REACTING to the New Spells for D&D 2024
Vložit
- čas přidán 6. 09. 2024
- Support the Channel! ► / oneshotquesters
SUBSCRIBE for all the Nat 20 luck ► / @oneshotquesters
OSQ Dice! ► www.awesomedic...
📱 FOLLOW OSQ SOCIALS 📱
► beacons.ai/one...
► / discord
🎥 EDITORS 🎥
► / @swordplaysorcery
📧 BUSINESS INQUIRY 📧
► business@osqtv.com
One Shot Questers is a comedic channel dedicated to tabletop role-playing games, mainly focusing on Dungeons and Dragons 5th Edition 2014 & 2024 (D&D 5e or DnD 5e). Our content covers a variety of topics, including news, class or character stereotypes, guides & how to’s on gameplay, rules, tips, tricks, and much more, all presented in a humorous and entertaining video. For a quick taste of our most popular content, check out our short-form videos on platforms like TikTok, CZcams Shorts, and Instagram Reels.
"player characters don't often cast guards and wards"
*glares in abjuration wizard*
Hot take. Make hunters mark not require concentration. Or make it not take spell slots.
As it is. It doesnt scale compared to other combat spells that require concentration.
It ahould be a class feature that applies on hit. Hell even make it a once per round class effect that applies on hit that scales.
Caveat - The biggest barrier to Ranger being good is the collapse of the travel/exploration pillar, by far.
BUT for combat:
-you could make HM concentration-less after a certain number of levels to avoid the dip problem. Doesn't even have to be level 3. If you wanted to go higher, like level 5 when a lot of classes get big boost, that's very in-line.
-Make HM scale with ranger level better, cut the level in HALF to gain the additional abilities they listed
-Make HUNTER's Mark progression a key feature of only one of the Ranger subclasses so it doesn't affect other subclasses BA and leave HM as a concentration-less d6 for the others after level 5. I wonder which Ranger subclass that HUNTER's Mark would be most appropriate for.
Ranger gets HM. Rangers who like HM specialize in Hunter. Level 5 all Rangers get concentration-less HM. Level 6 Hunters get upgraded HM while other subclasses abilities improve in different ways. Beast master gets their 1d6 without concentration and their animal, Hunter gets 2d6 without concentration.
Random people spitballing on the internet have a better instinct to improve Ranger than the actual people whose job it is.
Not a hot take.
@@AndrewThoesen Yeah i agree.
It could be as easy as
* Concentration-less lvl 5
* On every hit lvl 7-8
* Damage improvement lvl 10+
If you look at the progression of the base class, HM becomes a free cast of Guardian of nature at high levels. That would explain the way they progressed the spell and the class.
Edit: I play rangers a lot. Guardian of nature is one of my favorite 4th level spells at high levels due to advantage on specific attacks, increased movement, advantage on specific saves like wisdom and con…. The base class now gives this as it progresses with a lvl 1 spell without spending the 4th level spell slot, which then allows you to cast freedom of movement so you can’t be locked down. It’s actually pretty powerful once you really look at it.
I might be totally in the wrong here and this might be too strong for level 1 mainly because of the multi-class problem but I like the idea that Favoured Enemy is still used and what it does it that your favoured enemy is treated like their already under hunters mark but without concentration and then when you actually cast the spell for enemies that aren't your favoured enemy its more like the ranger has to actually try and focus because its a monster they haven't fought before or aren't as skilled at fighting. I would use it in my games though because I think its pretty in line with both the core class identity of the ranger being favoured enemy (in my opinion) and the fact that an extra 1d6 damage per attack for free on one type of enemy is comparable to a rogues sneak attack at early levels without taking away what makes sneak attack great
Regarding backwards compatibility, they tended to focus more on old adventures being compatible than the Player Characters.
That will kill the edition with this release schedule.
Everyone mad about the polymorph change to temp HP is just mad they can't power word kill the bbeg turn one with it anymore.
I think that is kind of narrow as it was often used to save party members or for utility
PWK shouldnt work that way with polymorph anyway
@@13thTemplar718 that's my point. Rules as written, it does work that way. Changing it to where polymorphism now gives temp hp instead of giving you a separate hit pool prevents it from working that way.
I flat out wouldn't allow that at my table, so that wouldn'T be an issue.
Presumably there is the issue with stacking and healing now.
You can't heal up the polymorphed party member, since they are only temporary hitpoints.
And you can't give the polymorphed member temporary hitpoints on top of the forms HP.
I can see why people don't like that change, since it tremendously weakens the spell or the Druid for that matter.
