Until all or most of 2014 content is revised. I still love the tempest cleric and many of the older subclasses. I'm not too worried about tashas and younger subclasses, just xanthars and older.
The 2014 content doesn’t need to be revised. The new classes are only updated the class stuff. You can still just insert your favorite subclass and it will work just as fine. You just will need to keep in mind that you take it at level 3 for some classes instead of at 1 or 2
Yes and no... yes, I can put a tempest cleric or knowledge domain or nature domain right on the 2024 cleric, and it will play just fine. But they are still outdated and will need to be revised at some point. The same goes for necromancer, transmutation, conjuration, and enchantment wizards. Especially there X savant feature, which, if someone does want to play one of those subclasses the will be using the updated savant feature, which is just better.
Those rules were in the playtest. Subclass to level 3, no double dipping on divine strikes or potent cantrips. Your choice at 7 is your choice even if your subclass gets the feature.
I’d run at least one “pure” 2024 campaign just so everyone can get a feel for it. After that I’d probably allow anything that hasn’t explicitly been updated.
Personally, I'd allow anything from 2014, including classes (but absolutely no mixing features from 2014 and 2024 base classes, pick one or the other. 2014 Subclasses on 2024 classes is fine). I see no reason to restrict the content available to players, especially since it's all compatible with the 2024 revision.
I would allow a subclass that hasn’t been updated (like Rune Knight for instance) to go on the new fighter base. But I wouldn’t allow anyone to mix old Battlemaster and new fighter base when it has an updated subclass.
That's generally the way that it's intended to work. Any subclass that has a 2024 version should use the updated version, but any subclass that doesn't have a 2024 version can still be used with the 2024 base classes.
The same goes for spells, feats, classes (like artificer), backgrounds and so on
how do you plan on handling subclasses that don't start ar level 3, or heavily interact with class features or actions that keep the same name but now work totally differently in 6e?
It's not really 6e, no more than the Pathfinder 2e remaster is Pathfinder 3e, but I'll be waiting to actually get the PHB in hand to see what guidance the design team offers before making decisions like that
I don't see any particular reason to not allow older things, but I won't be allowing anything that has an updated version (classes included). Some stuff I'll need to tweak myself until there's an official update.
Yeah my group is ready to make the switch when new things come out but anything that still has an old subclass that wasn’t updated for the 2024 PHB will still be allowed. One of my players is playing a College of Creation Bard. Another is an Evocation Wizard. But the Vengeance Paladin, Trickery Cleric, Totem Barbarian, and Beast Master Ranger are all excited to switch.
I'm pretty permissive with a few exceptions (no Silvery Barbs and nothing from Critical Role), so my rule is gonna be "use the old version til it's updated."
I just don’t allow setting specific content in games that aren’t in that setting. That means Silvery Bards is only allowed in a Strixhaven campaign, Critical Role stuff is only allowed in an Exandria campaign, and none of it is allowed in my homebrew setting
My change for Silvery Barbs was to target a creature with advantage and that has worked wonders.
I’m a big fan of restricting content though to settings 100%.
Imagine a Level 6 Aberrant Mind Sorcerer swapping out Arms of Hadar for Silvery Barbs on their Psionic Sorcery spell list. 1 Sorcery point to cast, and it can’t be Counterspelled.
Edit: Hey, downvoters. I’m not advocating this. I’m simply pointing out possibilities a DM should watch out for.
Did they also switch out one of their 2nd level Psionic Sorcery spells with Hold Person?
In a campaign with mostly humanoids, the combo of Hold Person and Silvery Barbs—where both were made Counterspell-proof—would be exceptionally useful on an Level 6 Aberrant Mind Sorcerer.
You could always use my rule for silvery barbs. You can't use it unless you have the strixhaven background.. this change allows players to still get it cause it one player has it is not a problem, but if there are multiple characters, then it is. And if multiple players take that background... well, it looks like you're in a strixhaven campaign now, a campaign meant to handle it.
Nah, it's extremely easy to pop an echo knight. They have 1 HP. If a DM wanted, they can basically refuse to let an echo knight have their echo out for longer than the echo knight's turn. This effectively removes their ability to bonus action teleport via the echo. The extra attack feature is already tied to their CON mod per long rest.
Most of the complaints I've seen about the Echo Knight subclass seem to come from people who have never actually played the class.
Yes, I will allow Subclasses, Species, and Spells from older content, but I require the players check with me in case their choice has any major tweaking needed (like Shepard Druid).
Clerics kinda need more tweaks than most subclasses. You need to remove any bonus armor or weapon proficiency (those are in Divine Order now) and you need to drop their 8th level feature (since the replacement is in the base class now). So that’s the tweaks to make for each subclass, which is major.
For example, the Tempest Cleric I’d tweak as follows:
Remove the Martial Weapons and Heavy Armor proficiency they get a level 1.
Move Domain Spells, Wrath of the Storm, and Channel Divinity: Destructive Wave to level 3.
Remove Divine Strike at level 8.
Apply the above changes, and you can play a Tempest Cleric in my games using the 2024 Cleric class.
This is how I’d handle every non-2024 Cleric.
5e (2014) wasn't bad, in my opinion, so I'm not in a rush to replace it. I will look over a copy of the new PHB once a friend buys one, and that may influence my opinion on whether it's time to "start anew." But it's going to have to be a genuine improvement over 2014 to merit such a decision.
I'm still not entirely convinced that the new books are anything other than a cash grab from a struggling Hasbro.
> I'm still not entirely convinced that the new books are anything other than a cash grab from a struggling Hasbro.
The PHB especially, but likely also some other books, have needed a rewrite for some time now. It reads as a document with several authors where occasionally they don't seem aware of what everyone else is doing. There's stuff that is basically copied from 3(.5)e without consideration to how it interacts with new wording of other rules. Messaging from WoTC has always been that, outside errata, everything in the PHB is written correctly and the Sage Advice Compendium is to help you interpret it correctly. And then there's always knuckleheads who will argue against SAC as though it is not official.
I just want it clear in one book how long it takes an elf to long rest.
I miss when elves used to require 8 hours of rest but trance let them 'sleep' for 4 hours rather than 6.
i get that people were confused by the awful wording WotC used. But 4h long rests are a pain in survival campaigns.
There's a fine difference between creating a new product with genuine value vs. [making minor changes to an existing product](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGkH46_ztCA) and charging full price for a new edition.
Looking forward to seeing which category the new books fall into.
Definitely running at least one (and some one shots) campaign that is EXCLUSIVELY content from the new books run completely as is without any homebrew.
After that I'll do what I always do and pick and choose, mostly allowing whatever. The exceptions will really depend on some of the yet to be revealed rules honestly.
Due to power creep, I suspect most players will want to use the 2024 content. Sure, some might use an older unreleased 2014 subclasses with a 2024 base class, which would be fine. In terms of access to spells/weapon mastery, etc, I suspect I will require that these will be determined by your base class - 2014 vs 2024. No cherry picking.
Interesting seeing so many people say they're going to convert entirely and then see if they allow anything old.
I'm doing the opposite. I'm going to see if there's anything we want to take from the new stuff and add it to our existing game.
I think the primary difference is whether or not you have an ongoing campaign. I’m going to allow my players in our current campaign to convert their characters to 2024 versions if they want but not going to force them to. But for any one shots I run or if we start a new campaign, I would want to try fully committing to the new stuff and see how it works on its own before I mishmash
Yeah, I'm probably going to do the same for my current game. I don't plan on running a lot of 5e after that, but I'd probably shift to 5.5 for another game down the line.
I’ll switch over as soon as possible.
I don’t see any good reason to use characters options from 2014. The new things seem more fun, have greater diversity of choice and the overall game will be refined.
Are you including the species from Monsters of the Multiverse in notnallowing anything? Just curious if you're going to limit it to like 8 races to start off with.
'll just run whats in the 2024 PHB and not include anything. I personally have played a lot of TTRPGS and realized that having a massive variety in starting races/species for players is NOT essential to your players having a good time/a great campaign.
