D&D (2024) What is your oppinion of 5.24 so far?

[Scott Christian]

I'm not saying that people can't take a bit of extra time on their turns - I just find that the difference between 2014 and 2024 is negligible. I suppose that it's not non-existent, but I don't find that, for example, my polearm master player knocking an orc down and "playing shuffleboard" with him takes any longer to adjudicate than your average spell. Maybe it takes longer when comparing new fighter turn to old fighter turn, but it's no different than having a different class in that seat, if that makes sense.

And that is fair. I keep saying, we'll have to wait and see. So I will go by that.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

*and Conjure X, which was egregious in the time it took. It was banned as a combat spell at my table. I did allow it for out of combat scouting.

Yeah, I think that's ultimately my point - there are worse things in 2014 for game-slowing than any of the new options available in 2024. Much like the "power creep" - I see 2024 as rising the low-end, but bringing down the top, with maybe the middle bumped up a tiny bit, time-wise.

 

[Clint_L]

I'm not saying that people can't take a bit of extra time on their turns - I just find that the difference between 2014 and 2024 is negligible. I suppose that it's not non-existent, but I don't find that, for example, my polearm master player knocking an orc down and "playing shuffleboard" with him takes any longer to adjudicate than your average spell. Maybe it takes longer when comparing new fighter turn to old fighter turn, but it's no different than having a different class in that seat, if that makes sense.

Yes, but if you had a fighter using the old rules, and now you are using the new rules, your turns might take a bit longer because you have new options (i.e. playing shuffleboard with the orc). In fact, that's what happened with our group, because we started with the 2014 rules but have been adding the UA ones. And we've found that, for example, the barbarian's turns and monk's turns are definitely slower. Because they have more options. Which we've enjoyed.

I didn't think I was making a controversial point. Just reporting what we have experienced: slightly longer combats due to more stuff players can do. Which I presume is working as intended.

We haven't found much that speeds the game up, though certainly if we used a lot of summing spells that might be different. Most groups will have martial classes in them, though. Summoning spells are more of a niche improvement.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Yes, but if you had a fighter using the old rules, and now you are using the new rules, your turns might take a bit longer because you have new options (i.e. playing shuffleboard with the orc). In fact, that's what happened with our group, because we started with the 2014 rules but have been adding the UA ones. And we've found that, for example, the barbarian's turns and monk's turns are definitely slower. Because they have more options. Which we've enjoyed.

I didn't think I was making a controversial point. Just reporting what we have experienced: slightly longer combats due to more stuff players can do. Which I presume is working as intended.

We haven't found much that speeds the game up, though certainly if we used a lot of summing spells that might be different. Most groups will have martial classes in them, though. Summoning spells are more of a niche improvement.

Oh yeah, I'm not arguing with your experience - I'm just saying to the larger audience, that after what's probably getting on to a hundred sessions, with five groups of separate players and levels ranging from 1 to 12, I haven't noticed the overall experience to be substantially different.

Some people seem to be worried that the game will be entirely bogged down by the new rules. It's not. Your 10% thing will probably be the average - maybe a bit worse at higher levels - or worse if one is comparing a 2024 mostly martial party to a 2014 mostly martial party. But an average mixed party to an average mixed party is, IMO, barely noticeable.

And as you say, absolutely worth the little bit of extra effort.

 

[tetrasodium]

And that is fair. I keep saying, we'll have to wait and see. So I will go by that.

Because we have the rules for the weapon masteries what we don't need to "wait and see" about is estimating how much longer it will take if every weapon using PC is using a weapon mastery before or after swapping weapons on each and every attack of each of their turns... That is not an insignificant value. We also don't need to "wait and see" to estimate how much overhead is going to be dumped on the Adversary who needs to start tracking all of those short lived status effects being applied round after round with at will abilities attached to regular at will attacks.


I think that we will find the reason why @FitzTheRuke doesn't notice a difference is because it's new and nobody has put out guides/videos describing how best to minmax their weapon mastery when odds are good most players have not even read much of the play test packets.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I think that we will find the reason why @FitzTheRuke doesn't notice a difference is because it's new and nobody has put out guides/videos describing how best to minmax their weapon mastery when odds are good most players have not even read much of the play test packets.