@Gnarlf except that temp hp just goes on top of your normal HP. If you lose all the temp hp, you can still heal the normal hp of the polymorphed character, as well as the wild shaped druid. They mentioned in the druid video that losing your temp hp won't cause you to drop wild shape. Presumably, polymorph works the same way.
I think with the backwards compatibility, Duke, there is a context that I think will help.
If you have a base paladin from 2014 you can convert the base class to 2024, but you can still use the 2014 Paladin Subclass. You can use the Oath of the Watchers with the 2024 Paladin base class.
However, have you ever seen 4th edition or 3.5 edition DnD? Those are different editions of DnD and those are not compatible at all.
A 4e level 1 Paladin has bonuses to Willpower, Fortitude and Reflex saves. They will have 15+ constitution SCORE hp. They have 10+con mod Healing surges that they can use. You gain half your level as a modifier to all skills. You have two At-Will Powers, an encounter power and a daily power. At level 11 they gain their paragon class. Then at level 21 they get their epic destiny.
A 3.5 Paladin gains I think it was (2 + Int Mod) time 4 skill points to spend on skill ranks and cross-class skills at level 1. They have 10+mod hp, and they start with a base attack bonus of +1 which moves to +6/+1 at 6th level, and eventually to +20/+15/+10/+5 by the end of their character's journey. A Paladin's smite adds their charisma modifer to attack rolls for one normal attack, then a +1 per paladin level to damage, but only if the creature is evil, and they can only do this once per day, gaining a new use every 5 levels. You also get to increase any ability score by +1 every level, gaining feats every 4 levels, and the power of your spells is calculated by your level. For example, fireball is 1d6 fire damage per caster level, max of 10d6 and its range increases per your caster level.
So, while yes, if you are playing paladin, they want you to use the 2024 base class... this isn't a new edition of DnD as DnD has previously defined editions, because the game is largely the same. Sure, Divine Smite now works differently, but you aren't using skill ranks to purchase skills, you don't have encounter powers and Healing Surges that are the only way you can heal, it is largely the same game. And if you wanted to take a 2014 Subclass and use it with a 2024 base class... it largely works. There are a few minor tweaks that will need to be made, but the concept of a paladin subclass still exists, and is a unique feature of DnD 5e, it was not how older editions worked.
It is not perfectly compatible, but it is FAR FAR more compatible than would be expected from "a new edition" where all the rules and basic resolution mechanics would be expected to have changed. So, while yes, I get your frustrations and the fact that you will largely be using the new rules for everything, for those of us deep in the community who have seen multiple DnD editions... we would have received a far different message than "these are the new versions of the rules for the same game" if they had announced this was a new edition of the game. Because DnD editions are RADICALLY different from each other on a fundamental level.
I’m starting to understand more, but again the wording and lack of information is what’s making a lot of this hard to comprehend. 😩 honestly just gonna wait for the book to come out to see what they officially say instead of these vague responses we are getting from them. Because again, all of our thoughts reasonings and explanations could be 100% wrong until the book comes out and what is written in there.
I do appreciate the help greatly though! Thank you for trying to help me understand it 🥰
They honestly needed to make a video thoroughly explaining the rules and guidelines for reverse-compatability itself rather than this vague video about how spells got an overhaul with only like 3-4 specific examples. Lol@@OneShotQuesters
@@OneShotQuesters My personal opinion on this, from what I've seen so far, is that it's effectively 5.5e. It's not *completely* new, like moving from 4e to 5e, but it is less compatible than described in their marketing, like moving from 3e to 3.5e. It builds on 5e as a base, to an extent that it can't really be considered a "full" new edition, but revises and streamlines it in a way that isn't cleanly backwards compatible in all cases. Their marketing is bad and they should feel bad, but the way this update works in reality isn't anything particularly foreign to longtime, multi-edition players.
THAC0!
@@Wintermute909 There is no reason to torment them with Eldritch things long laid to rest
The backwards compatibilty has more to do with published campaigns and adventures more than trying to play one generation of chraracter next to another one. Your Curse of Strahd book will be playable with the 2024 rules.
Shepherd druids get hit with a painful nerf due to the updated conjure spells, because they don't summon creatures anymore, and the new summon spells only summon a single creature. The spells are good updates, don't get me wrong, but this is where things like the backwards compatibility chafes hard.
It had to change tho, those conjure spells were designed so ass
If I'm not mistaken, they mentioned very quickly in one of their videos that inside the PHB there will be a small part where it explains how the two 5e work together.
