D&D (2024) So Will 'OneD&D' (6E) Actually Be Backwards Compatible?

[Umbran]

They don't want to call it a new edition but, compatible or not, that's what they're making as far as I'm concerned.

The distinction is academic. Whether it is, or isn't a new edition is not functional. How much work it takes to use older materials is functional.

 

[mellored]

So if I pick a 2014 character, no 2024 rules apply to me?

That's how I would do it.

You get the 2024 free feat. Or you get the 2014 concentration free spiritual weapon.

Except for universal rules like long rests. Which is more of a clarification than a change.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The distinction is academic. Whether it is, or isn't a new edition is not functional. How much work it takes to use older materials is functional.

I would prefer it to be treated differently by the community, mostly so I stop seeing everything in 5e discussions assumed to be whatever WotC put out on the subject, as opposed to the wider 3pp universe of 5e.

 

[Loren the GM]

You could do that, I guess. But I don't know that I find it necessary. If John wants to sit at the table with his 5e PHB, and Sally with her One PHB, I don't know that I have an issue with that, especially because, to be honest, I expect that to be a rare occurrence. It would be a little worse if the player needed both PHB's to play.

I'm not big on depending on errata to create compatibility. If John hasn't made errata corrections in his PHB, I really want his character to mostly just work anyway. If he's at slightly lower or higher power, maybe errata fixes it, but I can also use encounter design and such to manage the disparity.

Most of the issue of compatibility I would expect to see is more among the adventures and supplements. Say my group moves to OneD&D - can I still use the Spelljammer set I bought but haven't run yet, without all that much more work than I'd need to do anyway?

I agree personally - I think as long as the content (like Spelljammer) still runs, it is compatible.

A lot of the discussion on the last couple of pages have been about how compatibility needs to come down to the character builds, not having duplicate versions of rules in play, etc. I don't really agree with that premise, but if WotC wanted to agree with that train of thought, it could be easily handled by putting the errata in place, and DND Beyond specifically would be the easiest place for that to happen seamlessly.

From where I sit though, at least based on what we have seen in the playtests, there is enough compatibility to be able to run 5e characters next to 1DND with no problem. And like you, I also expect it to be rare that players will even want to run 5e characters. People in general will move to 1DND if it is even just slightly better then 5e. Based on playtests, I think that will be the case; the better organization of terms, the standardization, some of the rules adjustments (inspiration mechanic adjustments to 1 or 20 rolls instead of DM fiat, fixes for long rests, revised and expanded feats, feats on 1st level, etc) all point to this being an updated system that I will prefer to run over 2014 5e. 5e is a great system, but could definitely stand a bit of a tune-up, and I think that is what we are getting.

 

[Umbran]

I would prefer it to be treated differently by the community, mostly so I stop seeing everything in 5e discussions assumed to be whatever WotC put out on the subject, as opposed to the wider 3pp universe of 5e.

I'm terribly sorry, but the community isn't going to change its ways for you. You'd probably do well to resign yourself to that.

 

[Maxperson]

That's how I would do it.

You get the 2024 free feat. Or you get the 2014 concentration free spiritual weapon.

Except for universal rules like long rests. Which is more of a clarification than a change.

That really doesn't work for me. I mean it would throw the fiction off. You could have two of the same class, say clerics. Give them the same subclass. Give them the same god. And give them the same spells. And what you would have in the fiction are two clerics with different class abilities, different subclass abilities, and different spells, despite all being the same of everything.

Cam: "Why is your spiritual weapon so much better than mine?"
Sham: "Because Lathander likes me better! Pltththththth!"

 

[Loren the GM]

That really doesn't work for me. I mean it would throw the fiction off. You could have two of the same class, say clerics. Give them the same subclass. Give them the same god. And give them the same spells. And what you would have in the fiction are two clerics with different class abilities, different subclass abilities, and different spells, despite all being the same of everything.

Cam: "Why is your spiritual weapon so much better than mine?"
Sham: "Because Lathander likes me better! Pltththththth!"

To me, that is an enhancement of fiction. More chance to roleplay. Mechanically they are compatible, and actually adds interest to the storytelling.

 

[mellored]

That really doesn't work for me. I mean it would throw the fiction off. You could have two of the same class, say clerics. Give them the same subclass. Give them the same god. And give them the same spells. And what you would have in the fiction are two clerics with different class abilities, different subclass abilities, and different spells, despite all being the same of everything.

In the real world, you could have identical twins, who go to the same school, pick the same job, and they will have some differences between them.

If you want an In game reason. Cham was raised by a fighter, and has defensive fighting style.
While Sham was raised by a monk, who taught him how to concentrate a bit better.

 

[Maxperson]

In the real world, you could have identical twins, who go to the same school, pick the same job, and they will have some differences between them.

If you want an In game reason. Cham was raised by a fighter, and has defensive fighting style.
While Sham was raised by a monk, who taught him how to concentrate a bit better.

And the subclass ability differences granted by the same god? And the spell differences granted by the same god?

 

[mellored]

And the subclass ability differences granted by the same god? And the spell differences granted by the same god?

2 characters can use the same sword and have different techniques.

But, it seems like your main issue isn't math or balance, but rather semantics. Which I don't really care about.

Maybe just call the 2014 one a cleric and the 2024 one a priest.