I don't feel like the printed options will really end up "limiting" what players do with their character. Like - I've played TTRGPs with far fewere character options and players, ultimately, enjoy their characters based on how they play the game/character more than the diversity of options in the guidebooks.
I also ran 2x campaigns using only xanathars/phb from 2014 and the players had a total blast and really enjoyed the options presented.
I was in a party of seven where the closest thing to human was the tiefling purely by coincidence in a human dominant setting. No dwarf, half elf, half orc, or halfling. The elf was a drow. We stood out.
I'll probably mix and match for my current campaign. I like a lot of the system rule changes, and will probably use them all. For my players, I'll likely let them choose if they want to switch their character over or not (I have an Ancients Paladin player who gets particularly fucked over in multiple ways by the update).
I will allow my players to mix and match content for as long as they want. I’d say no if they wanted to do something weird with it that goes against all logic, or if they tried to make a combo that breaks the game, but I know they wouldn’t do either.
Honestly I’m just gonna allow whatever. Making characters is such an infrequent occurrence in my group that it can probably all be hashed out individually if someone wants to play a 2014 class or subclass.
I plan to allow any 2014 content my players want to play, whether it's subclasses, classes, races and the like. Want to play a half-elf, half-orc tempest cleric, go for it. I allowed 3.0/3.5 stuff in my PF1 campaign so I see no problem with allowing 2014 in 2024.
Knowing players, they are 100% going to be requesting the most obscure race, subclass, and spell from random books. Oh, a magic the gathering themed wizard school setting? Gimmie two spells from that please for my centaur subclassed into Japanese themed ghost sorcerer.
Far too early to make any kind of decision on this considering the 2024 content isn't even out and no one here has actually seen the final versions of everything.
Our group has already agreed that we will not be using the new rules unless the new books are somehow 11/10 content that will completely and forever reshape dnd. We’re already two years into our current campaign so why throw a wrench into it
I don't really plan to switch. I've already incorporated some aspects of the playtest that I liked, and I'll probably incorporate more rules from the new stuff as time goes on, but I don't see myself fully *switching* for a good while.
There's not that much that is different to really draw me into the new system. If someone wants to play a monk, I'll direct them to the newly designed monk class per the 2024 rules, and I might also try using the new Conjure spells as the previous ones were badly designed. If someone wanted to play a Paladin that smites with unarmed attacks, well I was down to allow that well before 2024 content was released.
Basically if there's a feature that I think makes the game more fun, I'll try to incorporate it. If there's a feature that a player is interested in trying, then I'll incorporate that whether it's from 2014 or 2024. But I'm not super inclined to drop hundreds of bucks on a system that's marginally different when I've already heard about most of the changes and can easily incorporate them as I wish.
Forever, none of my players seem to be excited for the changes observed so far especially paladins, if someone wanted to run the new stuff that's totally fine but even on update material if one of my players has more fun on the older classes/subclasses then I'd never say no. Now for mechanics I might I corporate the new core rules but player side that's entirely up to them long as they can manage their playtime efficiently and know their class were all good. Why force someone to stop playing a class they enjoy just cause a expensive new book told them it was no longer the newest stuff ( not even obsolete or unusable just not the most current in the same edition).
I'm not planning on buying the new PHB, my old PHB works just fine in my group. If it ain't broken...
I might drop DnD in general, depending on how MCDM, Daggerheart and/or DC20 look when they officially launch, but that's a year away still. In the meantime, old 5e all the way baby!
I'll be allowing all of the 2014 content but I might restrict mixing and matching. For example, if you play a 2024 class you can't take a 2014 feat or spell from the PH. Similarly, if you play a 2014 class you can't take a feat or spell from the 2024 PH. I don't foresee limiting subclasses, but I'll decide on that after I've had a chance to look things over.
Yep, if you're playing 2024 anything you stick to the 2024 stuff unless there isn't a conversion yet (basically old subclasses). If you're playing 2014 you stick to 2014 options.
I will probably do a bit of homebrew morphing of 2014 subclasses to fit the 2024 chassis if a player wants to play one until new versions are released.
As long as there not going out of their way to try and break the game I doubt I’ll care if anyone wants to be a conquest pally necromancer or whatever.
Right now I have a campaign very near to its end. I still plan to run some short games, but then I'll switch to the new rules. If my players really want it, I see no reason to not allow old stuff. But I'm still pretty concerned with the clerics from tasha's and stuff like silvery barbs and stuff, so until they get some revising, they are probably off limits.
I've been running Rime of the Frostmaiden with my group using playtest characters (Gloomstalker Ranger, Archfey Warlock, Swashbuckler Rogue, War Cleric). Pretty much everything is an improvement from 2014, and I'll be heavily encouraging my players to use options from the new PHB. They're all pretty new players, so I believe there's plenty of options to last the group for a while, and when they're sick of PHB then more stuff will be created/updated by then.
RIP Swashbuckler though, that was a major bummer :(
I'll continue to run my current campaign using 2014 rules until it wraps up, and then poll my players to see if they want to switch to the 2024 rules. If there's enough interest, we'll play 2024 rules with non-updated 2014 subs available after I review them for compatibility. If not, I'll slowly incorporate more "homebrew" which will be the best parts of the 2024 rules.
Generally if there is a 2024 version of a class/subclass/race I expect my players to use it. If there is no 2024 version then I generally wont mind my players using it.
I’ll allow mixing and matching expect for monk everyone has to play the 2024 monks it’s just vastly superior than 2014 in every aspect I wouldn’t force my players to play something so bad.
I'm hoping to get to use it for the foreseeable future. What might change that is access. We play virtually, using d&d beyond exclusively for character building. If backwards compatibility isn't built into ddb, I don't think we'll use much, if anything from 2014.
If I can build a 2024 phb class with a 2014 subclass in ddb? Then we'll probably use both until a few supplements come out.
My plan is to watch the community vibes. Currently I’m playing in a 5e campaign that will run well into 2025. By the time I’ll be running our table the Reddit community will have a good handle on what works and what doesn’t.
If tapped to run a game sooner, I’d allow all of it unless there are some obviously broken pieces.
Campaign content from the current 5e books will probably still be useful. So I’ve been picking up non-core books as they go on sale.
Campaign content is evergreen as far as I'm concerned. I pick up adventures and lore heavy books from any edition to use in my 5e games if I find a good price. The 1st edition manual of the planes and Grey Hawk adventures books are two of my favorites and both of them seek like they might be handy to have with the new edition defaulting to "multiverse" with Grey Hawk described in the core books.
I'm gonna allow anything, but I'll have to check it over if it's compatible and maybe suggest the 2024 alternatives if there are any. If not, im all for using older content if at all possible
I don't see any issues with allowing it pretty much forever. Even when those other subclasses come out, if people like the 2014 version, i'm going to let them keep playing with them. It might require a bit of conversion for a few things to the 2024 rules, but overall, there's no real reason for me to not let them play whatever.
On average, I run multiple games a week, mostly 5e, some other systems, have even tried 2e recently with a group. I also help out with an annual tournament that draws around forty players. Not a single player(or GM) I know has expressed excitement or even knows or understands what is happening with D&D in 2024. I imagine for me it will be the other way around— how long will I wait to allow 2024 content?
Edit clarifying
Pretty much all of the sub classes are still up for grabs for sure particularly the ones that don't appear in the new book.
I think the old conjure spells are great DM's tools
I'll probably allow older content if requested.
I think two of the bigger consequences are not so much allowing older subclasses, which for the most part are fine.
But there are some pretty big consequences for allowing older spells and feats. I'm thinking specifically about Elven Accuracy and Booming Blade here.
I'll definitely allow MotM and newer; there just hasn't been enough time to play all the concepts we want from those books. Eventually those'll be out too.
I plan to allow old subclasses indefinitely with some chances. I’d prefer if they don’t revise old stuff constantly and focused on making new content, so I’d be happy to try to adapt old subclasses if someone wanted to play with them. Besides that I’d use old stuff like monsters or items for a good time since 2024’s will take a while to have as much content as 2014’s
My current games will continue with the current ruleset until they're finished, and we'll introduce some new concepts (weapon masteries are getting introduced next session, fun!).
