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

[Clint_L]

My perspective is that now more than ever, 6E needs to be significantly different from 5E. If I can play and run 6E with my old books, or with a third party game, why would I buy a new PHB or DMG? If I can run existing monsters unchanged, why do I need a new MM? And if I can do all of this with third party games that might also be more to my tastes, why wouldn't I just do that? If it's compatible to the point where the books are interchangeable, why would I want to buy it?

You're not the primary market. The current books still sell well. They are trying to maintain and build on the game's popularity, not roll the dice on a new edition that will instantly alienate a ton of the existing players. The new books are there for new players, or old players who are interested in the updated material. Over time, the new material will replace the old.

If they radically change from 5e, they break DnDBeyond, and they also leave the door wide open for a competitor to use the SRD to release a rival game based on the incredibly popular 5e chassis. Like Pathfinder on steroids.

 

[dave2008]

No, they wont.

You don't know that. Hopefully Kyle can shed some light on the subject.

Only something that changes the math would update the 5.1 SRD.

You don't know that. It made no mention of math, but compatibility and that is a flexible word. Hopefully Kyle can shed some light on the subject.

No. But this depends on what exactly the ORC looks like.

I agree it depends, but I did specifically ask Kyle to join the ORC if it looks good. Hopefully Kyle can shed some light on the subject.

The OGL is dead.

Not technically, but perhaps functionally. It may depend on how ORC develops. WotC says this in their FAQ:

Then is there any benefit to publish my content under OGL 1.0a v Creative Commons? We expect most creators will start using Creative Commons due to its benefits. Still, OGL 1.0a has been the means by which creators have published their D&D compatible works since 2000. We want you to have the choice on which license to use.

Hasbro-WotC will rely on the free advertising that comes from the CC-BY 4.0.

Perhaps, but they shouldn't. They should continue to get more good press and perhaps more importantly, good will.

Outside of the 5e SRD, the Hasbro-WotC lawyers will viciously enforce copyright claims.

What start now? Possible, but I don't see why they would waste their time with 3e/3.5e stuff. That is small potatoes to them and could cost more in Lawyer fees then in potential lost sales and bad PR.

But. Hasbro-WotC will get away with this "sues regularly" approach, because they will actually support the creativity of unofficial content that comes from the gamers inside the walled garden, in the DMsGuild (or whatever its future incarnation will be called).

Doesn't seem likely to me, but we don't know until it happens.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I'm not sure how you could expect it to be otherwise. It would be like walking into a Book Club that had all been reading the Game of Thrones, and you want to talk about your favorite self-published novella by the well-known Dutch author. I mean, that novella might be fabulous, but your audience just isn't familiar with it.

Except the forum isn't called, "WotC 5e, pretty much".

 

[Scribe]

Except the forum isn't called, "WotC 5e, pretty much".

Which one? The lions share of discussion for D&D (the most populous forum here) will be for the current, active, and largest, version of the game. Which is 100% 5e.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Why though, why not treat 1D&D as another 3PP supplement to 5e. That is effectively what it is. So why is the “edition” significant? I mean it is changing less than A5e and that is the same edition as 5e. What is your hang up with the term “edition?” I’m just not seeing how the view intersects with your desire for 3PP inclusion .

Mostly personal. I don't care for WotC's changes in the last few years, and don't want the conversation to shift to nearly entirely 6e when their design choices leave me cold. The only positive about the OGL crisis (and I had to really look) was it took the shine off WotC.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Which one? The lions share of discussion for D&D (the most populous forum here) will be for the current, active, and largest, version of the game. Which is 100% 5e.

I love 5e. That's not what I have a problem with. 5e is not just whatever WotC decides to publish. We don't need to hang on their every release.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Not to be personal here but talking about 3pp is very much not why you get pushback. The reason you get so much pushback is that you insist that these massive changes have been made that have “forced” you to choose 3pp. IOW endless, repeatedly incredibly negative statements about all things WotC is why you are getting shouted down.

In what way is that not personal?

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

Mostly personal. I don't care for WotC's changes in the last few years, and don't want the conversation to shift to nearly entirely 6e when their design choices leave me cold. The only positive about the OGL crisis (and I had to really look) was it took the shine off WotC.

Do you care for every change or addition 3PP adds or revises for 5e and that is why you don’t call those 6e? If there is 3PP you don’t like is that deemed 6e too? I’m not trying to be obtuse, I just don’t understand how you are using the 6e moniker.

 

[Parmandur]

My perspective is that now more than ever, 6E needs to be significantly different from 5E. If I can play and run 6E with my old books, or with a third party game, why would I buy a new PHB or DMG? If I can run existing monsters unchanged, why do I need a new MM? And if I can do all of this with third party games that might also be more to my tastes, why wouldn't I just do that? If it's compatible to the point where the books are interchangeable, why would I want to buy it?

The target audience for D&D products is aged 12-24. They don't particularly need you or I to buy anything.

If people keep playing D&D, then more new players will eventually buy in. If the 2014 PHB is out of print, bit the 2024 is in print and compatible, that's what they will buy.

And, yeah, a lot of us will buy it for new art and book loving as much as new rules.

 

[Maxperson]

Feats aren't a system in Core 5E, they are a variant rule, a variant that most tables and characters aren't using. Abandoning an unused variant rule and making a new system is reasonable, and has no effect on compatibility.

This is not correct.

2014: default = no feats.
2024: default = mandatory feats via background.

Those are two completely opposing things. You can't do both at once. Mandatory feats via background is not compatible in any way with no feats.