D&D (2024) Based upon what we currently know, what degree of "edition update" is 5.5?

[Parmandur]

If a stat was a stat, then a Wizard with Int 10 Wis 18 is as capable as a Wizard with Int 18 Wis 10?

That's not the accurate comparison. 14 Wisdom is always nicer than 1e Wisdom, even if it is a tertiary stat. Saves exist.

 

[Parmandur]

Yeah, Essentials had different design and structure than classic 4e, but was entirely backwards-compatible with and usable alongside classic 4e. I believe the same will be true of 1D&D and classic 5e. Because that’s what WotC has been saying will be the case.

I mean, they've demonstrated it at this point by just switching their publishing without mentioning it for a while.

 

[Charlaquin]

THIS. IS. AN. EDITION. WARRIOR. LIE.

Sorry, but this particular bit of misinformation has been repeated at least three time in the last couple of days, and I am done being polite about it. Yes, Essentials conincided with several errata, and incorporated those errata (and all the previous ones) where relevant. Yes, it presented alternate versions of several classes, which were fully playable alongside their predecessors. Neither of these things make Essentials a separate edition, especially considering that Essentials was fully compatible with the non-Essentials 4e produces that came before it and after it (and vice versa of course).

Friend, I loved classic 4e and Essentials, and I used them both together. I’m not an edition warrior lying to discredit either edition. I still think Essentials is best described as a new edition of the game that was 4e - in contrast to 5th edition, which is a different game. I think that 1D&D will have a relationship to 5e that is comparable to the relationship between Essentials and 4e: a series of revisions that are backwards-compatible with and usable alongside the previous rules. Whether you call that an edition change or not is ultimately semantics.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

That's not the accurate comparison.

So you're saying... a stat is actually not a stat? It might matter where they are placed?

14 Wisdom is always nicer than 1e Wisdom, even if it is a tertiary stat. Saves exist.

A 15 Wisdom is no better at saves than a 14 Wisdom. It can feel nice to get a bump in your non-power stats, but it's not a meaningful difference (even if all your scores are odd, which is almost never the case).

 

[Marandahir]

That's not accurate: per Crawford, the swapping works fine for Mountain Dwarf and Half-Elf. The point buy still functions nonmatter which attribute theybassign the bonuses to.

Thanks for the fact check!

 

[Parmandur]

So you're saying... a stat is actually not a stat? It might matter where they are placed?

A 15 Wisdom is no better at saves than a 14 Wisdom. It can feel nice to get a bump in your non-power stats, but it's not a meaningful difference (even if all your scores are odd, which is almost never the case).

To the individual it matters, to the game balance it does not.

Good tertiary saves can save your bacon, and when I played that Wizard I rolled 6 odd Attribute numbers: it was sweet. And if one does point buy, easy enough to engineer that!

 

[Parmandur]

Thanks for the fact check!

No problem!

 

[Krachek]

Why does "not a change" require a public playtest? (It doesn't.)

4ed essential was not well accepted at the time. It was a last stand to save the edition and bring back old players, but miss the target. 4ed have been develop without public playtest with a blind conviction that it would be a crush.
a Playtest is a wonderful marketing tool to engage the community to follow and accept changes and evolution. Xanathar guide and Tasha have been built on playtest.
The hype for the new playtest is so high that I wonder why you doubt of its utility.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

To the individual it matters, to the game balance it does not.

This is a fair point, and I've seen plenty of people profess happiness at the +1 tertiary bumps.

Good tertiary saves can save your bacon

It's not good, though. It's a 5% difference (if the DC is even within your bad save's reach at higher levels).

and when I played that Wizard I rolled 6 odd Attribute numbers: it was sweet. And if one does point buy, easy enough to engineer that!

Just a nitpicky detail: you cannot actually have 6 odd scores using point-buy, just 5. So it's down to just random rolling to make the most of the 2014 basic human... or for that Human option to make rolling all odds feel better.

 

[Marandahir]

THIS. IS. AN. EDITION. WARRIOR. LIE.

Sorry, but this particular bit of misinformation has been repeated at least three time in the last couple of days, and I am done being polite about it. Yes, Essentials conincided with several errata, and incorporated those errata (and all the previous ones) where relevant. Yes, it presented alternate versions of several classes, which were fully playable alongside their predecessors. Neither of these things make Essentials a separate edition, especially considering that Essentials was fully compatible with the non-Essentials 4e produces that came before it and after it (and vice versa of course).

Umm, I loved 2008-2010 4e and 2010-2013 Essentials. I bought everything in both versions of the 4th Edition. I also bought a LOT of 3e and 3.5e, and own 1e and 2e core rules, and EVERY 5e book. I’m not edition warring, or trying to diminish one or the other. If anything, I’m a WotC shill because I’m a reliable customer who will buy their stuff no matter how many revisions they go through.

Nor am I saying they couldn’t be played side by side. I do know people who felt very uncomfortable playing characters built with one book side by side with characters built using the others. This was mostly because 2008 PHB in particular was incredibly and perfectly balanced for combat with AEDU powers.

That balance was much more precarious come the 2010 PH3 and Psionics letting you pump up your at-wills into encounter-level powers, and even more so when you have Essentials characters with completely different class feature structures than the 1st level core class and build mechanics + AEDU powers carrying everything else.

From just Packet One, One D&D looks to have a completely different baseline power assumption for what options players have to play with at any given level. But it’s not like trying to port 3.5e adventures into 4e and having to create dozens of specialized monsters and rethink encounters to incorporate minions and elites etc. It’s like Essentials and 4e, and it’s like 3.5e and 3e. Sure the math may be different and I may need to use errata or give my players using 2014 PHB builds a bonus feat to keep up with the rest, but it should be no harder than when I tried to use Rokugan rules from 3e in a 3.5e game…