James Gasik
We don't talk about Pun-Pun
Primal Order is amazing.
D&D (2024) The impending mess that will be backwards compatibility
- Thread starter Emberashh
- Start date
Mirrorrorrim
Hero
Same. We even had two people playtest the 2014 druid and playtest druid side by side. Story-wise they decided they were merely Druids of different Moon Circles, maybe differentiated by the phases or seasons of the moon. Like a cultural difference from a worldbuilding sense.
Both had fun, mind you... and they were both effective. But the discussion about what they liked about their, and each other's, experiences, preferences, and appreciation of each others' contribution was kinda cool.
At level 1, vs. goblins, both had fun, but the 2024 druid player was a little jealous that they couldn't wildshape yet. OK, that's to be expected.
At level 3, vs. ogres, both had fun again!
- The 2024 Druid was able to describe how they wanted their shape to look. Following in the footsteps of the owlbear, they described a modifed Great Cat, specifically a Large Displacer Beast. They liked being able to talk, and cast shield on themselves and was also able to heal. Unarmed strike as a bonus action gave them some decent combat technique options.
- The 2014 Druid chose the Dire Wolf because they knew it had good stats. They could not talk, but they enjoyed the tough damage-dealing they were used to dealing, and with Pack Tactics and Pr0ning their enemies, they had some good team-focused combat techniques
The 2014 player said they are used to the ablative HP that makes 2014 druids feel tough. They want to tank. If the 2024 version doesn't have temp HP, or abilities that let them tank (as opposed to healing), he would just play the 2014 version (and I would let them in my game). That said, they really like the ability to reskin their wildshape to be what they want, rather than select other forms at higher levels (I said I'd allow it as a house rule). They also want to be able to play the same "form" but have its power scale. If they wanted to be a Dire Wolf at L12, they want it to scale up, not have to reskin a dinosaur or some other beast. They also wanted to be able to talk in beast form.
2014 Druid L3 - Circle of the Moon
Wildshape 2x/day (bonus action)
Dire Wolf
Str:17 Dex:15 Con:15 Int:10 Wis:17 Cha:12
AC: 14 HP: 37 (Will return back to elf at 0)
Speed: 50 Init: +2 Keen Hearing and Smell Pack Tactics
Action: Bite: +5 / 2d6+3 piercing; Str save DC 13 or prone
Bonus action: Spend L2 spell to heal self 2d8hp
2024 Druid L3 - Circle of the Moon
Channel Nature 2x/day (bonus action)
Twilight Displacer Beast (Deep purple, 6 legs, short tentacles no reach)
Str:17 Dex:17 Con:16 Int:10 Wis:17 Cha:12
AC: 13 (AC: 18 with Shield Spell) HP: 27 (drops unconscious at 0)
Speed: 40 Init: +3 Darkvision Keen Senses
Action: Bestial Strike: +5 / 1d8+3 (can choose between B/P/S)
Bonus Action: Unarmed Strike: Deal Damage option: +5 / 4 bludgeoning (this gives a second attack per round, for a total possible 1d8+7
- Grapple option: Str/Dex save DC 13 or be Grappled
- Shove option: Str/Dex save DC 13 or be Pushed 5 ft, or knocked Prone
Sorcerers Apprentice
Hero
Exactly. We need to be able to differentiate the 2014 and 2024 versions of D&D if we're going to use them together.
Uni-the-Unicorn!
Hero
Sort of, I mean it doesn’t really take any more differentiation than between two different 2014 classes. I think that is the point people are making. It is something you are already doing. If it is just a name thing really, call the 2024 a “shaman” or whatever and then it is no different from learning any other new class. I think that is the point. Don’t get hung up on the name
Mirrorrorrim
Hero
Oh, right! After the playtest, we realized the new Barkskin (L2 Transmutation spell) gives Spellcasting Ability Mod + PB Temp HP every round for 1 hour (concentration).
Even if you are not a Mood Druid, as long as you cast it before you wildshape, at 3rd level you can get 5 temp HP per round for the fight. That is some great tankability. Now it is true you are casting a spell to enable better tanking, as opposed to concentrating on Moonbeam or Call Lightning for better DPR damage, but it is an interesting choice to be made. I think it is a valid choice. Upcasting to also give your Warrior ally THP is pretty great for melee combat support. Imagine the Barbarian tank and Moon Druid off-tank fighting back to back with this. And at level 5, the THP may be as high as 7 or 8 per round.
It also would be pretty crazy if the Druid got (or the player chose) an ability that makes it harder to disrupt concentration.
Neonchameleon
Legend
There are those who'd say we've been through two .5s. The question is whether this will be like 3.5 where the old versions vanished basically within the year or whether it will be like 4E Essentials where many people were happily playing PHB alongside Essentials classes well past the launch of 5e (and if I was running classic 4e rather than my own retroclone I'd allow it now).
I'm of the "This doesn't seem so far to be putting grit into the wheels" attitude. If two characters turn up at the same table, one created under "classic" 5e rules and one under D&Done rules they will both have the same skill list. Horses will be the same shape. The meaning of things like spell resistance will be the same. Most spells look unchanged. It looks as if even Two Weapon Fighting will work almost the same way* it did in "classic" 5e rules. You could quite easily play a 4e Essential class in a classic 4e party or vise-versa and people did - but you'd have the wrong skill list and most of your spells would do the wrong thing if you tried that with 3.5 in a 3.0 game or vise-versa.
(Of course there were only three classes completely overhauled in 3.5 and no one wanted to stick with the old ranger or bard, and the 3.5 monk was an improvement over the 3.0 one even if the core issues went unfixed).