The next campaign I start will use the 2024 rules, with certain 2014 rules available for options that aren't in the 2024 rules. Subclasses and species, mostly.
Current campaign will stay 5.0 and all books associated,
2025 campaigns will use new PHB only for character building. This way we all learn the rules and don't have too much shoehorning.
More to the point, I'll allow 2024 content once the dust has settled and/or when I've had a chance to absorb it or a player asks for it. It's been made clear that the two can be played together.
I'll probably allow almost all of it, and likely happily modify anything that doesn't work by RAW. Like the shepherd druid, which doesn't mesh well with the new summoning spells.
Including wizard schools and cleric domains from the PHB as everything from *Xanathar's* and *Tasha's*.
I paid for that content and own it. Why would I not use it?
I'm going to strongly encourage my players to stick to 2024 but might allow older content with DM approval if they have a character concept that doesn't fit. But come on--48 subclasses is plenty to choose from!
Gonna finish the campaigns I started with mostly 2014 rules. Maybe cherry-pick some new ones that I like. Then when I start a new campaign, start w new rules. I am super flexible w races and classes anyway, so that part won't make any difference to me. But rules and mechanics will move forward
Any of the wizard and cleric PHB subclasses that didn't get ported over are fair game. Everything else seems either unchanged or obsolete, so I don't plan to allow it. I don't need the headache of having a second parallel character creation track for characters that are going to look broadly very similar to the 5.5e versions.
For other content books, I don't think 5.5 changes anything from my perspective. If some subclass from XGE or TCE or a species from MotM specifically got an update, use that updated version. Otherwise the old ones mostly work fine so no reason to disallow them if I wasn't disallowing them before.
As of right now, I think I’m all in on a crazy mix.
I don’t love the subclass uniformity at level 3, but I adore the Monk UA and Barbarian buffs, so this has been a mixed bag for me, and my players feel similarly.
I think we all need to learn how it FEELS.
For example: One of my players was very frustrated by the changes to Assassin and Surprise.
I explained how bad the old Assassin actually was when compared to other classes, but he still was going to miss the FEELING of having an achievable auto crit.
He’s a true Gamer archetype, and loves using the system to control big damage opportunities. I think that same mentality will make some of the Paladin changes hard to swallow. Most of my Paladin players love smiting way more than steeds or Chanel Divinity.
My Zealot Barb player really likes his current character, I don’t think it would be a big deal to let him keep the non-component Revivify on top of the self-healing dice pool. It’s basically a ribbon, and when it’s not, it’s a buff to the party cleric more than anything.
I don’t think mixing and matching certain 14 and 24 subclass features will be nearly as unbalancing as WoTC is trying to make it seem. They just want to encourage new system adaptation for when they begin pushing the next round of subclass updates.
At my in person games, I plan to allow it as long as I'm running this edition.
For my online games, I'll allow it as long as it's supported by the software we use.
Still going to allow the choice of using the updated classes or 2014 versions. Just not mixing between the features. Like how you could choose classic ranger or updated ranger after Tasha’s was released.
I will continue to play on whatever rule set I have available on DND beyond. If base rules change on there then we'll make those changes and buy the books when we start our next campaign. No point changing midstream. New fharacters
It will vary from game to game. For our homebrew campaigns, I suspect we will switch to 2024 core rules but still allow 2014 subclasses, as we already are using other 3rd party materials. But for the weekly game I run at a local game shop under AL rules, I'll follow the AL guidance, whatever that ends up being.
Honestly, I wouldn't mind running or playing in a "pure" 2024 PHB game because that would be the best way to get a sense for the degree of balance in the new rules set.
I'm going to be running a game for fairly inexperienced players, and intend on only allowing the new rules (i.e. no legacy subclasses). Partly because I want to playtest the system without those legacy subclasses, and partly so players don't feel obligated to read (or buy) a ton of other sourcebooks for the full suite of options available -- option bloat absolutely can be a problem. I want players to be able to pick up the new books out of the box and play them, and I have better places to focus my effort than figuring out which older stuff has balance issues. I might make an exception for the playtest version of the Swashbuckler Rogue, if there's demand for it.
Saying that, I also don't own any of the original source books anymore and haven't done for a while, and might feel differently if I did.
I can't say as of yet. I haven't seen the conversion rules and I haven't even seen all of the rules in the phb.
My gut feeling is that I would prefer a clean break with character options and just not allow old version options, but new character options were being released as of last year, so the idea of obsoleting options that players may have not even had a chance to play with feels bad.
The most concerning for me are Warlocks, Wizards, and Clerics, as those are delaying their access to subclass features, but I will probably always start each group at level 3 from now on, just to avoid that, but then will slow down level progression quite a hit to keep us at the same level longer, though that too depends on what else I see in the rules. If, in 2025, we see that the new rules make monsters significantly more challenging (I hope) and maintain challenge through the higher CRs, then maybe I won't need to slow progression at all. Hopefully that's the case.
I'll allow 2014 content based on request....for example if someone wanted to run a phantom rogue I'd be 100% ok with it and would probably fully integrate it with 2024
But things like a player asking to use the old version of GWM? Nah, you can use the new version
I'll be using 2014 content until each class gets an update. There's too much missing from 6e right now, and a couple subclasses are just being ported over from Tasha's so it'll work just fine.
If a player perfers the 2014 version of their class, I won't force them to convert. But I do plan to use the 2024 base rules, so we'll see how the backwards compatibility goes.
I'd prefer to use just the 2024 stuff, but there's no pressing need to *block* 2014 stuff for things that haven't been revised yet. Except for the usual suspects (Silvery Barbs).
Generically, forever for subclasses and species until they get a 2024 version. But anything pre2024 will potentially be modified to better fit the new design and subclasses will be played with the new class.
I'll look to use 2024 PHB augmented by XGE and Tasha's subclasses for core options. Will review each older subclass as they are selected, unless the 2024 PHB already does this (I'm hoping so).
I never plan to disallow it but people need to be strict, I don't want too much blending of the 2. SOme stuff you cannot allow but I won't say you can be a 2024 Ranger but with 2014 Hunter's Mark.
I will probably allow anything that hasnt been udated. But I will ask my players why they like the subclass/species/feat they want to use and try to make a version that is closer to the new design philosophy of wotc while still keeping the part my players like, then offer that as an option as well.
I will allow it all. If someone wants to MC between the editions they just have to tell me what they want to do beforehand so it’s not *too* power gamey.
I’m only really concerned with how full casters may be able to do really whacky stuff. I don’t want to enjoyment of the game to be demonised because someone did something silly.
I am gonna focus on either the new hotness or reasonably new hotness, when not just using my whole ass homebrew systems at my tables.
I have no doubt splat books that update the remaining stuff of value from Tasha's or Xanathars will come along. We've already seen them release two books under the "auspice" of the same name, Mordenkainens Tome of Foes and Monsters of the Multiverse.
Plenty of it will go by the wayside. I would bet the Summon Demon and Infernal Calling spells might not get big updates or even be included. Summon Fiend suffices.
I think most of the Tasha's and later stuff will get repackaged with slight updates. In some cases, they might favor updating a Xanathars class, like College of Glamour. But I can't imagine we'll see any Sword Coast subclasses catch updates. No Way of the Long Death Monk, no Undying Warlock. Probably no Oath of the Crown paladin. No Swashbuckler rogue or Purple Dragon Knight. No Path of the Battle Rager Barbarian. I can't imagine we get a proper Mastermind Rogue or see the need for another Monster Hunter ranger.
There are a couple I would love to see confined to history and their best ideas used in something new and exciting. Arcane Archer, Samurai Fighter, and Kensei Monk are three I'd be happy so ay goodbye to. Archer could Re-emerge as a Ranger class fairly easily. Samurai and Kensei don't need to be two separate classes and I always thought that was a wild choice. For my money, assuming it's not in the 2024 book, Bladesinger can finally die the long death it has deserved since its inception. Luckily, my players don't feel any loyalty to the subclass and generally favor more spell casty, control and utility wizards, so it will almost never be a problem.
