed. When the game is redesigned, everyone is naturally going to argue for changes (or retained materials) that benefit themselves and their groups the most. It's fine if that is a starting point for a broader argument about why that will benefit the game as a whole, and why that will lead to more sales for WotC, but as soon as the argument turns into 'well, you would agree with me if you weren't an XXXX' implying that people with opposing viewpoints are somehow defective or that your viewpoint is inherently superior because of some aspect of yourself it becomes counterproductive.
So, because I, hypothetically, don't like 1D&D over 5e I'm a horrible bitter person who doesn't deserve to play D&D? That I wish pain and suffering on other people?
I really hope that 1D&D works well and that I enjoy it. We don't have enough information to even speculate on whether that will be the case or not, the game experience comes from the holistic experience, and we've only seen glimpses of very small parts that may or may not even be part of the game. All we have is WotC's history to judge them by, and do their recent efforts really look particularly reassuring? I'm remembering Spelljammer, a cut length publication, sold at a pretty high premium, only to have a massive uproar over what content there was.
Sorry, I'm anxious about this change. I have a lot of money invested in the game and I'm having to wait until 2024 to know whether it has a future (for me) or not. While I point out the bits I do like and praise it, I'm unwilling to just gloss over the bits that I don't, and I refuse to believe that makes me a bad person.
It's apparent that I'm not welcome in this community.
Oh come on, don't be a drama queen. This community is the most polite, caring, and gentle of those that I've been to. I remember holy wars on WoW forums in TBC-WotLK era... *Vietnam flashbacks intensify*
I also think it is important to point out that hating change for the sake of hating it and wanting more simplicity in the game are completely different opinions believed by completely different people. The former is clearly bad*, but the latter is an interesting perspective that A) I haven't seen anyone actually voice and B) does have its upsides. Simplicity, by definition, is easier to understand and play with. That being said, I find a lack of complexity can lead to a lack of options and depth. This can bore more experienced players.
Personally, I think that each class should be fairly complex, but also be easily accessible to new players. As I explained in this thread, I really like additional complexity that provides simpler options for players who need them. That way, both new and advanced players can play and enjoy the game.
* = Just to clarify, hating something for the sake of hating it is very different than hating or disliking it for actual reasons.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
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 & explainHERE.
So, because I, hypothetically, don't like 1D&D over 5e I'm a horrible bitter person who doesn't deserve to play D&D? That I wish pain and suffering on other people?
I did not say that people do not deserve to play D&D. Even if I wanted to, I cannot stop people from making up stories and play pretend anyways, as it is literally impossible.
What I said is that I and others like me should not be forced to play with people who want to play with an extremely narrow set of rules, especially when that narrow set of rules from time to time have caused disappointment and PAIN. I am pretty lucky that nothing in the books have really triggered me, but that does not mean I have not the seen the negative impacts that it has caused in this very forum, and from what I have seen, Reddit is even worse. If I was one of those people who were hurt, I would have been told that I have issues with separating fantasy from reality and that I should just suck it up. In fact, I was one of those very people who thought that D&D is just a game and people should grow a pair and grow up. I do not remember who it was on this forum, but something they said in response to me made me realize that D&D can cause real PAIN despite being just a game, and if D&D pushes my buttons, I would be up in arms screaming too.
Now that I and others have a chance to play a game with more options that is more reflective of our beliefs and values, it is extremely messed up for people who do not give two shits about our wellbeing to shut it down and force us to play with them, continuing to cause us PAIN. It is not okay entrap us and hurt us for the sake of convenience of those who do not care about us. Trust me, having a harder time finding players is absolutely nothing compared to the PAIN some of us have experienced, and people who have hurt us should be thankful that karma is kind, as all they get is a slap on the wrist and will never experience nor understand our PAIN.
I am a GM, so I have absolute control over my games and know what things to avoid to not hurt myself, and it is relatively easier for me to find players. On the other hand, most players are at the mercy of their GMs and hope their GMs will not hurt them, it is also more difficult for them to find a group, and are more likely having to choose between no D&D and bad D&D. I personally just want more options, and I honestly do not care if they are good or bad because I can fix it with good old fashioned homebrew. Most players do not have that luxury since they have to go by the GM's rules, but by having more options available, it may be easier for them to bring something up or simply just choose the option that causes the least PAIN. For example, I really like the option of ASIs coming from backgrounds rather than race. Keep in mind the old option of ASIs coming from race is still there, and it honestly does not matter where the ASIs come from as long as the character get them from somewhere, as it is literally just a cosmetic change. However, that one change can potentially mitigate so much PAIN, and I am all for it as an available option to players.