The conjure spell section of the PHB 24 is probably going to be the thickest section
Everyone has a smile and a modern hair cut is because they are part of a secret time travel cult.... 👾
wait?! If palidan smite = spell, than fighter with arcane ability & no school restriction.. does that mean fighter can cast smite ... as a bluff?
I would allow it honestly 😂
I don't think it is a good option tho
Paladins smite will not on the wizard spell list which the fighter would use
I think Rangers need more choices of skills to have. I'm thinking about Aragorn from LotR and Will from the Ranger's Apprentice series. Both of them are absolutely rangers but have very different skill sets. Neither of them have magic though 🤔
Maybe I'm tired but I read that as Rogers 😅
I don't know why they insist on having rangers as spellcasters. Their use of spells is akin to Artificer's spells
@@bastionsea2829 It's easier to use spells than to create options unique to the ranger (also less bloat for the class info).
@@bastionsea2829rangers have always been spell casters since AD&D 1e. Artificers took from the beast master ranger for the battle smith, that is why they are similar and have a nice synergy. I’ve played a battle smith ranger multiclass and had fun playing it.
@@syvajarvi2289 The archetypical rangers not from D&D don't usual cast spells, though. I think Rangers need to cast spells in D&D though, since it's part of the tradition, yeah. But I don't think spells are essential to their fantastical archetype like it is for other spell casters
38:19 i think in the case of taking a 2014 paladin into a 2024 game, the correct answer RAW would just be that you get the divine smite spell for free and always have it prepared... but in reality we'd probably all try to argue to double up on the casting so you could cast the spell, then attack and use your feature for massive damage cuz we all like to hit for big numbers. lol
honestly though, i think the best idea would be to just take what you want from both versions and mash them into a version you want to use.
People actually did like the new conjure spells in the UA. The Ranger is an outlier because we never got a version where we were happy with it. Especially since the UA tends to get nerfed before release.
Most people I heard didn't care for the conjure spells changes. They just didn't want to risk it going back
I love the Tasha’s version. What they did with HM is allows the class to get guardian of nature for free as the class progresses to higher levels. Between the temp hp, no loss of concentration on the spell at lvl 13, roving +10 feet of movement, advantage on attacks against the marked target at 17….. guardian of nature is similar but not the same for a 4th level spell slot…. You have to choose feral or the “tree” to get similar features but they are limited to a choice to get certain features of the spell.
The temp hitpoint thing for shape change is to fix the powerword kill issue
There is a powerword kill issue?
@justinacosta6212 it goes by HP so either it would be insane. Oh that polymorph character has 10 HP instant death.
That shouldn't be their priority; there are so many fcking ways to break dnd with 9th level spells, picking one out of thousands of exploits and rules interactions and saying no is so unbelievably stupid it's funny. I'm waiting for a Polymorphed Giant Ape to give 157 temp hp.
@@AccursedGnome Honestly, we should just go back to 4e, where the game was actually balanced
I feel like backwards compatibility isn't too difficult to do in this instance, it is just not going to be a good choice for the player ever. How I'd do it is just that a 2014 player plays strictly by the 2014 class abilities. Paladin smite stays as it is. No weapon masteries. Etc. That just removes the headache for everyone. But all the 2024 classes are just better than their 2014 counterparts (I know people argue about paladin, but whatever) so it would not feel great as the player to just be weaker because you're using a 2014 class.
For our group, I've taken the Paladin and did a combination of the 2014 and 2024. Namely this affects Divine Smite. It acts like the 2014 but is limited to once per turn. I then took a page from the new Ranger with Hunter's Mark and let the Paladin trigger a level 1 Divine Smite a number of times equal to their CHR mod for free
Whatever comes out of the new spells terrifies me. I honestly thought that these new rules would balance martial vs caster, but a book with hundreds of pages for new spells while Rangers get a mud mask for a makeover and Rogues get a new option to deal even less damage so the rest of the party can do the job for them, it looks like balance is nothing but a pipe dream.
I've just given up hope for 6e balance
Rogue upgrades are pretty powerful I think.
@@petermilesi3718 They now get to replace their not great damage for a chance to do something that a spell could've done guaranteed and/or better. So far, casters (except for Druid and Ranger) have recieved overall buffs, while Rogue gets next to nothing. WotC probably just saw the satisfaction scores being high and forgot that it was the weakest class in the game, so they gave it very little.
@AccursedGnome they got a lot more than that. Lol
@@petermilesi3718 Like what?
I think 'Compatible' means that you can bring in characters that have not been updated.