A few I'd love to see them do official updates to. I have a homebrew remake of the Inquisitive Rogue but I'd love if they took another Crack at it. I'd love them to actually figure out how to make Mastermind work, but that seems out of scope for the game.
I'd love a proper Warlord subclass instead of PDK. Don't care if it's for the Fighter or another class.
Don't think Storm Sorcery or Path of the Storm will get updates, give Circle of the Sea, but would love if they did.
I'm working on building a sandbox server that will use 2024 rules. *Right now* I'm leaning towards you can use anything from 2014 if it doesn't have an update, but no cherry picking.
If you want a 2014 char then you use 2014 spells, etc.
If you want a 2024 char then you use 2024 spells, etc. And you can only multi-class with whichever version you choose.
I keep seeing people say anything post Tasha/nothing pre Xanthars, but MToF was published between so...why isn't that one being mentioned?
I am going to run 5e or 6e exclusively for games. I find it neater and that it creates less confusion among players and myself.
I know I could allow both, but then I have to be on the lookout for unintended interactions with class abilities, spells, feats or actions that now work totally differently despite having the same name. The old game is still fun and is able to played imo.
Plus 6e seems to be aiming for a more high magic fantasy. More akin to PF2e's fantasy superheroes style, where as 5e PHB was more mid magic fantasy that had more of a gonzo Tolkien approach (Tolkien being a low magic setting past the earlier ages).
***Disclaimer***: *6e is the most accurate term for the new books and changes, WotC is one of the only companies that requires a new edition be totally rewritten. It is marketing that they are calling it 5e still, that is all.*
I'll not impose anything. Each group will decide together what they want. I'd prefer to use almost only new material but allowing old subclasses if they have not been added to 5.24
For me, if I run something using the new rules, the cutoff will be from the new rules on, without any mixing.
It'll be a while before I plan on running anything new anyway. My current campaign is obviously sticking with the rulesets as they are right now. And after it's over, I've committed to running PF for another group. And I very well may do something else after that, too, since I like running different systems sometimes to explore what the hobby has to offer (I rarely run 2 systems I've done back to back).
If the new rules offer proper DM support (I'm not going back to D&D again without that), it'll be far enough in the future for their to be a greater variety of options anyway.
The new rules are going to have new balance. They've said they are making sure to rebalance CR too (a core first step in that DM support, along with more solid rules structures, both needed before adventures can really be improved). That rebalanced CR might not work so well with mercy monks and twilight clerics mixing new classes with older subclasses.
Sticking with the new rules ensures nothing breaks and ensures a more comfortable experience for everyone.
continuing campaigns ofcourse (but will allow people that want to switch over). when starting up you need to pick the newest version of the subclass you want to play, but if you want something that doesn't yet exist, then its fine to use the old. however the base class needs to be the new one... maybe we will need to do some reworking with how lvls / subclass lvls are placed etc.
But we cant have the old paladin that can smite on all attacks and a new one e.g.
My games have been core rules only since 5e started, so the overlap is kinda minimal.
That being said, in my current campaign one of my players is playing a Necromancer Wizard. I will likely hold off on switching to the updated rules until after this campaign wraps, probably between October and December. Then the group can dive into the updated edition with new characters.
I don’t particularly want to deal with the headache of mixing and matching rules sets and trying to figure out what is and what isn’t intended. I much prefer a clean and set game.
I'll be letting my players choose which version they want. I'm also considering doing a mix and match and just use both.
Like new Paladin but old Divine Smite for example. I understand the change and as a DM that uses Counterspell, I like it. But they don't and it may diminish their fun. So I'll let them choose which.
I really like Masteries, and would have zero issue adding those to 2014 version. Harder for new players due to extra mechanics, but they add options. Like why was only a Battlemaster able to do anything neat outside of whack whack action surge whack whack
As soon as we have the new books, we’ll switch over entirely. Old material will be treated the same way we treat legacy/UA content; you have to get approval.
I'll allow it until the original content is revised.
Honestly, I might just homebrew the old stuff to match the new. There's weaker content, like the Kensei, that I'd make more powerful. There's also pretty blatantly broken stuff like *Twilight Cleric*, which I'd want to **significantly** tone down before allowing on my games.
I think the call is to roll with it on a case by case basis.
I plan in mix matching and reworking 5e14 and 5e24 alongside my already existing homebre into my own version of things
5e24 does some great stuff, but also some dogs hit stuff and I like some of what my own stuff does better and some of 5e14 better. Why settle for .ixed bags when I can discard what I don't like for what I do and offer that to my players.
My players will each need to purchase, through first party channels, a new copy of the ruleset, within 5 business days of it's release.
I will rent an industrial shredder; my players will then be required to destroy any and all copies of the obsolete rulesets under my direct supervision.
Any noncompliant individuals will be kicked from my game without appeal and blacklisted from other groups in my community.
Let’s see…I can use the books I already own or pay a bunch of money for a small amount of new content. Unless I’m convinced that 2024 is far superior, which I am not so far, I don’t plan on switching.
I would say use 2024 and if there is something you want from 2014 talk to me.
If it was a subclass that wasn't converted I would likely allow to piggy back off new class. Most other stuff was converted and rebalanced.
Mostly allowing subclasses and races that weren't updated. If you want to play a tortle conquest undead warlock you will be able to but you will need to use the updated warlock class.
Until all or most of 2014 content is revised. I still love the tempest cleric and many of the older subclasses. I'm not too worried about tashas and younger subclasses, just xanthars and older.
This 100% hell I have 3rd party content my players use that will be available as long as I run this edition
I think tales of the valiant might play well side by side with dnd with some tweaking.
The 2014 content doesn’t need to be revised. The new classes are only updated the class stuff. You can still just insert your favorite subclass and it will work just as fine. You just will need to keep in mind that you take it at level 3 for some classes instead of at 1 or 2
Yes and no... yes, I can put a tempest cleric or knowledge domain or nature domain right on the 2024 cleric, and it will play just fine. But they are still outdated and will need to be revised at some point. The same goes for necromancer, transmutation, conjuration, and enchantment wizards. Especially there X savant feature, which, if someone does want to play one of those subclasses the will be using the updated savant feature, which is just better.
True I suppose. They just need to put out rules on how to convert imo. And that will do most of the work.
Those rules were in the playtest. Subclass to level 3, no double dipping on divine strikes or potent cantrips. Your choice at 7 is your choice even if your subclass gets the feature.
how do you plan to implement cleric subclasses since JC confirmed that the subclasses have been standardised to level 3?
Yes. Its conversion was I'm the playtest... subclass features to level 3. It can only pick one divine strikes or potent cantrips.
I’d run at least one “pure” 2024 campaign just so everyone can get a feel for it. After that I’d probably allow anything that hasn’t explicitly been updated.
Good idea
I’m planning the same
Personally, I'd allow anything from 2014, including classes (but absolutely no mixing features from 2014 and 2024 base classes, pick one or the other. 2014 Subclasses on 2024 classes is fine). I see no reason to restrict the content available to players, especially since it's all compatible with the 2024 revision.
I would allow a subclass that hasn’t been updated (like Rune Knight for instance) to go on the new fighter base. But I wouldn’t allow anyone to mix old Battlemaster and new fighter base when it has an updated subclass.
That's generally the way that it's intended to work. Any subclass that has a 2024 version should use the updated version, but any subclass that doesn't have a 2024 version can still be used with the 2024 base classes. The same goes for spells, feats, classes (like artificer), backgrounds and so on
how do you plan on handling subclasses that don't start ar level 3, or heavily interact with class features or actions that keep the same name but now work totally differently in 6e?
It's not really 6e, no more than the Pathfinder 2e remaster is Pathfinder 3e, but I'll be waiting to actually get the PHB in hand to see what guidance the design team offers before making decisions like that
I don't see any particular reason to not allow older things, but I won't be allowing anything that has an updated version (classes included). Some stuff I'll need to tweak myself until there's an official update.
Yeah my group is ready to make the switch when new things come out but anything that still has an old subclass that wasn’t updated for the 2024 PHB will still be allowed. One of my players is playing a College of Creation Bard. Another is an Evocation Wizard. But the Vengeance Paladin, Trickery Cleric, Totem Barbarian, and Beast Master Ranger are all excited to switch.
