Who's gonna switch to 5.5, and why?

[Waazraath]

Personally, at the moment I'm not inclined to make the switch to the new (half) edition next year. So I was wondering: who is and who isn't, and why, based on the information and playtest available so far? Maybe I'm missing reasons why making a switch would be an interesting idea.

[2D8HP]

The only heads up information that I’m aware of is that the plan is for all PC’s to now have a feat at first level, otherwise WotC promises “backwards” compatibility with 5e.

I’ll certainly at least buy the new PHB when it comes out, whether I’ll use any of that I don’t know, it kinda depends on which version of D&D I’ll teach my younger son.

[schm0]

I think like a lot of people, I will wait and see what is contained in the final product when it comes out, whenever that is.

[Atranen]

I'm likely to pick up the PHB and run it, because I run community games via AL, and I suspect they will be required to switch to the new ruleset. If not, I'll happily pass, as nothing in the new rules seems worth making the switch for me.

[One Tin Soldier]

I am, because:
-They’re fixing a lot of commonly complained about problems with 5e.
-Basically every class has been improved to be more fun to play.
—They finally figured out what makes bad capstones bad, and are getting rid of them and replacing them with good ones.
—Every single martial class can make interesting tactical decisions in every round of combat if they want to, most of the time free of resources - without making it impossible or bad to “just swing your sword at the bad guy.”
-Players are being given fewer “nova” capabilities and overpowered spells/feats, which means that balancing encounters will be easier as a GM.
-The Monster Manual is being updated, and what they’ve said about the changes sounds very promising.
-The DMG is being updated to improve the layout, and adding some new GM tools (like the Bastion system).
-It really is going to be backwards compatible with like 99% of what‘s been published for 5e.

[Mastikator]

I think like a lot of people, I will wait and see what is contained in the final product when it comes out, whenever that is.

Yeah same. I'll probably also wait until there's a discount as well.

I also won't switch out for any current campaign. Most likely if I start a campaign in 2025 I might use the 2024 version.

[P. G. Macer]

Probably not to be honest; I’km trying to move towards non-D&D RPGs in general, and nothing that I’ve seen has wowed me enough to justify spending so much money on the new core rulebooks. Yes, there are a lot of good rebalances and Quality of Life Improvements, but nothing so spectacular as to justify the expense.

Also, as a paladin main in 5e, what they did to Divine Smite is a gosh-darn travesty; if there was any paladin feature that deserved nerfing, it was Aura of Protection, and that one’s mechanics are unchanged (and no, “just use the 2014 paladin at a 2024 table” is not a viable response here, because that leaves me at the mercy of “DM may I” and the expectation of using a 2014 paladin at a 2024 table will be different from at a 2014 one, because it’ll no longer be the default).

[GooeyChewie]

I was going to, but the rest of my group decided to stick with 5e. I'm sure we will revisit that decision when the books actually release, but I'm not sure revisiting that decision will actually lead to picking up One D&D/5.5. We are actually trying out Pathfinder for our next in-person game, which is something I wouldn't have fathomed a year ago.

[Damon_Tor]

Personally, at the moment I'm not inclined to make the switch to the new (half) edition next year. So I was wondering: who is and who isn't, and why, based on the information and playtest available so far? Maybe I'm missing reasons why making a switch would be an interesting idea.

I'll allow any of my players who prefer 5.5 to build their characters with those rules. And similarly I would allow anyone who prefers 5e to use those. I probably won't allow mixing and matching of game elements between the two. I doubt I'll ever "switch" as such

[Keltest]

I'm really disinclined to spend a bunch of money on content that I basically already own. If I find something that is really egregious, im just going to houserule it, not buy an entire new set of (expensive) books just for the one patch.

[Waterdeep Merch]

I'll be buying the PHB, at least. But I buy all kinds of systems, if only to read them and consider what aspects I might be able to use in the games I run. If it's good, I'll probably pick up the MM and DMG later too.

Whether I then run it, in whole or in part, will depend on my players. I like to stay flexible as DM.

