Level Up (A5E) Is Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition compatible with D&D 5E?

[Larnievc]

Playtesting is supposed be performed before a product is released, not after by the player base. It’s a perfectly reasonable line of inquiry I think.

To be be fair you have been told that it was play tested by one of the authors (over two years, I believe). True not precisely how it was play tested but one imagines by playing the game under various conditions. Given this your comment here seems a little disingenuous.

Your initial position I believe was that the two rule sets were incompatible: is that still the case?

 

[Rant]

To be be fair you have been told that it was play tested by one of the authors (over two years, I believe). True not precisely how it was play tested but one imagines by playing the game under various conditions. Given this your comment here seems a little disingenuous.

Your initial position I believe was that the two rule sets were incompatible: is that still the case?

Again, we are back in the vagaries of what “compatibility” means. I think it is possible to run a table with two different rule sets at work. I think it is possible to run D&D modules with Level Up rules. This makes it about as compatible as Pathfinder - which is a different system. It isn’t compatible with D&D rules that it overwrites by definition, by overwriting them, but a table could run two different rule systems side by side without either losing anything, it seems.

That means “compatible” to some people and not to others. To me, no. While I could run a Pathfinder and D&D combined table that’s an experimental game, not a compatible game. But to some with less concern they might consider it compatible.

It’s too vague of a term to have a solid objective answer. It’s clearly less compatible with D&D 5e than a true expansion like Tasha’s and more compatible with D&D 5e than a system with entire differently paradigms like Chaosium’s, if that’s what you are asking. It doesn’t meet my benchmark for compatibility. The ability to run an experimental game with two different rule set involves running two different rule sets. It’s a neat idea. It’s not compatibility, it’s a workaround for a lack thereof.

Also, I still have no details on what that playtesting looked like. Given that there are numerous last minute edits at play in the rules the version seem in print may have never been playtested save by the players. I asked specific questions about how the play test was done, what kind of builds and rules were used. “Two years of playtesting” is not an answer to that.

 

[Larnievc]

may have never been playtested save by the players

Who else would play test it?

I guess 'to me' compatibility means that two players can rock up to my game with a PHB champion and a LU sorcerer and I can sit there with my Trials and Treasures overload trip planned out with the Monster Menagerie and Tome of Beasts 2 for combat encounters and get on with the game with no worries. In practice what else matters?

 

[Waller]

two different rule sets --- two different rule systems --- two different rule set --- running two different rule sets.

If you keep repeating it over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over. Maybe eventually it will become true!

Wiat, no it won't. No it won't. No it won't. No it won't. No it won't. Is it working yet?

Dude, you haven't played the game, you've even indicated here that you have intention of playing it, you repeatedly post identical repetitive rants over and over and over again, about a game you haven't played, which directly contradict actual statements fom thos who have played it, and you have clearly made up your mind. This is just a Monty Python sketch at this point. Not one of the good ones.

Just give it a rest, eh?

 

[Faolyn]

Again, we are back in the vagaries of what “compatibility” means.

There's no vagueness here. Do you think you could play a game where some of the players are playing o5e characters and others are play LU characters, and you are using one or the other's rules, or a mixture of rules? Yes or no. Several people here have said yes, they can and have done exactly that. Which means that you can play it as well.

So, question: is your only or primary problem that you can't do certain builds with LU, because of the way that feats or classes are designed now?

If so, try building new characters. Don't expect you'll be able to make an exact duplicate of your character in LU. Or, try re-imagining your character in a new way, like I did with my Swashbuckler Rogue/Fighter to pure Fighter Duelist.

 

[Rant]

Who else would play test it?

I guess 'to me' compatibility means that two players can rock up to my game with a PHB champion and a LU sorcerer and I can sit there with my Trials and Treasures overload trip planned out with the Monster Menagerie and Tome of Beasts 2 for combat encounters and get on with the game with no worries. In practice what else matters?

Typically playtesting happens before a product is released. Obviously different things matter to different people and compatibility means different things to some of us. But I have no elaboration on what kind of playtesting took place to assure me that it was sufficient.

Poorly thought out additions like Press The Attack indicate a lack of playtesting. Why would we assume the “compatibility” was playtested any more thoroughly than the core battle mechanics?

 

[Faolyn]

@Rant, have you actually played a game using PtA/FB? Or are you making this decision based on what you've read?

 

[Rant]

@Rant, have you actually played a game using PtA/FB? Or are you making this decision based on what you've read?

Press the attack and fall back are obviously messed up from a read. There are some things that come across in text as obviously bad vs the need to test to confirm they’re bad.

Actions having built in reaction based countermeasure doesn’t line up with 5e game design. It creates a meta-game guessing game that doesn’t resemble in game tactics. Taking a class mechanic and universalizing it isn’t appropriate. Fall back’s disadvantages don’t mean as much to a caster using fall back as a melee attacker, and so on. Groups gain an advantage making the balance of swarm encounters vs solo encounters skewed. This is all apparent from just a read.

 

[tetrasodium]

Press the attack and fall back are obviously messed up from a read. There are some things that come across in text as obviously bad vs the need to test to confirm they’re bad.

Actions having built in reaction based countermeasure doesn’t line up with 5e game design. It creates a meta-game guessing game that doesn’t resemble in game tactics. Taking a class mechanic and universalizing it isn’t appropriate. Fall back’s disadvantages don’t mean as much to a caster using fall back as a melee attacker, and so on. Groups gain an advantage making the balance of swarm encounters vs solo encounters skewed. This is all apparent from just a read.

For many of us o5e's "game design" doesn't line up very well with the needs of d&d... Having combatants moving in combat on my physical Tvbox displaying a local VTT for reasons other than closing to attack range will be a dramatic improvement & players having the option to trade risk of easier attacks against them for the reward of more successful attacks against an opponent gives me as the GM/Narrator more room for monsters to challenge players without simply adding gobs more hit points on top of a low ac.

 

[Rant]

For many of us o5e's "game design" doesn't line up very well with the needs of d&d... Having combatants moving in combat on my physical Tvbox displaying a local VTT for reasons other than closing to attack range will be a dramatic improvement & players having the option to trade risk of easier attacks against them for the reward of more successful attacks against an opponent gives me as the GM/Narrator more room for monsters to challenge players without simply adding gobs more hit points on top of a low ac.

View attachment 146731

Press the attack/fall back is not where I would advise plugging the system. It’s a weak point. Social and exploration abilities and filling in choice-free levels, all positives. Press the attack is not a good mechanic.

You have solo creatures like dragons that already struggle to provide an adequate challenge while using legendary actions, lairs, and whatever else the game can cook up to make them competitive, now further weakened by being outnumbered. Encounters with large “mobs” of enemies that outnumber the players now are much more dangerous than before. Also, a mechanic with a built in “use a reaction to counter this” like Press the Attack or the Polearm Master replacement aren’t just antithetical to 5e design. It’s different from any edition of D&D to date.

If a mechanic seems overpowered or problematic so a counter to it needs to be introduced that involves using a reaction it might just be a sign that the mechanic is overpowered or problematic.