That might be true - but the good news for me is that I won't have to worry about that AFTER that video drops either, because I don't play with minmaxers, even when I play public games at my FLGS.

Anyone who can't "play nice with others" (say, by taking a reasonable amount of time on their turns) can go find someone else to play with. If they can get it down to something that doesn't disrupt the table, then they're fine to do what they like. I'll certainly try to work with them to reach something that everyone is comfortable with.

I've never kicked anyone out - but I have had people leave of their own volition to go find a table that will put up with that sort of behaviour. I don't know how successful they were. I've had people who might be minmaxers elsewhere keep it to a level that isn't disruptive and got along fine at my table. YMMV.

 

[tetrasodium]

That might be true - but the good news for me is that I won't have to worry about that AFTER that video drops either, because I don't play with minmaxers, even when I play public games at my FLGS.

Anyone who can't "play nice with others" (say, by taking a reasonable amount of time on their turns) can go find someone else to play with. If they can get it down to something that doesn't disrupt the table, then they're fine to do what they like. I'll certainly try to work with them to reach something that everyone is comfortable with.

I've never kicked anyone out - but I have had people leave of their own volition to go find a table that will put up with that sort of behaviour. I don't know how successful they were. I've had people who might be minmaxers elsewhere keep it to a level that isn't disruptive and got along fine at my table. YMMV.

I've seen you make comments like this before but think that you vastly underestimate that bolded bit has on the players who sit down at your tables and their mindset once they sit down. You should not take your experience as someone who can say "at my FLGS" to be reflective of the norm.

Also the shade you are throwing at "minmaxers" is IME badly misplaced. Minmaxers tend to invest more into figuring out the rules & how to drive a truck through them without being slapped down. It's the more casual "Munchkins" who saw a video online for some OP/broken☆ build who show up deserving of that shade....

☆ often one even using one of those words in the video title or post that described it.

 

[DrJawaPhD]

That might be true - but the good news for me is that I won't have to worry about that AFTER that video drops either, because I don't play with minmaxers, even when I play public games at my FLGS.

I always find that min/maxers are the fastest at taking turns in combat. Part of analyzing the math on everything to the Nth degree to put your build together is that you are prepared to take your turns quickly without much analysis paralysis. If you are making any decisions in the moment without already knowing the "correct" answer beforehand then you aren't min/maxing.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I've seen you make comments like this before but think that you vastly underestimate that bolded bit has on the players who sit down at your tables and their mindset once they sit down. You should not take your experience as someone who can say "at my FLGS" to be reflective of the norm.

Perhaps. I just generally find that most people understand how to "play nice with others" when joining a group of people to do a communal activity.

Also the shade you are throwing at "minmaxers" is IME badly misplaced. Minmaxers tend to invest more into figuring out the rules & how to drive a truck through them without being slapped down. It's the more casual "Munchkins" who saw a video online for some OP/broken☆ build who show up deserving of that shade....

I was responding to YOUR use of "minmaxers" implying that there would be a problem once they watched the inevitable munchkin-videos. I understand the difference. Also - I don't think I was "throwing shade" (much) in that - again - I think that most of them can "play nice with others" and therefore won't be a problem.

While I agree with your use of "Munchkin" to differentiate, I'm not sure that either of us can assume that any given term has universal meaning that will be understood by everyone reading our posts.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I always find that min/maxers are the fastest at taking turns in combat. Part of analyzing the math on everything to the Nth degree to put your build together is that you are prepared to take your turns quickly without much analysis paralysis. If you are making any decisions in the moment without already knowing the "correct" answer beforehand then you aren't min/maxing.

Yes, I agree. We were talking about ones that would be a problem - which I assume would consist of those who want to make sure that they maximize their turn, but aren't good at making those decisions quickly and hem and haw about each part. What Tetra calls a munchkin, or what could be thought of as an inexperienced and/or low-skilled minmax wannabe, perhaps. Again, a theoretical problem that I don't think is going to occur often when we can simply talk to them and get them to behave (by "playing nice with others").

The point isn't to judge - it's to work together to keep the game moving smoothly.

Tetra's right, though, that I probably benefit from an implied authority, both because I own the FLGS that I often play at, and everyone there knows that I come with a deep level of knowledge and experience in the game. I don't think that I lord it over anyone, though - I think I'm decent at explaining how to "play nice with others" and try to lead by example.