[Psyren]

I am, because:
-They’re fixing a lot of commonly complained about problems with 5e.
-Basically every class has been improved to be more fun to play.
—They finally figured out what makes bad capstones bad, and are getting rid of them and replacing them with good ones.
—Every single martial class can make interesting tactical decisions in every round of combat if they want to, most of the time free of resources - without making it impossible or bad to “just swing your sword at the bad guy.”
-Players are being given fewer “nova” capabilities and overpowered spells/feats, which means that balancing encounters will be easier as a GM.
-The Monster Manual is being updated, and what they’ve said about the changes sounds very promising.
-The DMG is being updated to improve the layout, and adding some new GM tools (like the Bastion system).
-It really is going to be backwards compatible with like 99% of what‘s been published for 5e.

All of this, though I'm pretty lukewarm on Bastions so far (I can see the benefit of it for sandboxy campaigns but those aren't really my jam.)

[PhoenixPhyre]

Neither I nor any of my play groups have expressed any interest in switching.

Our collective sense is that
1. The problems it claims to fix are not generally problems we have.
2. The way it goes about fixing those problems (even the ones where we agree that there is a problem there) is at best "meh, that's ok but not exciting" and often "why would you do that"?
3. We don't like that it's doubled down on "everything exciting is either a spell or costs a spell slot."
4. We don't trust WotC's understanding of their own game

Overall, there's nothing there worth spending a full book's worth of money on, let alone 3x.

Personally, my WIP knock-off is basically playable at this point. So new campaigns will either be 2014 5e or will use NIH system. I'll play 2024 5e, assuming someone else has the books on hand--it's not outright offensive or obnoxious. Just not worth giving WotC any money for.

[Zevox]

I don't currently expect to, based on what I've seen in the UAs. Many of the changes are lateral moves at best to me, and some I strongly dislike, such as Druid's Wild Shape and Paladin's Smite. There are some improvements, such as the overall Sorcerer and Monk classes (although certain subclasses leave a lot to be desired there, and I dislike the change to Monk ability naming conventions), but far from enough for me to feel it worth adopting the new version wholesale. And Weapon Mastery, while a step in the right direction, I can't see my group ever preferring to use over the Kobold Press Weapon Maneuvers we already use.

So my current intention is to stick to 5e, and house-rule in the best ideas from 5.5e. I may or may not pick up the new PHB at some point just to have the final version of things to comb for those ideas, though unless people who do get it report major changes from what we saw in the UAs I feel like those having given me a good sense of what and where they are. Also possibly for the few legitimately new subclasses like Dance Bard, still unsure if those will be worth it to me or not.

[kazaryu]

Also, as a paladin main in 5e, what they did to Divine Smite is a gosh-darn travesty; if there was any paladin feature that deserved nerfing, it was Aura of Protection, and that one’s mechanics are unchanged (and no, “just use the 2014 paladin at a 2024 table” is not a viable response here, because that leaves me at the mercy of “DM may I” and the expectation of using a 2014 paladin at a 2024 table will be different from at a 2014 one, because it’ll no longer be the default).

i mean, either way you're still stuck with "dm may i" since any table to may join can decide to swap to 2024 regardless of your input.

[Dr.Samurai]

The DM will give us the option in our current campaign, with the caveat that we either have to choose to stay with 2014 completely, or switch over completely, but no taking things from one to add to the other.

I would prefer not to make the change, as all three of my feats are heavily modified in the new version, resulting in the loss of:

1. Disengaging for free when I attack an enemy
2. +10ft of speed (since my character wears Heavy Armor)
3. Attacking as part of a Dash Action
4. Anywhere from 5-35 damage a turn (or more with Action Surge)

The player playing the ranger is ambivalent about switching over to the new ranger (including the new Hunter subclass). The druid player doesn't care. The monk player is super excited (he's been using the new monk for a couple of sessions now and loves it).

We will likely ending up switching over to the new version for the remainder of this game. Then depends on what the next DM wants to do, which will depend on what the final version looks like. If I wind up DMing, it will probably be 2014 base with some 2024 changes.

[Lalliman]

I’ll probably let it mellow for a while and eventually circle around to poaching the parts of it that I like, if I haven’t abandoned running D&D by that point. I definitely won’t use it outright. D&D5’s core merit is that it’s Good Enough and familiar. I’d rather keep running a flawed game that I fully understand, of which I know the flaws and know how to patch the worst ones in a way that works for me and my table, than sacrifice that familiarity for a new system that seems like it’s two-steps-forward-one-step-back.