So, you can play an Artificer - just use the updated spells.
But in the case of Paladin or other updated classes - use the new (2024) class.
Clerics for example are pretty easy to update because alot of their abilites are standardized. So alot of the subclasses could kind of just be standardized.
3:02 THANK YOU! THANK YOU! AUGH! I hate it! The hair dates the art so badly. Then, everybody being "happy" makes it feel... disingenuous? Fake? Forced? They look like they're in a cult. Because they don't _just_ look happy, they look like they're in constant awe. It's weird!
I think it's INSANE that they won't publish all the material at once. What the hell, as a new player/DM, are you supposed to do with just the new PHB??? Buy a 2014 book, or wait for months until you have the rest of the game? That's just dumb.
So for polymorph, as an example, would a dragon failing their save turn into a beefy HP bunny, or would it also be a bunny that's able to use breath weapon?
I'm wondering how many of these I can rejig to give Artificers 😂 if they aren't going to do any fixes to keep them in line I'M GONNA DO IT MYSELF😅
For paladin I've decided as a DM that I'll mix 2014 an 2024 as giving more spells/spell slots. But Divine smite will work from 2014, With the exception that they get one free smite a today with one less damage dice because they should be able to smite more often.
I mean seems pretty backwards compatible, just like when I adapted a few 3.5e mechanics for 5e. Just took a day or two of thinking.
I think the new guidance gives the 1d4 to any skill roll of the chosen one as long as you concintration. whereas the original ended when you chose to use the roll once.
I have been saying 2024 edition is new edition, but it not full new edition like 3rd to 4th. It same core rules but new maths behide stage.
When they talk about “backwards compatibility” I think they are more talking about modules and campaign books. Not the core rules
The way I see it, “backwards compatible” means that they use the same ruleset and that they included instructions in the book for how to convert older content to newer content. For example, if you’re running a 2024 Warlock and want to play Fathomless, you can use the instructions to pretty handily convert it to be compatible with the new Warlock. Likewise, if you’re playing a 2014 Fathomless Warlock, you don’t *have* to convert to play with the new version, since they’re using the same basic rules (with the exceptions of how surprise works and such).
If you’re playing a 2014 Paladin, you keep playing the 2014 Paladin. You’re missing out on a bunch of new stuff, but you can play with a bunch of other players who built their characters using 2024 classes without having to change to casting Smite as a spell.
I feel like disappointment with backwards compatibility is coming from just misunderstanding the expectation and what was said previously about how it was backwards compatible. The whole time it has been "you will be able to use your old adventures without needing to buy an updated version or updating yourself" and also "you will be able to take bring in 2014 characters to play along side new characters in the updated rules". That has been what they have been saying since they revealed more than "we are striving to remain backwards compatible". Being shocked that it isn't something else is just from misunderstanding what was said.
Bard is going to be the biggest grind point for backwards compatibility as the 2024 Bard has one more feature than the 2014 as they standardized the class features across all classes and 2014 had on less feature
I think Wizards needs to clarify specifically what they mean when they say the 2024 stuff is reverse compatible with 2014.
I don't think there is any intention on the company's part for you to run a purely 2014 character at a table using 2024 rules.
I believe the intention is that you as a player, can still use spells and subclasses from the additional 5E books like Fizbans, Eberron, Strixhaven etc.
They are essentially trying not to piss off the ppl who hate the 2024 rules by saying "hey you can stick to whatever you want between 2014 and now if you want" but also saying "hey we know making 6th edition means you wasted all your money on the other 5E books, so we aren't making a 6th edition, just amending the core rules with new core books".
The issue with a new edition is that either everything gets left behind or you have to HB everything you liked from older editions into the new. Honestly the 2024 rules don't fundamentally change the game the way a real new edition would either.
My guess is you do some homebrew fixes for things not in 2024 until they get put in.
If someone still reads that and would like to answer, please enlighten me "pun intended"
How is produce flame a burden to cast. Yes it has a lot of words, but it only takes 1 action to cast.
I guess you could change it to "dismiss for free" but even then.
Produce flame is a mix between the cantrips firebolt and light.
If you want light. 1 Action, get a bit of light for 10min. Dismiss as an action. - Less light, fixed to your hand and shorter duration than the light cantrip, but pretty much the same.
If you want to attack 1 action, 1 Hitroll, 30" 1D8 - Less range and a worse damage dice, but pretty much the same as firebolt.
Caveat is of course, you could use Light and firebolt at the same time, while you lose the illumination, when you hurl the flame,
but in exchange it only costs you one cantrip slot.