I really hope that 1D&D works well and that I enjoy it. We don't have enough information to even speculate on whether that will be the case or not, the game experience comes from the holistic experience, and we've only seen glimpses of very small parts that may or may not even be part of the game. All we have is WotC's history to judge them by, and do their recent efforts really look particularly reassuring? I'm remembering Spelljammer, a cut length publication, sold at a pretty high premium, only to have a massive uproar over what content there was.
Sorry, I'm anxious about this change. I have a lot of money invested in the game and I'm having to wait until 2024 to know whether it has a future (for me) or not. While I point out the bits I do like and praise it, I'm unwilling to just gloss over the bits that I don't, and I refuse to believe that makes me a bad person.
Their recent efforts are not reassuring, but you always have the option of not buying it, just like how some forum users here chose not to purchase and use TCOE. I love TCOE. I love the idea of Spelljammer, I just did not like how they made S:AIS, as I really wished they got rid of the adventure and put that effort into more spelljammers and monsters. Do not get me wrong, the adventure is not half bad, but I honestly do not think it is as valuable as having more Spelljammers and monsters. While not a priority for me personally, it does not hurt to include ship combat rules and a way to generate your own wildspace systems either.
1D&D is no different from TCOE or S:AIS. Just take what you like and discard what you do not like. At the end of the day, no matter what label Wizards put on it, 1D&D is still freaking 5e. Backwards compatibility is just marketing speak to generate hype for a system that is almost a decade old at this point. If Wizards did not slap a new edition name on it, people would probably just call this TCOE 2.0 or something until we have the name of the book.
Can't remember if this was mentioned here already or not, but the new grapple rules and Grappler feat are insane on a monk. Being able to hit with an unarmed strike and automatically grapple the enemy and then being able to ferry them across the battlefield at full monk super-speed is crazy. Its almost to the point where I feel its going to be a must-pick, which makes me think its too much. Granted, we havent seen how the Monk is going to change as a class but I doubt they are going to remove their focus on unarmed strikes or steadily improving movement speed.
Yeah these are some of the reasons I'm looking forward to the Warriors group to be next the most. I think it will really set the playing field for everything else. I kind of feal the same way about the Skulker feat too. It's so good for a Rogue, I wonder if it's the one everyone will gravitate to and feel bad if they don't take it.
Totally agreed. When the game is redesigned, everyone is naturally going to argue for changes (or retained materials) that benefit themselves and their groups the most. It's fine if that is a starting point for a broader argument about why that will benefit the game as a whole, and why that will lead to more sales for WotC, but as soon as the argument turns into 'well, you would agree with me if you weren't an XXXX' implying that people with opposing viewpoints are somehow defective or that your viewpoint is inherently superior because of some aspect of yourself it becomes counterproductive.
Oh come on, don't be a drama queen. This community is the most polite, caring, and gentle of those that I've been to. I remember holy wars on WoW forums in TBC-WotLK era... *Vietnam flashbacks intensify*
I also think it is important to point out that hating change for the sake of hating it and wanting more simplicity in the game are completely different opinions believed by completely different people. The former is clearly bad*, but the latter is an interesting perspective that A) I haven't seen anyone actually voice and B) does have its upsides. Simplicity, by definition, is easier to understand and play with. That being said, I find a lack of complexity can lead to a lack of options and depth. This can bore more experienced players.
Personally, I think that each class should be fairly complex, but also be easily accessible to new players. As I explained in this thread, I really like additional complexity that provides simpler options for players who need them. That way, both new and advanced players can play and enjoy the game.
* = Just to clarify, hating something for the sake of hating it is very different than hating or disliking it for actual reasons.
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.I did not say that people do not deserve to play D&D. Even if I wanted to, I cannot stop people from making up stories and play pretend anyways, as it is literally impossible.
