D&D (2024) What do we call One D&D?

[Ruin Explorer]

3.x lacked the modular system design at the core of 5E. It is very easy to unplug rule elements and replace them without disruption.

5E isn't modularly designed.

It was initially proposed that it would be, but that wasn't actually followed through. So this isn't the case. It has modular elements (like Feats), but we're not talking about a system like FUZION where it's fundamentally modular.

 

[Parmandur]

LOL. Let's see man, I just don't see it happening. The changes in this one thing alone are about as big as all the "stealth releases" imho.

This is the big test, though: per Crawford in the video, the further tests are going to be much smaller and more focused (probably mainly Classes, honestly, though he did say we would see more Feats).

 

[Parmandur]

5E isn't modularly designed.

It was initially proposed that it would be, but that wasn't actually followed through. So this isn't the case. It has modular elements (like Feats), but we're not talking about a system like FUZION where it's fundamentally modular.

It is modular in that it is made up of elements that can plug in or out of the game. What they didn't deliver on was delivering a huge variety of modules, like 4E style material. They could have, but they didn't. You can remove the Race rules and replace them, and it doesn't break classes or Skills. That's modularity.

 

[Cadence]

Based on the UA, they might include those conversion documents in the PHB and DMG directly, as sidebars.

Having many of them scattered throughout feels really inelegant to me (with it getting worse as time goes on). I can see the one about only getting 1st level ASIs from one source though.

Having them put something up front (like B/X did about Basic) seems good to me.

 

[Maxperson]

3.x lacked the modular system design at the core of 5E. It is very easy to unplug rule elements and replace them without disruption.

I disagree. 5e is modular only in that it has optional rules in the DMG that you can use. This is no different from the 3.5 UA that was released with options. And had 3e had a UA, there would have been options for that as well. Yet 3.5 wasn't compatible with 3e.

I'm not going to believe WotC on the compatibility issue until I see the final product and can assess myself. They failed to deliver on this promise once already.

 

[Parmandur]

I disagree. 5e is modular only in that it has optional rules in the DMG that you can use. This is no different from the 3.5 UA that was released with options. And had 3e had a UA, there would have been options for that as well. Yet 3.5 wasn't compatible with 3e.

I'm not going to believe WotC on the compatibility issue until I see the final product and can assess myself. They failed to deliver on this promise once already.

The modularity is in the ability of the system math to allow for elements to be replaced or added. Even Adventure modules in the game have added entire rules systems handily.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

• DnDone
• ODD
• 5.5e
• 6e

Either I call it what it really is, or I call it something which mocks their marketing buzzword name.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

You can remove the Race rules and replace them, and it doesn't break classes or Skills. That's modularity.

Yeah, but I think in analysis of the proposed 5E rules change we're already seeing breakdowns to modularity. For example, the change to Grappling rules means literally everything you can do to be good at Grappling right now, including class features seemingly designed for that (Barbarian STR check Advantage, for example) no longer function to do that. To fix this, they'd need to change the Barbarian to add say, applying Disadvantage to saves to break his Grapples during Rage.

That's showing how the combat rules in D&D are not modular. You can't change them without changing class rules.

Even Adventure modules in the game have added entire rules systems handily.

This also happened in 2E, 3E, and 4E note. Do you need specific examples? 4E is particularly easy if so, because I refer you to my favourite 4E adventure, Blood Money by Logan Bonner.

 

[Parmandur]

Yeah, but I think in analysis of the proposed 5E rules change we're already seeing breakdowns to modularity. For example, the change to Grappling rules means literally everything you can do to be good at Grappling right now, including class features seemingly designed for that (Barbarian STR check Advantage, for example) no longer function to do that. To fix this, they'd need to change the Barbarian to add say, applying Disadvantage to saves to break his Grapples during Rage.

That's showing how the combat rules in D&D are not modular. You can't change them without changing class rules.

This also happened in 2E, 3E, and 4E note. Do you need specific examples? 4E is particularly easy if so, because I refer you to my favourite 4E adventure, Blood Money by Logan Bonner.

Well, this is the test where they are going to measure if people want those changes. If they don't, roll 'em back. Either way, the Class redesigns can be based off of that, and they're already including "conversion documents" in sidebars.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Well, this is the test where they are going to measure if people want those changes. If they don't, roll 'em back. Either way, the Class redesigns can be based off of that, and they're already including "conversion documents" in sidebars.

Sure, but regardless of the ultimate fate of the grappling changes, my point re: modularity of the combat system stands. It's not modular. You cannot change or replace it without re-working classes.