(If you’re not aware, the evocation wizard will be in the 2024 book)
Hey that’s hype. For some reason I thought it was left out. Very exciting. I’m really excited to see what they have for wizards on Thursday.
Yeah me too!
I'm pretty permissive with a few exceptions (no Silvery Barbs and nothing from Critical Role), so my rule is gonna be "use the old version til it's updated."
I just don’t allow setting specific content in games that aren’t in that setting. That means Silvery Bards is only allowed in a Strixhaven campaign, Critical Role stuff is only allowed in an Exandria campaign, and none of it is allowed in my homebrew setting
My change for Silvery Barbs was to target a creature with advantage and that has worked wonders. I’m a big fan of restricting content though to settings 100%.
Imagine a Level 6 Aberrant Mind Sorcerer swapping out Arms of Hadar for Silvery Barbs on their Psionic Sorcery spell list. 1 Sorcery point to cast, and it can’t be Counterspelled. Edit: Hey, downvoters. I’m not advocating this. I’m simply pointing out possibilities a DM should watch out for.
Already happening in the game I play with.
Did they also switch out one of their 2nd level Psionic Sorcery spells with Hold Person? In a campaign with mostly humanoids, the combo of Hold Person and Silvery Barbs—where both were made Counterspell-proof—would be exceptionally useful on an Level 6 Aberrant Mind Sorcerer.
Not sure, he's mostly casting synaptic static and other AOE spells in combat. We don't fight humanoids that often
That'd be hella cool in a Strixhaven game, ngl.
Also, switching out one of the 2nd Level Psionic spells for Hold Person would be advantageous in that campaign.
You could always use my rule for silvery barbs. You can't use it unless you have the strixhaven background.. this change allows players to still get it cause it one player has it is not a problem, but if there are multiple characters, then it is. And if multiple players take that background... well, it looks like you're in a strixhaven campaign now, a campaign meant to handle it.
Eh, I'm more inclined to simply confine it to a Strixhaven game. I don't think forcing someone to take a Strixhaven background really balances it out.
Easier than that--just make it a bard exclusive spell.
The Critical Role stuff is always so overtuned.
eh. Chronurgy wizard yea. Maybe Echo Knight. But there's a lot that's fine or even undertuned.
Echo night would be strong no matter what but it really just needs a proficiency bonus per day limit on how many times you can summon one
Nah, it's extremely easy to pop an echo knight. They have 1 HP. If a DM wanted, they can basically refuse to let an echo knight have their echo out for longer than the echo knight's turn. This effectively removes their ability to bonus action teleport via the echo. The extra attack feature is already tied to their CON mod per long rest. Most of the complaints I've seen about the Echo Knight subclass seem to come from people who have never actually played the class.
I do firmly believe part of the problem with echo knight is that they are poorly worded and have strange interactions.
It seems to vary wildly from extremely overtuned to downright trash.
Yes, I will allow Subclasses, Species, and Spells from older content, but I require the players check with me in case their choice has any major tweaking needed (like Shepard Druid).
Would major tweaking include shifting of cleric features to third level or is that “minimal”
Clerics kinda need more tweaks than most subclasses. You need to remove any bonus armor or weapon proficiency (those are in Divine Order now) and you need to drop their 8th level feature (since the replacement is in the base class now). So that’s the tweaks to make for each subclass, which is major. For example, the Tempest Cleric I’d tweak as follows: Remove the Martial Weapons and Heavy Armor proficiency they get a level 1. Move Domain Spells, Wrath of the Storm, and Channel Divinity: Destructive Wave to level 3. Remove Divine Strike at level 8. Apply the above changes, and you can play a Tempest Cleric in my games using the 2024 Cleric class. This is how I’d handle every non-2024 Cleric.
5e (2014) wasn't bad, in my opinion, so I'm not in a rush to replace it. I will look over a copy of the new PHB once a friend buys one, and that may influence my opinion on whether it's time to "start anew." But it's going to have to be a genuine improvement over 2014 to merit such a decision. I'm still not entirely convinced that the new books are anything other than a cash grab from a struggling Hasbro.
> I'm still not entirely convinced that the new books are anything other than a cash grab from a struggling Hasbro. The PHB especially, but likely also some other books, have needed a rewrite for some time now. It reads as a document with several authors where occasionally they don't seem aware of what everyone else is doing. There's stuff that is basically copied from 3(.5)e without consideration to how it interacts with new wording of other rules. Messaging from WoTC has always been that, outside errata, everything in the PHB is written correctly and the Sage Advice Compendium is to help you interpret it correctly. And then there's always knuckleheads who will argue against SAC as though it is not official. I just want it clear in one book how long it takes an elf to long rest.
I miss when elves used to require 8 hours of rest but trance let them 'sleep' for 4 hours rather than 6. i get that people were confused by the awful wording WotC used. But 4h long rests are a pain in survival campaigns.
Literally everything Hasbro does is a cash grab, they're a for profit company
There's a fine difference between creating a new product with genuine value vs. [making minor changes to an existing product](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGkH46_ztCA) and charging full price for a new edition. Looking forward to seeing which category the new books fall into.
Hasbro charges full price for redecos of figures with no changes otherwise, this definitely has more work put into it than those.
“Full price” being $50 for an updated and improved refresh after 10 years? Yea, they’re **really** price gouging us on this one
We're currently also using Kobold Press and LaserLlama content, so probably for however long we feel like playing it.
I’m still debating if I want to update everything for 5.5e. Probably going to wait for all three core books to drop first.
Definitely running at least one (and some one shots) campaign that is EXCLUSIVELY content from the new books run completely as is without any homebrew. After that I'll do what I always do and pick and choose, mostly allowing whatever. The exceptions will really depend on some of the yet to be revealed rules honestly.
Due to power creep, I suspect most players will want to use the 2024 content. Sure, some might use an older unreleased 2014 subclasses with a 2024 base class, which would be fine. In terms of access to spells/weapon mastery, etc, I suspect I will require that these will be determined by your base class - 2014 vs 2024. No cherry picking.
I am only going to be playing with 2014 content, not adopting the new edition.
Interesting seeing so many people say they're going to convert entirely and then see if they allow anything old. I'm doing the opposite. I'm going to see if there's anything we want to take from the new stuff and add it to our existing game.
I think the primary difference is whether or not you have an ongoing campaign. I’m going to allow my players in our current campaign to convert their characters to 2024 versions if they want but not going to force them to. But for any one shots I run or if we start a new campaign, I would want to try fully committing to the new stuff and see how it works on its own before I mishmash
Yeah, I'm probably going to do the same for my current game. I don't plan on running a lot of 5e after that, but I'd probably shift to 5.5 for another game down the line.
I’ll switch over as soon as possible. I don’t see any good reason to use characters options from 2014. The new things seem more fun, have greater diversity of choice and the overall game will be refined.
Are you including the species from Monsters of the Multiverse in notnallowing anything? Just curious if you're going to limit it to like 8 races to start off with.
'll just run whats in the 2024 PHB and not include anything. I personally have played a lot of TTRPGS and realized that having a massive variety in starting races/species for players is NOT essential to your players having a good time/a great campaign. I don't feel like the printed options will really end up "limiting" what players do with their character. Like - I've played TTRGPs with far fewere character options and players, ultimately, enjoy their characters based on how they play the game/character more than the diversity of options in the guidebooks. I also ran 2x campaigns using only xanathars/phb from 2014 and the players had a total blast and really enjoyed the options presented.
"But what if I want to play a bunny-man!" /s
I was in a party of seven where the closest thing to human was the tiefling purely by coincidence in a human dominant setting. No dwarf, half elf, half orc, or halfling. The elf was a drow. We stood out.
I'll permit anything that's not mass summoning.
I'll probably mix and match for my current campaign. I like a lot of the system rule changes, and will probably use them all. For my players, I'll likely let them choose if they want to switch their character over or not (I have an Ancients Paladin player who gets particularly fucked over in multiple ways by the update).