I realy can't see how produce flame is any bother to cast.
I still think that the backward stuff is only for the DM side, monsters and modules are backward compatible, for players its only 2024, and they should've focus only on this since the beginning
I think the “backwards compatibility” that they are going for is for anything that they aren’t updating. The subclasses, spells, etc… that they aren’t updating will be able to be used in the 2024 version(even though a few abilities are made useless like the grave cleric’s critical cancellation).
35:53 old subclasses. How will I play my undead warlock otherwise!
I know somewhere on ONE of those videos they completely said they gave up on the whole backwards things. but there are some tips in the DM book that can help with that. but that was it, they WANT you to use the 2024 version. They also said they were reworking the CR cause it made no damn sense in the "14 version.
but yeah, all we got is them hyping it up instead of JUST LETTING US SEE IT OR GO INTO GREATER DETAIL lol
Guidance maybe I'm hearing it wrong but I think it's now:
flat bonus that can be used multiple times for the chosen skill as long as concentration is maintained
vs a d4 added once to ability check
???
Something I’ve been saying is that 5e is going to end up as the tutorial version of 5.5, so we send newbies to 5e to get some experience with mechanics, then bring them to 5.5e when they’re ready to handle all the options.
I love how he mentioned bg3 several times. Maybe they acknowledge the game's popularity, and many people new to dnd introduced from it
This is definitely true! Three of my players (new to DND) have either played or watched streams of people playing bg3 and are actually better at using their class, and have become more invested in our home game's freedom to experiment with things they couldn't do in a crpg
What days will duke be at gencon
Guidance wasn't nerfed... since it is concentration you can use it on multiple checks. Say you pick stealth and the party rogue goes off... old version they could only use it on the one instance of whatever, now as long as you maintain concentration they can keep using it on all stealth checks.
so a nerf, in that it is only for skill checks, but a buff in that it can be multiple checks (At least that is what I understand based on Treantmonk's video)
I'm really confused on what they changed about Produce Flame. The base spell is easy to cast and can be used to attack at the same time you cast it so I don't know what they're talking about when they say it was difficult and took too long to use.
Guidance is now Baldurs Gate 3 rules.
My thinking is that every subclass and species that isn't in the new PHB is why everything has to be considered backwards compatible, for at least the next year or two while they work to rerelease everything.
There are probably millions of characters on DND Beyond that will be made immediately unplayable if they simply said "Nope, it's not in the new PHB, so you can't use it with the newer edition."
That and limiting character creation, even with the expanded subclasses available in the 2024 PHB, (RIP Clerics and Wizards) is extremely boring.
I want to make a Rune Knight, nope.
I want to make a Samurai, nope.
I want to make Spores Druid, nope.
I want to make a whichever of the myriad Cleric domains that will not be in the PHB, nope.
I want to make ANY Artificer, nope.
You get where I'm going. These species, subclasses, and an entire excluded class, need to still be in the game in order to keep people happy and buying and playing the new edition.
It's all about keeping people happy and spending money.
A 2014 Paladin would be able to Crit and then choose to Divine Smite (14) and Searing Smite (24.) They couldn't technically double Divine Smite because Divine Smite (24) is not on Paladin (14)'s spell list. But either way, their ad-hoc burst would be through the roof.
Moral: do only 24 classes. You can mix in some 14 subclasses, but DO NOT import 2014 classes wholesale.
imo if you're playing with 2024 rules, you shouldn't be using any pre-2024 classes (minus artificer because duh) and if anything has been reprinted, use the most updated version (ex. using the sage advice updated healing spirit vs the original printing like we do now). Subclasses can very easily be ported onto the new class chassis, though the new ones will probably be more tuned to interact with the new base class features (ex. hunter's mark focus on rangers). But overall I really don't see an issue with backwards compatibly regarding what the vast majority of people will be using it for, that being cool subclasses and old adventures.
But who knows, book isn't out and I may be inferring completely wrong.
I'm a huge fan of the chromatic orb change. I use it a lot and thus change will make it even more fun
Yes my dude glad someone else feels the same as me!!!!!!🎉
It's not hard really. As a DM I'm only allowing 5.5 classes + Artificer until it gets a revamp.
2:47 Yes, this! This bothers me so much. Almost every piece has a character with this borderline manic open mouth smile. If it was a few characters that would be whatever but it feels like there's no seriousness in any of the characters and it makes them feel samey despite there obviously being effort made to make them as different as possible.