What I said is that I and others like me should not be forced to play with people who want to play with an extremely narrow set of rules, especially when that narrow set of rules from time to time have caused disappointment and PAIN. I am pretty lucky that nothing in the books have really triggered me, but that does not mean I have not the seen the negative impacts that it has caused in this very forum, and from what I have seen, Reddit is even worse. If I was one of those people who were hurt, I would have been told that I have issues with separating fantasy from reality and that I should just suck it up. In fact, I was one of those very people who thought that D&D is just a game and people should grow a pair and grow up. I do not remember who it was on this forum, but something they said in response to me made me realize that D&D can cause real PAIN despite being just a game, and if D&D pushes my buttons, I would be up in arms screaming too.
Now that I and others have a chance to play a game with more options that is more reflective of our beliefs and values, it is extremely messed up for people who do not give two shits about our wellbeing to shut it down and force us to play with them, continuing to cause us PAIN. It is not okay entrap us and hurt us for the sake of convenience of those who do not care about us. Trust me, having a harder time finding players is absolutely nothing compared to the PAIN some of us have experienced, and people who have hurt us should be thankful that karma is kind, as all they get is a slap on the wrist and will never experience nor understand our PAIN.
I am a GM, so I have absolute control over my games and know what things to avoid to not hurt myself, and it is relatively easier for me to find players. On the other hand, most players are at the mercy of their GMs and hope their GMs will not hurt them, it is also more difficult for them to find a group, and are more likely having to choose between no D&D and bad D&D. I personally just want more options, and I honestly do not care if they are good or bad because I can fix it with good old fashioned homebrew. Most players do not have that luxury since they have to go by the GM's rules, but by having more options available, it may be easier for them to bring something up or simply just choose the option that causes the least PAIN. For example, I really like the option of ASIs coming from backgrounds rather than race. Keep in mind the old option of ASIs coming from race is still there, and it honestly does not matter where the ASIs come from as long as the character get them from somewhere, as it is literally just a cosmetic change. However, that one change can potentially mitigate so much PAIN, and I am all for it as an available option to players.
Their recent efforts are not reassuring, but you always have the option of not buying it, just like how some forum users here chose not to purchase and use TCOE. I love TCOE. I love the idea of Spelljammer, I just did not like how they made S:AIS, as I really wished they got rid of the adventure and put that effort into more spelljammers and monsters. Do not get me wrong, the adventure is not half bad, but I honestly do not think it is as valuable as having more Spelljammers and monsters. While not a priority for me personally, it does not hurt to include ship combat rules and a way to generate your own wildspace systems either.
1D&D is no different from TCOE or S:AIS. Just take what you like and discard what you do not like. At the end of the day, no matter what label Wizards put on it, 1D&D is still freaking 5e. Backwards compatibility is just marketing speak to generate hype for a system that is almost a decade old at this point. If Wizards did not slap a new edition name on it, people would probably just call this TCOE 2.0 or something until we have the name of the book.
You are alright. We have different visions for D&D, but we share the same goal of wanting the most fun for our players.
We probably should not share a table for a long campaign though, due to how different we play, haha.
Check Licenses and Resync Entitlements: < https://www.dndbeyond.com/account/licenses >
Running the Game by Matt Colville; Introduction: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-YZvLUXcR8 >
D&D with High School Students by Bill Allen; Season 1 Episode 1: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52NJTUDokyk&t >
Can't remember if this was mentioned here already or not, but the new grapple rules and Grappler feat are insane on a monk. Being able to hit with an unarmed strike and automatically grapple the enemy and then being able to ferry them across the battlefield at full monk super-speed is crazy. Its almost to the point where I feel its going to be a must-pick, which makes me think its too much. Granted, we havent seen how the Monk is going to change as a class but I doubt they are going to remove their focus on unarmed strikes or steadily improving movement speed.
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Yeah these are some of the reasons I'm looking forward to the Warriors group to be next the most. I think it will really set the playing field for everything else. I kind of feal the same way about the Skulker feat too. It's so good for a Rogue, I wonder if it's the one everyone will gravitate to and feel bad if they don't take it.
I hope they do not force Dnd Beyond to change to only "one d&d" and make all of 5e legacy.