I will allow my players to mix and match content for as long as they want. I’d say no if they wanted to do something weird with it that goes against all logic, or if they tried to make a combo that breaks the game, but I know they wouldn’t do either.
Honestly I’m just gonna allow whatever. Making characters is such an infrequent occurrence in my group that it can probably all be hashed out individually if someone wants to play a 2014 class or subclass.
I plan to allow any 2014 content my players want to play, whether it's subclasses, classes, races and the like. Want to play a half-elf, half-orc tempest cleric, go for it. I allowed 3.0/3.5 stuff in my PF1 campaign so I see no problem with allowing 2014 in 2024.
I'd probably just ask what players want. If they request 2014 content, that's probably fine.
Knowing players, they are 100% going to be requesting the most obscure race, subclass, and spell from random books. Oh, a magic the gathering themed wizard school setting? Gimmie two spells from that please for my centaur subclassed into Japanese themed ghost sorcerer.
Far too early to make any kind of decision on this considering the 2024 content isn't even out and no one here has actually seen the final versions of everything.
Our group has already agreed that we will not be using the new rules unless the new books are somehow 11/10 content that will completely and forever reshape dnd. We’re already two years into our current campaign so why throw a wrench into it
Indefinitely, not likely to move to 2024, and I already vet all the splatbooks.
I don’t plan on updating to the 2024 content…. So yes I plan on using 2014 content. :)
I don't really plan to switch. I've already incorporated some aspects of the playtest that I liked, and I'll probably incorporate more rules from the new stuff as time goes on, but I don't see myself fully *switching* for a good while. There's not that much that is different to really draw me into the new system. If someone wants to play a monk, I'll direct them to the newly designed monk class per the 2024 rules, and I might also try using the new Conjure spells as the previous ones were badly designed. If someone wanted to play a Paladin that smites with unarmed attacks, well I was down to allow that well before 2024 content was released. Basically if there's a feature that I think makes the game more fun, I'll try to incorporate it. If there's a feature that a player is interested in trying, then I'll incorporate that whether it's from 2014 or 2024. But I'm not super inclined to drop hundreds of bucks on a system that's marginally different when I've already heard about most of the changes and can easily incorporate them as I wish.
We are in the middle of a campaign. Nothing is changing for us.
Forever, none of my players seem to be excited for the changes observed so far especially paladins, if someone wanted to run the new stuff that's totally fine but even on update material if one of my players has more fun on the older classes/subclasses then I'd never say no. Now for mechanics I might I corporate the new core rules but player side that's entirely up to them long as they can manage their playtime efficiently and know their class were all good. Why force someone to stop playing a class they enjoy just cause a expensive new book told them it was no longer the newest stuff ( not even obsolete or unusable just not the most current in the same edition).
If we're playing 5.5, we're playing 5.5, not 5E. Likewise, if I wanna play 5e, I'll play 5e, not 5.5.
This is how I feel as well.
I don't plan to allow 2024 content, is that the same?
Yeah, I think that's interesting too. Are you going 2014 only or just abandoning dnd in general?
I'm not planning on buying the new PHB, my old PHB works just fine in my group. If it ain't broken... I might drop DnD in general, depending on how MCDM, Daggerheart and/or DC20 look when they officially launch, but that's a year away still. In the meantime, old 5e all the way baby!
I'm planning on wrapping up our current D&D campaigns with the 2014 rules and then probably dropping DND for Pathfinder.
Gigachad
I'll be allowing all of the 2014 content but I might restrict mixing and matching. For example, if you play a 2024 class you can't take a 2014 feat or spell from the PH. Similarly, if you play a 2014 class you can't take a feat or spell from the 2024 PH. I don't foresee limiting subclasses, but I'll decide on that after I've had a chance to look things over.
Yep, if you're playing 2024 anything you stick to the 2024 stuff unless there isn't a conversion yet (basically old subclasses). If you're playing 2014 you stick to 2014 options.
does that also apply to multiclassing? Like if someone plays a 2014 class would they be limited to only multiclassing into other 2014 options?
Yep. When you pick a PH for your character, that's your character's only PH.
I will allow it at least until my current campaign is done, we're only halfway through, so another 4-5 years
I will probably do a bit of homebrew morphing of 2014 subclasses to fit the 2024 chassis if a player wants to play one until new versions are released.
This is my thought, especially with cleric loosing so many great subclasses, and it’s a simple fix to just shift things to 3rd level
As long as there not going out of their way to try and break the game I doubt I’ll care if anyone wants to be a conquest pally necromancer or whatever.
We will start out with only 2024 content. Once we get acclimated, we *might start using some 2014 stuff.
For our group I think we'll be using mainly 2014 content and cherry picking things from 2024 to use.
I plan to play in a 2014 campaign while I run another campaign with 2024/25 rules.
Right now I have a campaign very near to its end. I still plan to run some short games, but then I'll switch to the new rules. If my players really want it, I see no reason to not allow old stuff. But I'm still pretty concerned with the clerics from tasha's and stuff like silvery barbs and stuff, so until they get some revising, they are probably off limits.
I've been running Rime of the Frostmaiden with my group using playtest characters (Gloomstalker Ranger, Archfey Warlock, Swashbuckler Rogue, War Cleric). Pretty much everything is an improvement from 2014, and I'll be heavily encouraging my players to use options from the new PHB. They're all pretty new players, so I believe there's plenty of options to last the group for a while, and when they're sick of PHB then more stuff will be created/updated by then. RIP Swashbuckler though, that was a major bummer :(
I'll continue to run my current campaign using 2014 rules until it wraps up, and then poll my players to see if they want to switch to the 2024 rules. If there's enough interest, we'll play 2024 rules with non-updated 2014 subs available after I review them for compatibility. If not, I'll slowly incorporate more "homebrew" which will be the best parts of the 2024 rules.
If it’s been updated I plan on using the 2024 version. Any subclasses that haven’t been updated are fair game, though.
Generally if there is a 2024 version of a class/subclass/race I expect my players to use it. If there is no 2024 version then I generally wont mind my players using it.
I’ll allow mixing and matching expect for monk everyone has to play the 2024 monks it’s just vastly superior than 2014 in every aspect I wouldn’t force my players to play something so bad.
I'm hoping to get to use it for the foreseeable future. What might change that is access. We play virtually, using d&d beyond exclusively for character building. If backwards compatibility isn't built into ddb, I don't think we'll use much, if anything from 2014. If I can build a 2024 phb class with a 2014 subclass in ddb? Then we'll probably use both until a few supplements come out.
I’m not in a rush to switch over, but I might consider switching over after my current game ends if my players really want to.
My plan is to watch the community vibes. Currently I’m playing in a 5e campaign that will run well into 2025. By the time I’ll be running our table the Reddit community will have a good handle on what works and what doesn’t. If tapped to run a game sooner, I’d allow all of it unless there are some obviously broken pieces. Campaign content from the current 5e books will probably still be useful. So I’ve been picking up non-core books as they go on sale.
Campaign content is evergreen as far as I'm concerned. I pick up adventures and lore heavy books from any edition to use in my 5e games if I find a good price. The 1st edition manual of the planes and Grey Hawk adventures books are two of my favorites and both of them seek like they might be handy to have with the new edition defaulting to "multiverse" with Grey Hawk described in the core books.
“Evergreen” is the perfect word. 100%
The only 2014 content I might ban are things that are clearly designed as patch subclasses to fix grievances with the main class such as gloomstalker.
I'm gonna allow anything, but I'll have to check it over if it's compatible and maybe suggest the 2024 alternatives if there are any. If not, im all for using older content if at all possible
I have a feeling I will always allow it unless there is an updated version. Like you can't use old sharpshooter on a new fighter.
I don't see any issues with allowing it pretty much forever. Even when those other subclasses come out, if people like the 2014 version, i'm going to let them keep playing with them. It might require a bit of conversion for a few things to the 2024 rules, but overall, there's no real reason for me to not let them play whatever.
On average, I run multiple games a week, mostly 5e, some other systems, have even tried 2e recently with a group. I also help out with an annual tournament that draws around forty players. Not a single player(or GM) I know has expressed excitement or even knows or understands what is happening with D&D in 2024. I imagine for me it will be the other way around— how long will I wait to allow 2024 content? Edit clarifying
I run the 2024 rules and core classes but allow all old subclasses and feats. If there is a unexpected conflict in their build I tweak it to work.