About the paladin its simple, if you are in a game and then upgrades to the 2024 version if the paladin does not want to move then he can just the play the old version using the old rules that the new rules do have room to accomodate, in that case he just uses everything from the 2014, spells, feats, backgrounds and so on
If a 2014 paladin is in a game with a 2024 paladin, the 2014 uses their own divine smite with no changes. Which is a huge reason you may want to bring in a 2014 paladin. There is no conflict there. Using "the updated version" is only for spells and other rules not for the class. For example replacing any reference to inspiration to heroic inspiration. The 2024 paladin just functions differently. That's the point. This is less of a "new edition" than 3.5 was for 3rd edition. It's a lot more like Pathfinder 2E remaster.
Asking the 2014 characters to follow 2014 rules while at the same time using 2024 rules for the 2024 characters is purely insane to think about and 100x more work for the DM than "okay your character from 2014, here are the slight mods to your features to use the new terms and here is your origin feat, here are your updated spells" and everyone uses the same rules. Saying that is more work is bonkers.
I am definitely not jumping right into 2024 edition as soon as it gets out. I need to finish my long going campaigns of 5th edition first. Then I am gonna scratch my head about that. And it's probably gonna be a year or so, with all those session cancellings 😢
They need to clarify if mayic missle counts as one attack or multiple. People annoy me with saying a player hit with it while downed are hit with multiple attacks.
Not how it works at my table but people suck.
Intuitively I would assume it's multiple hits, but that's also some evil shit.
@_zurr The spell even says they hit simultaneously. If they are separate a player instantly dies if hit with it while downed.
@dwaynejackson551 they hit simultaneously, but they still hit separately. They're still separate missiles. If they can target multiple targets, then they're separate attacks. It'd suck if your DM was a jerk who casts magic missiles on a downed party member, but sometimes that's just how it goes.
@AlphaOmega08922 I disagree with this ruling but thats my problem. There is nothing stating it counts as separate when targeting one creature.
I am a forever DM because of A-hole DMs, when I can be a player again I will enjoy it. Thanks for your thoughts.
I put it in the same category as Scorching rays
Duke what they mean by compatible is there are so many subclasses and species that are still 2014 and you are going to be playing with the new 2024 rules. So you will have to take the new classes but take the subclasses that and races I'm sorry species and they are compatible. Just because you put Windows 11 on your computer doesn't stop that old copy of word or wordperfect from running they are still compatible.
In theory, you could have a 2014 paladin, and they wouldn't have access to the 2024 paladin spells, they wouldn't have SMITE (24) they would have SMITE (14). An enemy paladin would smite, and when you try to counterspell it, the dm says, "Nah ah ah, that's SMITE (14), it isn't a spell."
Wait a minute, I know that music at the start! It's Megaman X3 drill rhino! OMG they nerfed guidance way too much.
YES! Please waist your 3rd Level Spell Slot (Counterspell) to counter my Smite Spell that if It fails I keep my 1st spell Slot.
Man I wonder if that guy's spine is all right cuz he must have snapped that thing in half bending over backwards to defy logic on how well the backwards compatibility thing is going to be a nightmare.
The important question, did they make witch bolt do proper damage or at least make its trigger a bonus action ?
You’re asking the real question. I’d love it if it stops a creature from moving 30 feet from you and you can do the upcast damage on the following attacks
I don't think it's all that unclear. If you have a 2014 paladin, they'll have the 2014 smite feature, so they wouldn't use the spell version, they would use the feature version.
For subclasses, using old subclasses would be extremely easy, all the subclass levels are at the same level, so just slot them in. The only change is everything below 3rd level is now given at 3rd level.
I believe it should be called 5.24 edition.
Maybe I'm crazy, but if you have developed characters in a current campaign, why would you up and change the rules in an ongoing campaign, just continue with current 5e rules? When you start a new campaign, use the new rules and restart your character, if you want to use it again at whatever level you're starting at. Am I just not getting it?
People are misunderstanding how the “backwards compatibility” is working. It’s that you can use all your old content if you want; you don’t have to buy new books. If you want to play a Fathomless Warlock, you can play the 2014 version, or you can follow the instructions in the 2024 PHB to make it compatible with the new Warlock (I will be doing this). Likewise, you can use 2024 characters with 2014 campaign modules, and when 2024 campaign modules come out, you’ll be able to use 2014 characters with them. Backwards compatibility is working exactly as they claim; it’s just some people didn’t understand what they claimed.
How did they complicate spells that you're needing to flip back and forth?
I don't remember ever doing that in AD&D or 3rd edition, and I would be DM,thus using spells a lot more than most players
Summoning spells with stat blocks, so you summon specific things instead of having options?
