D&D (2024) Jeremy Crawford: “We are releasing new editions of the books”

[Micah Sweet]

not sure why the CC version is useless because of whatever AL does or doesn’t do. Nor is there an intention for this to be the last CC release, there should be one for 1DD as well.

I hope you're right, but OneD&D is their moneymaker, so I'll believe it when I see it.

I'd be much more interested in the 3.5 SRD all the OSR folks were using anyway.

 

[haakon1]

Sigh.

OK.

 

[haakon1]

staggered in 2024, we do not have more than that

As to learning 5e now being a waste, much of the mechanics and all of the actual DMing will stay the same. What will change the most is what your class and subclass look like.

If she e.g. plays a Rogue now and a Sorcerer in the next version, she won’t notice much of a difference, what she learned from the Rogue and applies to the Sorcerer transfers over and what doesn’t would not have helped her with a 5e Sorcerer either

There is certainly a lot more that transfers from 5e to 1DD than from 3e, so she might as well start with 5e

Thanks. I think it’s not really worth it until the new rules are out, but I guess I just won’t raise the topic with her for now.

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

Well, if we choose which definition to use, we can call it anything we like.

so that is why I am useing what we have used since I joined this hobby... 3e-3.5-4e-4e+ess-5e-what ever this is...

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

Considering DDAL requires you to use MOTM versions of player options that came from Volo's or Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes, I would be incredibly surprised if DDAL permits folks to use 2014 options after the new core is released. At best, they may permit it for options that don't yet have a 2024 counterpart (and only until they do).

if official (club) games don't let you use the PHB you bought then that is a MAJOR hint it is a new edition no matter the words you use.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

My point is this. Will 1D&D be backwards compatible with 5E, probably, But with lineages, class features, feats, spells, weapon properties etc changing, will it be practical to do so probably not. If I understand correctly as of the last playtest aren't feats no longer considered optional?

Nope. Feats are core in the sense that they folded ASIs into feats. That’s all.

Hypothetically, if I was starting to DM a game of 1D&D and had 6 players excluding myself and 1 of those players decided "eh I'm just gonna play a 5E PC",

They’d be doing what the whole table is doing.

I'd probably tell them to take a hike unless they made a real convincing argument. I wouldn't want to pull double duty reading/referencing 2 sets of books.

This doesn’t make sense.

The playtests and the community's feedback is not the be all and end all, I am certain that yes they will definitely take it all into consideration but OTOH I can almost guarantee that the final playtest and actual releases will be slightly different.

I mean…yes? Of course? That’s…every playtest ever undertaken.

This makes sense, and were I to actually decide to play 1D&D Id probably do the same. Here's where I'm confused, has WotC ever clarified what their definition of backwards compatibility is? I interpreted it as if one player is playing a 2014 PC then they'd use the rules in the 2014 PHB, if another is playing a 2024 PC then they'd use the 2024 PHB. Am I wrong? Seems like its going to be using a little from both the 2014 and 2024 rules.

2014 characters would normally be using 2024 general rules, because they’re more updated, but you could also play with 2014 rules using 2024 characters.

I wonder why we should buy ANY book that has subclass features at wrong levels and feats that will need to be updated? Isn't this why between 3e and 4e they put out system neutral books?

They won’t need to be updated, though. 3 and 4 were different games. That isn’t the case, here.

OK that makes things clearer

As others have pointed out, it’s not accurate. They mean that no existing 5e book purchase will be obviated, because you can just play a 2024 rogue with a 2014 rogue subclass, and the other way around.

 

[Azzy]

so that is why I am useing what we have used since I joined this hobby... 3e-3.5-4e-4e+ess-5e-what ever this is...

So, two different definitions at once (both revision and entirely new system). That's fair and all, just remember that people using other definitions are just as correct. And that it's all meaningless anyway.

 

[Micah Sweet]

So, two different definitions at once (both revision and entirely new system). That's fair and all, just remember that people using other definitions are just as correct. And that it's all meaningless anyway.

Lingua franca isn't meaningless.

 

[Azzy]

Lingua franca isn't meaningless.

That ship sailed a long time ago.

 

[The Myopic Sniper]

They might have avoided some of the messaging issues if they released a "new edition of the book not game" DMG in 2024, a new Monster Manual in 2025 and a new PHB in 2026 all the while continuing to release "5e" content. Releasing all new books all at once, definitely has more the feel of a new game than if they did it incrementally.

I know they kept getting hounded by some of the TTRPG press after Tasha's about the PHB still having "races" in them and problematic content such as race based ASIs so maybe they should have just focused on that first. I know that doesn't allow them to sell three-book slipped case 50th Anniversary sets of the new books though.