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

[Micah Sweet]

Again, nothing wrong with promoting the stuff you like.

But, coupled with unrelenting negativity it's not really going to fly. "WotC is demonstrably not the most quality stuff"? Seriously? 3pp should get "the attention they deserve"? Hrm, I guess the fact that we have a dedicated forum for Pathfinder, things like the Ennies and tons of threads talking about various 3pp isn't giving them enough attention?

Look, half my D&D collection is 3pp. And that's been true since the first days of the OGL. I love 3pp. But, I don't feel the need to yuck in everyone's yum every single day for the past two years or so. Play the stuff you like. Trumpet the stuff you like. Telling me that WotC is teh suxxors endlessly and we should all jump on the Level Up bandwagon just pushes me further and further away from even considering anything you are promoting. Don't tell me why WotC is bad, because, well, I don't agree. I've got no major beef with WotC stuff. Some I like, some I don't. But, if the only reason I should look at 3pp is because you think WotC sucks, well... that's not good enough and just poisons the well AFAIC.

I'm far from the only person who doesn't care for WotC's interpretation of 5e rules, or the direction they've taken in the last few years. I have also expressed positive feelings for 3pp, particularly Level Up but also other products. What I don't do is let  how someone expresses their opinion affect my own. I'm sorry if my negative feelings about WotC's D&D have somehow made you less inclined to listen to me. Are you asking me to lie about my opinion, or just not participate in any thread that talks about their products? Because insofar as 5e talk on this forum goes, that's nearly all of them.

I think Level Up does a lot of things in 5e better than WotC. I vastly prefer it. But if you disagree, that's fine. Everyone should play what they like.

 

[Maxperson]

Yet we have actual play reports in this thread of there being no compatability problems in practice when mixing and matching.

I mean, you could play a 2e cleric using 2e rules along side a 3e cleric using 3e rules if you really wanted to. That doesn't make the two editions compatible. Not minding that two clerics are using two different rules sets doesn't make those rules sets compatible.

 

[Maxperson]

Will they update the CC SRD with for OneDnD? I guess yes.

I don't think they can update SRD 5.1. If they could just change the CC SRD however they like, then there was no point in putting it into the CC in the first place. It was put there so that the D&D community can use it as is forever.

They will have to put out a new SRD for 5.5e.

 

[Parmandur]

I guess I just have to disagree with this. What you're talking about seems like a minor blip in sales and then back to the same place the game was at. And that's not bad, Amazon tells me that they're selling a lot of 5E PHBs at this point, so they can stick to that formula. But ... there's an expectation that the game is going to expand, explode, break out ... get even bigger. Doing that with a game that's pretty much the same as the edition that will be about 10 years old at this point doesn't seem likely to generate that boost. WotC needs people like me and other veterans if they want the game to really take off at launch.

I do think you're right about the art and production: that will be a draw for some veteran players, to be sure. I just can't believe that is going to be the central selling point for the new game. I'm sure that nostalgia will be a factor too.

No one really knows what WotC is going to do, and their plans may have really changed recently. I'm just betting on 6E being something significantly different to lock other publishers out if nothing else.

I'm playing a 5E game now, we did session two of Dragon Heist and I'm already seeing why I prefer other companies takes on the 5E rules set: we have a player with difficulty with the Second Wind mechanic for their fighter, and spell casters who can't wait to get enough spells to not be using cantrips for much of the adventuring day. So we're finding the game simultaneously too complex and not complex enough. Can 6E address this? Don't know.

I'm sure they will get a big sales boost, but the rules being compatible or incompatible probsvly would matter to that either way: compatible rules help keep their current products selling.

 

[Parmandur]

I mean, you could play a 2e cleric using 2e rules along side a 3e cleric using 3e rules if you really wanted to. That doesn't make the two editions compatible. Not minding that two clerics are using two different rules sets doesn't make those rules sets compatible.

Well, I think we can agree thst the new rules will probably be more compatible than 2E and 3E.

 

[Maxperson]

Well, I think we can agree thst the new rules will probably be more compatible than 2E and 3E.

Yes. I can agree that they will be more compatible, but they will not be compatible. It would actually be pretty easy to run 2e and 3e together.

 

[Parmandur]

Yes. I can agree that they will be more compatible, but they will not be compatible. It would actually be pretty easy to run 2e and 3e together.

We already have people mixing the rules at the same table, and even the se character: not really seeing much of a case for incompatibility, at least on that trajectory.

 

[Maxperson]

We already have people mixing the rules at the same table, and even the se character: not really seeing much of a case for incompatibility, at least on that trajectory.

And again, just because people are okay with mixing two different rules sets, that does not make them compatible. By your definition 2e and 3e are in fact compatible. Just not AS compatible as 5e and 5.5e.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

And again, just because people are okay with mixing two different rules sets, that does not make them compatible. By your definition 2e and 3e are in fact compatible. Just not AS compatible as 5e and 5.5e.

I mean, I think you're trying to make compatibility a binary here, like whether a game is for Nintendo or Playstation, but it's very clearly a spectrum. There's no rational or logical argument that it's a binary.

It's not really that something is "compatible" or "incompatible", it's about the degree of compatibility. And people using stuff together without having to adapt it significantly is indicative that the degree of compatibility is relatively high, at least in some areas.

And looking at 1D&D we can certainly say that, based on the current playtest packets, it's extremely highly compatible with 5E.

 

[Maxperson]

It's not really that something is "compatible" or "incompatible", it's about the degree of compatibility. And people using stuff together without having to adapt it significantly is indicative that the degree of compatibility is relatively high, at least in some areas.

Sure. And if they had just said that with a bit of work you can run 5e and 5.5e together, I wouldn't be talking about this. It was the false claim of backwards compatibility that I have an issue with.

And looking at 1D&D we can certainly say that, based on the current playtest packets, it's extremely highly compatible with 5E.

I agree that so far it won't take a ton of work to make them mesh well.