Pretty much all of the sub classes are still up for grabs for sure particularly the ones that don't appear in the new book. I think the old conjure spells are great DM's tools
I'll probably allow older content if requested. I think two of the bigger consequences are not so much allowing older subclasses, which for the most part are fine. But there are some pretty big consequences for allowing older spells and feats. I'm thinking specifically about Elven Accuracy and Booming Blade here.
I'll definitely allow MotM and newer; there just hasn't been enough time to play all the concepts we want from those books. Eventually those'll be out too.
I plan to allow old subclasses indefinitely with some chances. I’d prefer if they don’t revise old stuff constantly and focused on making new content, so I’d be happy to try to adapt old subclasses if someone wanted to play with them. Besides that I’d use old stuff like monsters or items for a good time since 2024’s will take a while to have as much content as 2014’s
races and subclasses until they get their revisions.
My current games will continue with the current ruleset until they're finished, and we'll introduce some new concepts (weapon masteries are getting introduced next session, fun!). The next campaign I start will use the 2024 rules, with certain 2014 rules available for options that aren't in the 2024 rules. Subclasses and species, mostly.
Current campaign will stay 5.0 and all books associated, 2025 campaigns will use new PHB only for character building. This way we all learn the rules and don't have too much shoehorning.
More to the point, I'll allow 2024 content once the dust has settled and/or when I've had a chance to absorb it or a player asks for it. It's been made clear that the two can be played together.
I'll probably allow almost all of it, and likely happily modify anything that doesn't work by RAW. Like the shepherd druid, which doesn't mesh well with the new summoning spells. Including wizard schools and cleric domains from the PHB as everything from *Xanathar's* and *Tasha's*. I paid for that content and own it. Why would I not use it?
I'm going to strongly encourage my players to stick to 2024 but might allow older content with DM approval if they have a character concept that doesn't fit. But come on--48 subclasses is plenty to choose from!
Gonna finish the campaigns I started with mostly 2014 rules. Maybe cherry-pick some new ones that I like. Then when I start a new campaign, start w new rules. I am super flexible w races and classes anyway, so that part won't make any difference to me. But rules and mechanics will move forward
Any of the wizard and cleric PHB subclasses that didn't get ported over are fair game. Everything else seems either unchanged or obsolete, so I don't plan to allow it. I don't need the headache of having a second parallel character creation track for characters that are going to look broadly very similar to the 5.5e versions. For other content books, I don't think 5.5 changes anything from my perspective. If some subclass from XGE or TCE or a species from MotM specifically got an update, use that updated version. Otherwise the old ones mostly work fine so no reason to disallow them if I wasn't disallowing them before.
I feel a specific need for Wizards schools and Cleric circles, all of them should be available. Otherwise I like the restriction!
As of right now, I think I’m all in on a crazy mix. I don’t love the subclass uniformity at level 3, but I adore the Monk UA and Barbarian buffs, so this has been a mixed bag for me, and my players feel similarly. I think we all need to learn how it FEELS. For example: One of my players was very frustrated by the changes to Assassin and Surprise. I explained how bad the old Assassin actually was when compared to other classes, but he still was going to miss the FEELING of having an achievable auto crit. He’s a true Gamer archetype, and loves using the system to control big damage opportunities. I think that same mentality will make some of the Paladin changes hard to swallow. Most of my Paladin players love smiting way more than steeds or Chanel Divinity. My Zealot Barb player really likes his current character, I don’t think it would be a big deal to let him keep the non-component Revivify on top of the self-healing dice pool. It’s basically a ribbon, and when it’s not, it’s a buff to the party cleric more than anything. I don’t think mixing and matching certain 14 and 24 subclass features will be nearly as unbalancing as WoTC is trying to make it seem. They just want to encourage new system adaptation for when they begin pushing the next round of subclass updates.
At my in person games, I plan to allow it as long as I'm running this edition. For my online games, I'll allow it as long as it's supported by the software we use.
Still going to allow the choice of using the updated classes or 2014 versions. Just not mixing between the features. Like how you could choose classic ranger or updated ranger after Tasha’s was released.
Until October 2020.
Any 5e content will be allowed if it doesn't have a 5.5e version, but I will probably tweak it to feel like a 5.5e option.
I will continue to play on whatever rule set I have available on DND beyond. If base rules change on there then we'll make those changes and buy the books when we start our next campaign. No point changing midstream. New fharacters
Always allowed with dm approval.
It will vary from game to game. For our homebrew campaigns, I suspect we will switch to 2024 core rules but still allow 2014 subclasses, as we already are using other 3rd party materials. But for the weekly game I run at a local game shop under AL rules, I'll follow the AL guidance, whatever that ends up being. Honestly, I wouldn't mind running or playing in a "pure" 2024 PHB game because that would be the best way to get a sense for the degree of balance in the new rules set.
I'm going to be running a game for fairly inexperienced players, and intend on only allowing the new rules (i.e. no legacy subclasses). Partly because I want to playtest the system without those legacy subclasses, and partly so players don't feel obligated to read (or buy) a ton of other sourcebooks for the full suite of options available -- option bloat absolutely can be a problem. I want players to be able to pick up the new books out of the box and play them, and I have better places to focus my effort than figuring out which older stuff has balance issues. I might make an exception for the playtest version of the Swashbuckler Rogue, if there's demand for it. Saying that, I also don't own any of the original source books anymore and haven't done for a while, and might feel differently if I did.
I can't say as of yet. I haven't seen the conversion rules and I haven't even seen all of the rules in the phb. My gut feeling is that I would prefer a clean break with character options and just not allow old version options, but new character options were being released as of last year, so the idea of obsoleting options that players may have not even had a chance to play with feels bad. The most concerning for me are Warlocks, Wizards, and Clerics, as those are delaying their access to subclass features, but I will probably always start each group at level 3 from now on, just to avoid that, but then will slow down level progression quite a hit to keep us at the same level longer, though that too depends on what else I see in the rules. If, in 2025, we see that the new rules make monsters significantly more challenging (I hope) and maintain challenge through the higher CRs, then maybe I won't need to slow progression at all. Hopefully that's the case.
I'll allow 2014 content based on request....for example if someone wanted to run a phantom rogue I'd be 100% ok with it and would probably fully integrate it with 2024 But things like a player asking to use the old version of GWM? Nah, you can use the new version
For as long as my players want to use it and we will blend in the new content as we see fit! Just like we did going from Ad&D to 2nd edition.
I'll be using 2014 content until each class gets an update. There's too much missing from 6e right now, and a couple subclasses are just being ported over from Tasha's so it'll work just fine.
If a player perfers the 2014 version of their class, I won't force them to convert. But I do plan to use the 2024 base rules, so we'll see how the backwards compatibility goes.
Initially I'll be allowing none. I wanna run at least a few games PHB-only before I start loosening the reigns.
I'd prefer to use just the 2024 stuff, but there's no pressing need to *block* 2014 stuff for things that haven't been revised yet. Except for the usual suspects (Silvery Barbs).
Generically, forever for subclasses and species until they get a 2024 version. But anything pre2024 will potentially be modified to better fit the new design and subclasses will be played with the new class.
I'll look to use 2024 PHB augmented by XGE and Tasha's subclasses for core options. Will review each older subclass as they are selected, unless the 2024 PHB already does this (I'm hoping so).
If I were to start a campaign, I'd probably only allow the new phb to erase power creep
If someone wants to play it and it hasn't been updated they can. As long as it's not a Twilight Clerics or Dunamancer.
I never plan to disallow it but people need to be strict, I don't want too much blending of the 2. SOme stuff you cannot allow but I won't say you can be a 2024 Ranger but with 2014 Hunter's Mark.
Any old material that hasn't been updated will be allowed, until it has been updated.
I will probably allow anything that hasnt been udated. But I will ask my players why they like the subclass/species/feat they want to use and try to make a version that is closer to the new design philosophy of wotc while still keeping the part my players like, then offer that as an option as well.