[Kane0]

Probably not, i dont have the time or money to burn like i used to. I will take and adapt all the free UA stuff though.

[Mindflayer_Inc]

Personally, at the moment I'm not inclined to make the switch to the new (half) edition next year. So I was wondering: who is and who isn't, and why, based on the information and playtest available so far? Maybe I'm missing reasons why making a switch would be an interesting idea.

The opposite of switching to 5.5. Technically. Been slowly transitioning to other systems.

5e is ok and there are things I love about it (most of which are all the ideologies they brought over from 4e, simplicity and others) but it was always half finished. It's a mess but a usable one.

Numenera/Cypher System is a broken mess in terms of a lot of things, but like, everyone is a broken mess and on the same page. Also, as a GM, it's tied with 4e with how awesome it is to run a game. For vastly different reasons, but still, lots of fun.

The playtest, and WotC shenanigans, really turned me off from D&D.

[Dalinar]

I'm pretty sold on it from Monk changes alone. The question isn't just about me though, it's about my table, and I wonder how many of those people (who I love more than anything) would see enough upside to running what is essentially Uncanny Valley 5e to justify moving over. It's something I've seen in video games before (it's a long shot bringing it up on this forum, but anyone who was a fan of the Smash Bros mod Project M may have had a similar experience trying to get Melee players into it). In any case, that's a discussion for when the rules are finalized, I guess.

Conversely something like MCDM RPG (whenever that's available) or Fabula Ultima might be different enough to not cross wires, and yes, Not Giving Money to Hasbro/WOTC is also an upside to those.

[Mindflayer_Inc]

...Fabula Ultima might be different enough to not cross wires...

Hmm looks interesting enough.

The name alone screams "Final Fantasy" so it's hitting its intended vibe.

[Envyus]

Almost for sure getting the new books for me and my players. It’s pretty much 5e but improved from my experiences, so I am anxious to see more.

[Silverblade1234]

I'm overall positive on the PhB changes, and optimistic about the changes coming to the other two books given what they've said, so I'm sure I'll be buying the books and using them for the next campaign my group runs. My group hasn't been following the playtest and aren't very engaged with the larger D&D world outside our campaign, but I think they'll be excited by the numerous small buffs and improvements to their favorite classes and whatnot. There will be a small learning period where we get used to some of the rule changes, but I have to remind them of existing rules right now, so I don't think it's going to be any kind of hardship.

[Dalinar]

Hmm looks interesting enough.

The name alone screams "Final Fantasy" so it's hitting its intended vibe.

It's 100% intentional, a self-described "TTJRPG." I haven't had the chance to play it yet, but I've heard good things from other people and it seems up my alley.

[Psyren]

Oh yeah, I've been meaning to give Fabula Ultima a look, thanks for the reminder

There's a free trial adventure for it called Press Start that I'm reading through currently. It includes basic versions of the rules as well as 4 pregens.

[JonBeowulf]

5e is the final one for me. In fact, I have no plans to buy anything else (unless there's something on Roll20 that I just gotta have).

I may drop some cash on a new game. My son picked up the Dark Souls TTRPG that sits on the 5e chassis. At first glance it looks like they did a good job with it. Time will tell.

[JackPhoenix]

Not me. I'll probably drop 5e completely for other systems, if not, I'll at best take the rare few good changes (which are things that existed homebrew for years before WotC even announced they'll be making their cashgrab attempt "new" edition anyway) and ignore all the way they make the game worse. And even then, WotC won't see a single cent from me.

[rlc]

when i play: maybe, it depends on everybody else.
when i dm: probably.

[tokek]

Some of my play is online on Discord using the Avrae bot. Its likely that Avrae will switch to the new version as its maintained by Beyond developers - so we will switch those games to the new version.

As for my main weekly game we will wait and see.

[Luccan]

I'm not, but it's not really got anything to do with the changes beyond "that's not worth the money". 5e plays fine as is and I know how to account for the most common stumbling blocks