Guidance, from the sound of it, applies to only one skill, but if that character can get to 20 doors with the guidance helping lockpick skill in that minute, they get that guidance bonus to all 20 checks, not just one
If shapeshifting is actually temp hp, that means you can't heal your shapeshift form to full health.
Thanks!
Thank you!
I think they wanted this to be backwards compatible, but that was like 2 years ago, after much deliberation they changed their mind but for whatever reason wont admit it. I think they just don't want to admit they are going back on what they originally said
I just don't want to "loose" all the extra books that I already bought for 5e lol anything else can be solved
5:12 This is exactly the format that use to exist... look at any PHB spell list before 5E...
They want credit for putting a feature back in! WotC have gone full Bethesda!
Hope we still have Clone & Demiplane.
Your haircut looks great!
Tbh I think most people are just gonna ignore the changes to Divine Smite in their games. It's a stupid nerf, but tbh it's an outlier in my book.
No cleric love rip
Spells literally do every classes job better than the class. Rip every class but sorcerer and wizard.
why is the 2014 vs 2024 a problem?
If none in your group has the 2024 version you're all good?
If one in your group has the 2024 version and you're all using it... then you're all also viable to use the new broken stuff? except when it comes to subclasses not yet released. And in those cases is where they refer to the backwards compatability. So your old subclass still gets the new features from the 2024 base class because the new version is backwards compatible...
I must be dumb as heck because I don't understand the issue :|
(but please DM. Don't counterspell my smite 🥺)
2014/2024 isn't anywhere near as big an issue as you're making it lol. There are a ton of players that refuse to do something they're not explicitly told they can do by WotC, all they're saying by backwards compatibility is telling those players that yes, they *can* bring stuff forward despite the work it will take.
Guidance sounds like it was nerfed.....but maybe you now roll a d6 instead of a d4 or something?
I'm guessing making the check won't cancel it.
Not sure why you got stuck on smite? Smite didnt change, the way paladins interact with it did. If you have a 2014 paladin, you cast it as an ability. If you have a 2024 paladin, you cast it as a spell. Smite is the same. Only Paladins interaction is different. Im not sure how many people are going to be running games where they have 2 paladins each using a different version, but if they chose to do that, you just refer to each inviduals class rulings when handling them. This has got to be the most minor issue in all of this release so it seems odd get stuck on it.
If this isn't DnD 5th edition any more, what about DnD plus extra? or DnD extra silly edition? Or DnD 9000?
Not a single fully detailed example of a new spell made me sad
This is a New 50th D&D Anniversary Edition.
Too much is changed to even call it 5.5e!
It's 6th Edition!
Yaaaa, it feels like a pay to win DLC that has the worst effect on A. New dungeon masters who are fresh to the game
B. Game stores that now have to calm down conflicts of 2024 vs 2014 rule sets for new customers
At the end of the day, we’re all just nerds trying to get a die roll.
~_~
It is interesting just how confused people are getting from these videos. Wotc is being overly cryptic while also making very solid statements, such as how using new content with non-updated content will work.
Crawford often talks about stuff in that way, ignoring the flexibility of each playgroup. The thing they should of mentioned when discussing the backwards compatibility, such as it is, is that defined rules only pertain to discussions and things like adventuring league. Standarized rules are they to create a baseline for people to work with, and its good that some will stick to it and others will make changes.
As for the spells, we barely got any information in this video. The class videos revealed a lot about how the classes work but due to there being way too much to cover in the entire spell section this was more like the highlights of the highlights.
For example, We dont know what form conjure spells will take. The way he said it almoat made it sound like they will work like spirit guardians or the shepherd spirits, confering some mechanical benefit rather than 8 1/4th cr beasts.
Lastly, I feel that Ranger is in a decent spot with the more general aspect of Expertise in a few skills, having the martial kit, and magic. Some might see it as too many plates but sometimes you only need a little bit from the druid magic plate or need someone to excel at wisdom skills so the rogue can focus on dex and int skills. Whether or not they hit the mark with the class is the exact extent to which their spells and features let them shine within those roles. The capstone is awful though, it was bad when it addes wis mod damage once per turn, it was worse in the original favored foe ua when they forgot to tie the two abilities together, and its barely better being an average of 6 extra damage a turn (in melee using a nick weapon). Empowering their role as a martial, casting, expert in some way, truly blending these three pillars together, would have made the class really feel complete. Crawford saying it was all new in comparison to 2014 also really doesnt help him out when he hides that Ranger has been on a 10 year journey of updates that the community had to drag out of them.