* The "Nick" weapon property the creator summit leaked IIRC allows warriors to make offhand attacks as a free action; this makes sense only if offhand attacks are reverting to bonus action attacks while allowing two weapon rangers and fighters to be a thing without buffing other classes.
Sorcerers Apprentice
Hero
The main difference I see between 3.5 and 4e essentials is that where 3.5 changed a lot of class features and spells, with a few exceptions Essentials didn't change any existing content, it just added more options. Some PHB classes got additional names to differentiate them from the Essentials version, i.e the PHB Fighter became Fighter(Weaponmaster), the Wizard was now Wizard(Arcanist) etc.
1D&D looks like it will be a lot more like 3.5 than Essentials.
Neonchameleon
Legend
Essentials changed more than that. There was a wave of errata, the skill challenge mechanics were changed (I stuck with the old ones), the Monster Manual was made obsolete and replaced by better ones, the feats in the PHB were generally made obsolete and replaced by better ones (such as the expertise feats), and more.
You could still use a pre-existing character in the new version of the game without having to ask "where's the Use Rope skill gone" and "which version of Haste" are we using and "does Spell Resistance apply to Stinking Cloud?" (or just about any other conjuration spell) the way you did if you tried to mix 3.0 with 3.5.
D&Done looks to me as if it will be more like Essentials than 3.5.
James Gasik
We don't talk about Pun-Pun
Let's say that the extra work to run old content alongside new content is fairly simple. The game is, call it, 90-95% backwards compatible. And let's say that the rules updates don't cause major issues for any 5e class to play in 5e+.
There's still the fact that the design going forward is going to be based on this new paradigm, not the old. New options will either be better (likely) or better balanced (unlikely), giving players and DM's huge incentive to embrace the "new hotness".
The game will continue to evolve, and older content, which is already showing it's age, will be supplanted by new content. That's why I see backwards compatibility as a sham, just something to keep people who don't want the new flavor from freaking out.
D&D thrives on new content. Always has. You eventually reach the stage where you've been there and done that, and put up with janky rules and want more.
That's why we're even talking about a 5e, let alone a 5e+.
And even if you have found your perfect D&D, and you're happy with it in every way (unlikely- I sense copious house rulings in play), the new players will always gravitate towards the new thing. If your gaming group implodes tomorrow, what are the odds you can go to the local FLGS and get people to play some Basic? AD&D? 3.5? 4e?
My experience has been...not good. Back during the ONE playtest, I was asked to run an adventure set in Baldur's Gate. I was told we could use 3.5 or 4e, or the new playtest stuff.
Amused, I dusted off the 3.5 books and ran one session. Everyone had default arrays, it was strictly by the book. After the session, they were begging me to look at Pathfinder, lol, because they couldn't believe anyone had ever played 1st level characters out of the 3.5 PHB and had any fun to speak of, lol. You had few options, everything kills you in one hit, special abilities have literal paragraphs of restrictions, and Rogues do no damage without Sneak Attack because they have no Strength, lol. I literally had a Half-Orc Fighter with 17 Strength who was so strapped for carrying capacity that his ranged option was a handful of DARTS, lol.
"Where's the Dex to damage option? What do you mean I can't have Weapon Finesse until level 3? My racial abilities suck! Cantrips are limited use per day and do d3 damage?"
I can't see current 5e faring any better in the grand scheme of things after a few years. I guess we'll find out in 2033!
There's still the fact that the design going forward is going to be based on this new paradigm, not the old. New options will either be better (likely) or better balanced (unlikely), giving players and DM's huge incentive to embrace the "new hotness".
The game will continue to evolve, and older content, which is already showing it's age, will be supplanted by new content. That's why I see backwards compatibility as a sham, just something to keep people who don't want the new flavor from freaking out.
D&D thrives on new content. Always has. You eventually reach the stage where you've been there and done that, and put up with janky rules and want more.
That's why we're even talking about a 5e, let alone a 5e+.
And even if you have found your perfect D&D, and you're happy with it in every way (unlikely- I sense copious house rulings in play), the new players will always gravitate towards the new thing. If your gaming group implodes tomorrow, what are the odds you can go to the local FLGS and get people to play some Basic? AD&D? 3.5? 4e?
My experience has been...not good. Back during the ONE playtest, I was asked to run an adventure set in Baldur's Gate. I was told we could use 3.5 or 4e, or the new playtest stuff.
Amused, I dusted off the 3.5 books and ran one session. Everyone had default arrays, it was strictly by the book. After the session, they were begging me to look at Pathfinder, lol, because they couldn't believe anyone had ever played 1st level characters out of the 3.5 PHB and had any fun to speak of, lol. You had few options, everything kills you in one hit, special abilities have literal paragraphs of restrictions, and Rogues do no damage without Sneak Attack because they have no Strength, lol. I literally had a Half-Orc Fighter with 17 Strength who was so strapped for carrying capacity that his ranged option was a handful of DARTS, lol.
"Where's the Dex to damage option? What do you mean I can't have Weapon Finesse until level 3? My racial abilities suck! Cantrips are limited use per day and do d3 damage?"
I can't see current 5e faring any better in the grand scheme of things after a few years. I guess we'll find out in 2033!
Neonchameleon
Legend
D&D also collapses under its own weight and becomes inaccessible with new content. I don't think it's a coincidence that the two most successful editions (5e and 1e) were the two with the absolute slowest release schedules. Meanwhile the intermediate ones? 2e helped bring down TSR, 3.0 was made obsolete in under three years with no holdouts, and 3.5 and 4e only lasted a few years each.
I can - the biggest issues with 5e are slow and grindy combat and that the DM side of the screen is just plain bad.
Similar Threads
