I wonder if games using the 2024 rules will be able to use every feats and subclasses from Tasha or Xanathar, because if the Psionic Warrior is already on the PHB 2024 and it differs from the one in Tasha, which one will prevail ?
Honestly I don't think anyone would want to use the old content from Tasha's or XGtE after the new release cuz the changes they made are so strong that the old content feels weaker by comparison.
They addressed this in a video. TLDR: if you’re using the 2024 core, then you have to use the most updated version of a feat, spell, species, background, or subclass. You can still use older options that haven’t been updated yet, but if it appears in the 2024 PHB you have to use that version if the table is using the updated core rules.
@@JensenGKP OR you do what I am going to do, and as a DM pick which one I life better for my game and often when it comes to classes or other player features, let the players decide which version they want to use. Why not, at this pt its one big pile, let em have the toys they like...lol. I think in general, MOST of the 2024 features are not too much worst, but there are some real doozies I would not make someone keep: Divine Smite being a prime example.
@@shadowmancer99 divine smite needed a nerf and the new version is fine. I’ve been DMing two campaigns with the playtest material and the spell version of Smite has been a non-issue. I’ll stick to just one ruleset as much as possible because that’s how the games designed. I don’t want broken exploits.
I don't like the change on surprise attack. Tbh, I'm honestly thinking on skipping this when I take into consideration the race changes, Surprise attack. I also liked quite a lot the archtype possibly coming at different levels for different classes. This contributed to the uniqueness of the world and characters. Idk, a lot of those stuff takes quite a lot from what playing D&D means to me.
the problem with the 5e one is that if you surprise someone the fight is basically over, its way too punishing if you get surprised and way too easy of a fight if you surprise the enemy
Surprise easily becomes overpowered. If you surprise the enemy group and all of yours focus fires, you can easily kill at least 1 enemy in the surprise round. If you had a balanced 4 vs 4 it becomes a 4v3 wash.
Players NEVER like something they see as a nerf. If enemies surprised players as often as the players surprised enemies… well… surprise wouldn’t be as popular
I think the changes to fighter are fine. Not wow, but ok. What I wont be using s the Surprise rule they changed....surprise should be a big deal...cinematically, how many times do we see when one side get the surprise on the other that its a lop sided dight...I want to keep that threat....so if players are smart and think they can make their lives easier and if careless they can get screwed. I DONT subscribe to the new wave of gaming where players should not fail, die, etc. I dont agree that players should have to have flaws to be interesting, but I do think the real threat of terrible failure in a game like DnD is definietly better than an expection that everyone is going to live and be hapily ever after....
Seeing this makes me realize that I really can not go back to D&D. Picking one feat like every 4 levels (if you dont want a stat push that is, now even competing with these Epic Boons) is so lackluster. I want to build my character on every level I make with a variety of options and I want it to feel good within the first 3 levels. Unfortunately, D&D decided not to go that route so I'll stick to Pathfinder / Starfinder (and soon enough DC20).
I give my players 1 feat at first, and 1 every 3 levels and AIS bonus every 4 and those are at CHARACTER not CLASS levels. its how they did it in 3.5, and I prefer players being able to to actually PLAY with the tools of the game.
Yeah idk man, this really does seem to be just trying to fix a lot of 5e issues but it’s still doesn’t seem appealing enough to get me to hop off of 3.5, Path/Starfinder etc.
love the Pathfinder Fighter and Cleric iconics at 2:48 😂
I was waiting for someone to comment about that. 😆😆
They also change potion to a bonus action, which means that a fighter can down a potion of healing and still attack
I wonder if games using the 2024 rules will be able to use every feats and subclasses from Tasha or Xanathar, because if the Psionic Warrior is already on the PHB 2024 and it differs from the one in Tasha, which one will prevail ?
Honestly I don't think anyone would want to use the old content from Tasha's or XGtE after the new release cuz the changes they made are so strong that the old content feels weaker by comparison.
They addressed this in a video. TLDR: if you’re using the 2024 core, then you have to use the most updated version of a feat, spell, species, background, or subclass. You can still use older options that haven’t been updated yet, but if it appears in the 2024 PHB you have to use that version if the table is using the updated core rules.
@@JensenGKP OR you do what I am going to do, and as a DM pick which one I life better for my game and often when it comes to classes or other player features, let the players decide which version they want to use. Why not, at this pt its one big pile, let em have the toys they like...lol. I think in general, MOST of the 2024 features are not too much worst, but there are some real doozies I would not make someone keep: Divine Smite being a prime example.
@@shadowmancer99 divine smite needed a nerf and the new version is fine. I’ve been DMing two campaigns with the playtest material and the spell version of Smite has been a non-issue.
I’ll stick to just one ruleset as much as possible because that’s how the games designed. I don’t want broken exploits.
@@JensenGKP Your call. But I dont like the new smite, wont force it. Its an unnecessary nerf in my mind, though I realize others feel otherwise...
I don't like the change on surprise attack. Tbh, I'm honestly thinking on skipping this when I take into consideration the race changes, Surprise attack. I also liked quite a lot the archtype possibly coming at different levels for different classes. This contributed to the uniqueness of the world and characters.
Idk, a lot of those stuff takes quite a lot from what playing D&D means to me.
I dont like the change to surprise attacks, its hardly usefull anymore, i think the extra turn was great
the problem with the 5e one is that if you surprise someone the fight is basically over, its way too punishing if you get surprised and way too easy of a fight if you surprise the enemy
@@lucasn.e5835 I see, I'll admit I've just began playing DND and haven't noticed it being an issue, but maybe because the group is only first level
Surprise easily becomes overpowered.
If you surprise the enemy group and all of yours focus fires, you can easily kill at least 1 enemy in the surprise round.
If you had a balanced 4 vs 4 it becomes a 4v3 wash.
Players NEVER like something they see as a nerf. If enemies surprised players as often as the players surprised enemies… well… surprise wouldn’t be as popular
I think the changes to fighter are fine. Not wow, but ok. What I wont be using s the Surprise rule they changed....surprise should be a big deal...cinematically, how many times do we see when one side get the surprise on the other that its a lop sided dight...I want to keep that threat....so if players are smart and think they can make their lives easier and if careless they can get screwed. I DONT subscribe to the new wave of gaming where players should not fail, die, etc. I dont agree that players should have to have flaws to be interesting, but I do think the real threat of terrible failure in a game like DnD is definietly better than an expection that everyone is going to live and be hapily ever after....
Seeing this makes me realize that I really can not go back to D&D. Picking one feat like every 4 levels (if you dont want a stat push that is, now even competing with these Epic Boons) is so lackluster. I want to build my character on every level I make with a variety of options and I want it to feel good within the first 3 levels.
Unfortunately, D&D decided not to go that route so I'll stick to Pathfinder / Starfinder (and soon enough DC20).
I give my players 1 feat at first, and 1 every 3 levels and AIS bonus every 4 and those are at CHARACTER not CLASS levels. its how they did it in 3.5, and I prefer players being able to to actually PLAY with the tools of the game.
Yeah idk man, this really does seem to be just trying to fix a lot of 5e issues but it’s still doesn’t seem appealing enough to get me to hop off of 3.5, Path/Starfinder etc.