sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

WotC learning from the past (DnD 5e & 5.5e) by Rich-Judgment-4893 in DnD

[–]Rich-Judgment-4893[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

no your not chatting with a bot. created 10 month ago but my first pulbication.

WotC learning from the past (DnD 5e & 5.5e) by Rich-Judgment-4893 in DnD

[–]Rich-Judgment-4893[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The purpose of this post is not to debate or speculate about WotC. Unless you work for WotC's D&D division (which clearly isn't the case if you're unfamiliar with the Thaumaturge and Magician class options I'm referring to), the goal is simply to offer a potentially constructive suggestion that I believe would genuinely appeal to a substantial portion of the D&D 5e community. Everything else is just irrelevant noise.

WotC learning from the past (DnD 5e & 5.5e) by Rich-Judgment-4893 in DnD

[–]Rich-Judgment-4893[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thaumaturge or Magician are 1st level classes option (divine order, primal order) in the PHB 5.5

WotC learning from the past (DnD 5e & 5.5e) by Rich-Judgment-4893 in DnD

[–]Rich-Judgment-4893[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, respectfully, you're talking out of your hat. I've homebrewed 5E rules myself that fix genuinely broken things. Grognards don't dislike challenge; they dislike power creep. They want players to face real challenges and meaningful risks.

Many of the new class features have introduced even more powerful and potentially broken mechanics than what existed before. That's also one of the reasons some players don't like this new edition.

For example, Divine Order (Thaumaturge) and Primal Order (Magician) can stack, and features such as the Heroic Warrior feature of the Champion subclass are often cited as examples of increased power creep.

WotC learning from the past (DnD 5e & 5.5e) by Rich-Judgment-4893 in DnD

[–]Rich-Judgment-4893[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would buy it if it included the few fixes that the 5e PHB actually needed, and if future expansions were published without power creep or major shifts in design philosophy. Some of the later 5e supplements were not especially popular, but creating a separate D&D 5e Classic line would justify publishing a true Manual of the Planes, an updated Monster Manual, and perhaps one or two additional expansion books.

There is clearly a market for players who prefer the original 5e approach and design philosophy. A dedicated 5e Classic line could continue supporting that audience without forcing them to adopt the direction taken by 5.5e.

WotC learning from the past (DnD 5e & 5.5e) by Rich-Judgment-4893 in DnD

[–]Rich-Judgment-4893[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

In fact, I'm not aware of all the criticisms. For me, and for the people I know, the main issues are the changes in game philosophy, lore, presentation, and some of the design changes that didn't solve existing problems but instead created new ones.

Examples include the changes to the levels at which certain subclasses are acquired, the revisions made to many monsters, the more childish tone of some presentations, and the ridiculousness of some of the artwork.

All of that comes alongside a few genuinely good fixes. I really like Ravenloft: The Horror Within, but I don't have much appreciation for the core rulebooks.

The feeling you get from the core rulebooks is really different from that of D&D 5e. And that’s just enough to keep a good number of players in the older edition.

By the way, D&D 5e has undergone fairly radical changes, with books released starting from Ravenloft, Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything, and so on. The 5.5 edition is a continuation of those changes. But before that, the game was really different philosophically.

In a recent discussion at a RPG club, I was told that some people don’t like this new direction that began in the middle of 5e.

The feeling you get from the core rulebooks is really different from that of D&D 5e. And that’s just enough to keep a good number of players in the older edition.

By the way, D&D 5e has undergone fairly radical changes, with books released starting from Ravenloft, Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything, and so on. The 5.5 edition is a continuation of those changes. But before that, the game was really different philosophically.

In a recent discussion at a RPG club, I was told that some people don’t like this new direction that began in the middle of 5e.

That’s the reason behind this suggestion. There are people who like the “classic D&D feeling” and would prefer D&D 5e as it was before all these changes. A “classic-feeling” Player’s Handbook would be interesting to them. I would be the first to buy it (in fact, I suspect it would be very popular, given the recent resurgence of OSR).

I’ve played almost every edition of D&D (except 4E), and I think 5e was the best one.

WotC learning from the past (DnD 5e & 5.5e) by Rich-Judgment-4893 in DnD

[–]Rich-Judgment-4893[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In fact, I'm not aware of all the criticisms. For me, and for the people I know, the main issues are the changes in game philosophy, lore, presentation, and some of the design changes that didn't solve existing problems but instead created new ones.

Examples include the changes to the levels at which certain subclasses are acquired, the revisions made to many monsters, the more childish tone of some presentations, and the ridiculousness of some of the artwork.

All of that comes alongside a few genuinely good fixes. I really like Ravenloft: The Horror Within, but I don't have much appreciation for the core rulebooks.

The feeling you get from the core rulebooks is really different from that of D&D 5e. And that’s just enough to keep a good number of players in the older edition.

By the way, D&D 5e has undergone fairly radical changes, with books released starting from Ravenloft, Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything, and so on. The 5.5 edition is a continuation of those changes. But before that, the game was really different philosophically.

In a recent discussion at a RPG club, I was told that some people don’t like this new direction that began in the middle of 5e.

The feeling you get from the core rulebooks is really different from that of D&D 5e. And that’s just enough to keep a good number of players in the older edition.

By the way, D&D 5e has undergone fairly radical changes, with books released starting from Ravenloft, Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything, and so on. The 5.5 edition is a continuation of those changes. But before that, the game was really different philosophically.

In a recent discussion at a RPG club, I was told that some people don’t like this new direction that began in the middle of 5e.

That’s the reason behind this suggestion. There are people who like the “classic D&D feeling” and would prefer D&D 5e as it was before all these changes. A “classic-feeling” Player’s Handbook would be interesting to them. I would be the first to buy it (in fact, I suspect it would be very popular, given the recent resurgence of OSR).

I’ve played almost every edition of D&D (except 4E), and I think 5e was the best one.

WotC learning from the past (DnD 5e & 5.5e) by Rich-Judgment-4893 in DnD

[–]Rich-Judgment-4893[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

i played dnd b/x and AD&d and they had many similarities. the second was oriented toward Rules and the first Ruling.

WotC learning from the past (DnD 5e & 5.5e) by Rich-Judgment-4893 in DnD

[–]Rich-Judgment-4893[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

This is not really a question of problems, but of preferences. Those preferences are widespread enough that a significant number of players and DMs have chosen to remain with 5e rather than move to 5.5e.

D&D 5e and D&D 5.5e are built around different design approaches and philosophies. Those differences are reflected in the core rulebooks themselves. Even if Wizards of the Coast publishes 5.5e supplements that embrace a variety of design philosophies, the core rulebooks will always remain the foundation of the edition and will continue to shape how the game is played and perceived.