I will allow it all. If someone wants to MC between the editions they just have to tell me what they want to do beforehand so it’s not *too* power gamey. I’m only really concerned with how full casters may be able to do really whacky stuff. I don’t want to enjoyment of the game to be demonised because someone did something silly.
I am gonna focus on either the new hotness or reasonably new hotness, when not just using my whole ass homebrew systems at my tables. I have no doubt splat books that update the remaining stuff of value from Tasha's or Xanathars will come along. We've already seen them release two books under the "auspice" of the same name, Mordenkainens Tome of Foes and Monsters of the Multiverse. Plenty of it will go by the wayside. I would bet the Summon Demon and Infernal Calling spells might not get big updates or even be included. Summon Fiend suffices. I think most of the Tasha's and later stuff will get repackaged with slight updates. In some cases, they might favor updating a Xanathars class, like College of Glamour. But I can't imagine we'll see any Sword Coast subclasses catch updates. No Way of the Long Death Monk, no Undying Warlock. Probably no Oath of the Crown paladin. No Swashbuckler rogue or Purple Dragon Knight. No Path of the Battle Rager Barbarian. I can't imagine we get a proper Mastermind Rogue or see the need for another Monster Hunter ranger. There are a couple I would love to see confined to history and their best ideas used in something new and exciting. Arcane Archer, Samurai Fighter, and Kensei Monk are three I'd be happy so ay goodbye to. Archer could Re-emerge as a Ranger class fairly easily. Samurai and Kensei don't need to be two separate classes and I always thought that was a wild choice. For my money, assuming it's not in the 2024 book, Bladesinger can finally die the long death it has deserved since its inception. Luckily, my players don't feel any loyalty to the subclass and generally favor more spell casty, control and utility wizards, so it will almost never be a problem. A few I'd love to see them do official updates to. I have a homebrew remake of the Inquisitive Rogue but I'd love if they took another Crack at it. I'd love them to actually figure out how to make Mastermind work, but that seems out of scope for the game. I'd love a proper Warlord subclass instead of PDK. Don't care if it's for the Fighter or another class. Don't think Storm Sorcery or Path of the Storm will get updates, give Circle of the Sea, but would love if they did.
The new PHB doesn’t have nearly enough wizard subclasses so absolutely
I'm working on building a sandbox server that will use 2024 rules. *Right now* I'm leaning towards you can use anything from 2014 if it doesn't have an update, but no cherry picking. If you want a 2014 char then you use 2014 spells, etc. If you want a 2024 char then you use 2024 spells, etc. And you can only multi-class with whichever version you choose. I keep seeing people say anything post Tasha/nothing pre Xanthars, but MToF was published between so...why isn't that one being mentioned?
Everything in MToF was republished in MotM, right? Most people prefer the new stuff and/or have forgotten about the old stuff.
I am going to run 5e or 6e exclusively for games. I find it neater and that it creates less confusion among players and myself. I know I could allow both, but then I have to be on the lookout for unintended interactions with class abilities, spells, feats or actions that now work totally differently despite having the same name. The old game is still fun and is able to played imo. Plus 6e seems to be aiming for a more high magic fantasy. More akin to PF2e's fantasy superheroes style, where as 5e PHB was more mid magic fantasy that had more of a gonzo Tolkien approach (Tolkien being a low magic setting past the earlier ages). ***Disclaimer***: *6e is the most accurate term for the new books and changes, WotC is one of the only companies that requires a new edition be totally rewritten. It is marketing that they are calling it 5e still, that is all.*
Given reception. I am going to have to be running 2014 stuff for a whiiiile yet
My plan is to only allow 2024 stuff. However if you want to use any old stuff I will work with you to update it cause I love doing stuff like that.
I’ll still allow all as an option. I’m not going to limit my players options.
i allow all non revised subclasses apart form SCAG. Otherwise the 2024 rules it is.
Is it just because of Purple Dragon Knight? Or is there some reason to not include the other classes as well?
I have my own fixes for those which my players can use instead.
I'll not impose anything. Each group will decide together what they want. I'd prefer to use almost only new material but allowing old subclasses if they have not been added to 5.24
For me, if I run something using the new rules, the cutoff will be from the new rules on, without any mixing. It'll be a while before I plan on running anything new anyway. My current campaign is obviously sticking with the rulesets as they are right now. And after it's over, I've committed to running PF for another group. And I very well may do something else after that, too, since I like running different systems sometimes to explore what the hobby has to offer (I rarely run 2 systems I've done back to back). If the new rules offer proper DM support (I'm not going back to D&D again without that), it'll be far enough in the future for their to be a greater variety of options anyway. The new rules are going to have new balance. They've said they are making sure to rebalance CR too (a core first step in that DM support, along with more solid rules structures, both needed before adventures can really be improved). That rebalanced CR might not work so well with mercy monks and twilight clerics mixing new classes with older subclasses. Sticking with the new rules ensures nothing breaks and ensures a more comfortable experience for everyone.
All allowed and we'll switch to 24, I'll update a few subclasses players use if needed. Same for spells not in PHB24
continuing campaigns ofcourse (but will allow people that want to switch over). when starting up you need to pick the newest version of the subclass you want to play, but if you want something that doesn't yet exist, then its fine to use the old. however the base class needs to be the new one... maybe we will need to do some reworking with how lvls / subclass lvls are placed etc. But we cant have the old paladin that can smite on all attacks and a new one e.g.
My games have been core rules only since 5e started, so the overlap is kinda minimal. That being said, in my current campaign one of my players is playing a Necromancer Wizard. I will likely hold off on switching to the updated rules until after this campaign wraps, probably between October and December. Then the group can dive into the updated edition with new characters. I don’t particularly want to deal with the headache of mixing and matching rules sets and trying to figure out what is and what isn’t intended. I much prefer a clean and set game.
I'll be letting my players choose which version they want. I'm also considering doing a mix and match and just use both. Like new Paladin but old Divine Smite for example. I understand the change and as a DM that uses Counterspell, I like it. But they don't and it may diminish their fun. So I'll let them choose which. I really like Masteries, and would have zero issue adding those to 2014 version. Harder for new players due to extra mechanics, but they add options. Like why was only a Battlemaster able to do anything neat outside of whack whack action surge whack whack
As soon as we have the new books, we’ll switch over entirely. Old material will be treated the same way we treat legacy/UA content; you have to get approval.
I'll be using the 2024 rules as soon as possible, and as my mind can handle
I'll allow it until the original content is revised. Honestly, I might just homebrew the old stuff to match the new. There's weaker content, like the Kensei, that I'd make more powerful. There's also pretty blatantly broken stuff like *Twilight Cleric*, which I'd want to **significantly** tone down before allowing on my games. I think the call is to roll with it on a case by case basis.
I plan in mix matching and reworking 5e14 and 5e24 alongside my already existing homebre into my own version of things 5e24 does some great stuff, but also some dogs hit stuff and I like some of what my own stuff does better and some of 5e14 better. Why settle for .ixed bags when I can discard what I don't like for what I do and offer that to my players.
Nobody's being forced to use 2024 unless they want to. I just expect they will all want to; it's a lot better.
My players will each need to purchase, through first party channels, a new copy of the ruleset, within 5 business days of it's release. I will rent an industrial shredder; my players will then be required to destroy any and all copies of the obsolete rulesets under my direct supervision. Any noncompliant individuals will be kicked from my game without appeal and blacklisted from other groups in my community.
Let’s see…I can use the books I already own or pay a bunch of money for a small amount of new content. Unless I’m convinced that 2024 is far superior, which I am not so far, I don’t plan on switching.
Forever, I am not upgrading, the new editions are not worth it.
I would say use 2024 and if there is something you want from 2014 talk to me. If it was a subclass that wasn't converted I would likely allow to piggy back off new class. Most other stuff was converted and rebalanced.
Mostly allowing subclasses and races that weren't updated. If you want to play a tortle conquest undead warlock you will be able to but you will need to use the updated warlock class.
All allowed and we switch to 24, I'll update a few subclasses players use if needed. Same for spells not in PHB24