D&D (2024) Jeremy Crawford discusses what are the 2024 Fitfh Edition Core Rulebooks.

Status
Not open for further replies.

log in or register to remove this ad

mamba

Legend
Poor billion dollar company having to deal with people calling their spin spin. They must be protected. WITH CAPS LOCK
It's not like the side that claims that this is a new edition is objectively correct and WotC is objectively wrong. WotC obviously has a goal here, emphasize the compatibility, but given the insistence of the 'this is 5.5' crowd, I find it hard to believe that they do not.

I don't even know what the 5.5 side thinks calling it 5.5 would actually accomplish, other than cause confusion about compatibility. It's not making the 2024 version any less or any more compatible with 5e.
 
Last edited:

HammerMan

Legend
Et tu?

I mean, good grief, WotC has been as bloody crystal clear as they could possibly be right from day one. And right from day one people have been twisting their words right around the corner. "AHA! You have dangled a participle!! YOU MUST BE LYING TO EVERYONE!!! LOOK HOW THEY ARE LYING!!!!"

Yeah, it's all WotC's fault. :erm:
We are all welcome to define a ‘game edition’ however we want. There is no official definition and you, me, WotC, or anyone here doesn’t own the term.



We are allowed to disagree with a corporation’s position on something. We are not employees, we’re fans.
 

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
I mean, good grief, WotC has been as bloody crystal clear as they could possibly be right from day one. And right from day one people have been twisting their words right around the corner.
Right, because lack of clarity has never been the issue. You can say the sky is green as clearly and as many times as you want, it isn’t going to convince me it’s true.

Now, personally, I don’t have an opinion on if the 2024 rules are a new edition or not, other than that I think it’s a meaningless disagreement. But, I think the notion that people are just confused is silly. WotC has been perfectly clear about their intentions. People who think it’s a new edition understand what WotC is saying the 2024 rules are, they just fundamentally disagree that what they’re saying the 2024 rules are describes anything other than a new edition.
 

Hussar

Legend
Poor billion dollar company having to deal with people calling their spin spin. They must be protected. WITH CAPS LOCK

Fifteen years.

Fifteen years of watching people twist words to suit their particular axe to grind. From the early days of 4e forward.

Don’t you get tired of edition warring?
 

Vaalingrade

Legend
Fifteen years.

Fifteen years of watching people twist words to suit their particular axe to grind. From the early days of 4e forward.

Don’t you get tired of edition warring?
Saying this is an edition increment is not edition warring.

Until people start shouting others down over it and accusing them of having an agenda. This is just defending a marketing campaign with completely unnecessary fervor.
 

Azzy

ᚳᚣᚾᛖᚹᚢᛚᚠ
We are all welcome to define a ‘game edition’ however we want. There is no official definition and you, me, WotC, or anyone here doesn’t own the term.
Sure, we can define it any way we want. But we should understand that the way that WotC have used it previously (as a new rule set that isn't compatible with the previous edition) informs why they are not calling this a new edition, but instead a revision.
 

Right, because lack of clarity has never been the issue. You can say the sky is green as clearly and as many times as you want, it isn’t going to convince me it’s true.

Now, personally, I don’t have an opinion on if the 2024 rules are a new edition or not, other than that I think it’s a meaningless disagreement. But, I think the notion that people are just confused is silly. WotC has been perfectly clear about their intentions. People who think it’s a new edition understand what WotC is saying the 2024 rules are, they just fundamentally disagree that what they’re saying the 2024 rules are describes anything other than a new edition.

I really think the whole "is it a new edition" argument is less about what you actually call it as much as a desire to move harder towards the 2024 version, while others really value having full backwards compatibility with the 2014 edition. I'm not sure I believe that Wizards will be able to maintain the latter, even if they desire to do so, but we'll see.
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
One of the points that has remained consistant between all editions of D&D was that older mechanical material was no longer just "drop in" to use. You could convert it, but it wasn't RAW to use.

And that's the point we are disucssing here. Is this a continuation, where we can continue to use all of the previous material? Is it a continuation where a large amount of the material has been replaced but we can continue to use the rest? Or is it a "continuation" where some/all unaddressed mechanical material doesn't continue forward? Because the last doesn't fit the definition of a continuation.
What we have seen points to “drop in” continuation.
Gotcha. So if full power 2014 feats are fine to take at 1st level, then isn't the level requirements for feats just cruft that doesn't add to the game?
It adds guidelines that are nice. Not highly tuned isn’t the same as balance just not mattering.
No. In the video we are discussing in this thread, Crawford said that they are not changing the subclass level progression because it makes the two versions too incompatible. The change is subclass levels is the biggest change that makes the two versions not compatible, and they are getting rid of it in the next playtest package. How does that show that they don't care about the compatibility of player facing options again?
I don’t think That’s what he said, exactly. More that people disliked it, and worried that it would cause compatibility issues.

It didn’t, but whatever, if it bothered people fair enough.
 


Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top