My hopes for 2024, little bit less concentration for immediate effect spells or bolstering how those spells work. Guidance was a weird way to do the later, especially after people got to play with BG3 guidance being as overpowered as it is.
Good luck, have a nice break once it starts, and sorry for the wall of text Duke.
All of the art is also of black characters, orcs and/or tieflings.
Ranger is the unfixable class
Just make them rogues. Rangers stealth, track,, should have sneak attack, and should have better ways to hide since they deal with all kinds of ways to hide from animal senses. Beast masters need a way to team work with their companion and maybe a way to craft different arrows that aren't normally avaliable.
Honestly, Ranger should be the easiest fix of their lives. Years of people dissecting what’s wrong and years of people giving fix ideas onto top of that
Even just a 1 word fix to some of their spells can make huge impact on viability. Take ensnaring strike/hail of thorns, while it now applies to only 1 attack, if we change the spell tho it'll work on each attack and making every attack 1 that restraints or is effectively an AOE is a massive boost. As for 3rd lvl spells we could change lightning arrow (same story) and give them vampiric touch that works the same as these others and be usable with weapons and damage has been fixed. (With how it's already possible to use vampiric touch through a flying familiar, letting it work on ranged weapons isn't crazy)
@@woutvanostaden1299the fix is removing the concentration requirements from the single use spells like hail of thorns, zephyr strike, ensnaring strike, and the single use “charging” spells like lightning arrow….. not making them persistent, it still creates the same action economy bottle neck that the 2014 ranger has regarding concentration since most of the rangers spells are bonus action spells that require concentration for a single use. The catch of using concentration, it allows you to cast and hold the spell like hail of thorns or zephyr strike until you are in a position to take advantage of the spell’s effects.
@@syvajarvi2289 The reason I prefer making them persistent is that, that way it actually becomes well worth the concentration. In my opinion making them function like spirit shroud (concentration with bonus damage and an extra effect) is better than a fire and forget single use. Single use, while it makes it more like a smite (and rangers could use the bonus damage) and stackable with other good concentration spells (like bless and haste {the value of bless is there because it lasts multiple rounds}), it also greatly takes away from the secondary effects that I think are what could make them great. Restraint is a great condition to be able to dole out with every attack, making each attack an AOE attack makes fighting mobs a whole lot easier (and groups of enemies occur a whole lot more often than what people make it out to be. I have seen it multiple times) in addition the damage boosting nature of these spells makes the terrible hunters mark unnecesary. Since they wil now each do the same or more damage, they scale way better when you upcast them and they have an ACTUALLY USEFUL effect in combat or have you used/found the tracking feature of the spell a godsend, because from what I have heard so far, most people never have much of a use for it. (Or are dealing with a single invisible enemy every combat that is really ennoying with no one else having any of the better invisibility dealing spells)
Besides your solution eats up more action economy than mine, since presumably you'll want to use it more than once in a fight. (Have you ever seen a paladin smite only once during a fight? No they smite whenever and everytime it's advantageous to smite. The same would be the case if you make these spells single use.)
On the other hand with my suggestion, this is a spell that (as long as they don't break my concentration) I would like to use throughout the entire combat. It's like asking someone what they prefer more as a useful spell an ice knife or guiding bolt upcasted to the same lvl or something like moonbeam, heat metal, flaming sphere, spirit guardians or call lightning. Most people and or optimizers would 100% go for the version that requires concentration, but is more than a fire and forget and does a whole lot more damage with an additional effect.
this is just the 50th anniversary edition, and we will see 6th ed by 2028. predictions lol
Same thumbnail face every stream?
Hasbro: Say it's compatible with 5E
Reality: It's not.
im so so disappointed with the changes to summoning actual living creatures
So if any one has a problem with backwards in every context it has been used it mean that yoy can bring older thing in to the newer but never have you been able to put newer in to the older so if you make a 2014 the bring it to 2024 it has to use the new set but if you make a 2024 you can not bring it to 2014
If you make a 2014 only play 2014 if you dont like the new rules
Dont try and take thing from 2024 to 2014 they are stronger and the enemies most likely will have resistance to weapon masterys that 2014, dont have
Classes skill and perks have been put for the newer system useing them in 2014 will just give you a headache 2024 will only playable in 2024 not 2014
Can you go back to more sketches, please?🥺
Def wont be changing editions for my players. This sounds broke af
Also this guy who is talking is really, really condescending about things being "too complex" for players
Thanks!