D&D 5E For those playing 2014 5e, how are you reacting to the 2024 update?

[DEFCON 1]

At this point I think all of us are fine with whatever terms we use now to distinguish these revised books... whether that be 5.5, 5R, 5E24 or whatever. We all get it, we all know what we are referring to, and there's no "official" term that people are rebelling against by choosing one over another. It's all the same.

The only people I get really amused by are the ones who call it 6E, as though they think the differences between '14 and '24 are just as huge as 3.5 was to 4E and 4E was to 5E. Makes me think those people haven't actually played those games enough to be able to tell the difference, LOL.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I think 5R sounds better kekekee

De gustibus non disputandum est.

It's certainly not the worst notation, and it's inarguably the most compact notation available, given it only requires two symbols as opposed to the minimum of four (the point is a symbol too!) If I had to abandon my current notation or face a fate worse than death*, 5R is probably what I would use instead.

*Like being forced to run an epic-level 3.5e game with one player who refuses to optimize and another player who is exclusively about optimization.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

At this point I think all of us are fine with whatever terms we use now to distinguish these revised books... whether that be 5.5, 5R, 5E24 or whatever. We all get it, we all know what we are referring to, and there's no "official" term that people are rebelling against by choosing one over another. It's all the same.

The only people I get really amused by are the ones who call it 6E, as though they think the differences between '14 and '24 are just as huge as 3.5 was to 4E and 4E was to 5E. Makes me think those people haven't actually played those games enough to be able to tell the difference, LOL.

Fully agreed.

The only worse instance I've ever seen is people insisting that Essentials is a comparable ".5" edition.....when it's literally 100% compatible. It doesn't contain anything that can't be used 100% interoperably with "original" 4e.

 

[mamba]

The only people I get really amused by are the ones who call it 6E, as though they think the differences between '14 and '24 are just as huge as 3.5 was to 4E and 4E was to 5E. Makes me think those people haven't actually played those games enough to be able to tell the difference,

maybe they are thinking of 1e to 2e

 

[EzekielRaiden]

maybe they are thinking of 1e to 2e

I mean, even there there were some changes of varying significance. I certainly grant that it was the smallest of the "full edition" jumps, and thus reveals how these categories are fuzzy-edged distributions, rather than absolute things. But I think I wouldn't be out of line to say that, taken as a whole, 2e was not fully compatible with 1e without conversion, especially as the edition wore on.

"Early installment weirdness" is a thing, and the very first edition change was smaller than later ones. Doesn't mean it was no change at all.

 

[Zardnaar]

I mean, even there there were some changes of varying significance. I certainly grant that it was the smallest of the "full edition" jumps, and thus reveals how these categories are fuzzy-edged distributions, rather than absolute things. But I think I wouldn't be out of line to say that, taken as a whole, 2e was not fully compatible with 1e without conversion, especially as the edition wore on.

"Early installment weirdness" is a thing, and the very first edition change was smaller than later ones. Doesn't mean it was no change at all.

It's compatible enough stripped down. As long as DM rules 1E or 2E takes precedent if there's a conflict in the details.

2E adventures are more restrained on loot though. I'm running a 1E adventure at and the boss monster has around 120k loot and that's just the platinum and gold.

As I understand it a little of people hybridization them. Eg 2E xp in 1E, 1E assassin in 2E etc.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

It's compatible enough stripped down. As long as DM rules 1E or 2E takes precedent if there's a conflict in the details.

Sure, but by that same token, 3e, 4e, and 5e are all "compatible enough" if they're "stripped down" far enough. They all use the D20 substrate and a bunch of common terms. (E.g. 3e's "Attack of Opportunity" is identical to 4e/5e's "Opportunity Attack"; "Swift Action", "Minor Action", and "Bonus Action" are functionally equivalent; etc.) "Compatible enough stripped down" doesn't really tell us very much, because for some that might mean "minor, mostly-cosmetic changes" and for another it might mean "well you can technically make anything work with anything so long as you're willing to do enough work."

2E adventures are more restrained on loot though. I'm running a 1E adventure at and the boss monster has around 120k loot and that's just the platinum and gold.

Yeah, folks act like munchkins invented the "Monty Haul" campaign. Even I, with nearly-zero 1e experience, know that even official adventures sometimes showered players with loot. Indeed, that may be one of the few ways 5e really does resemble the earlier editions, rather than being all "feel" and "advice": tons of money and little to spend it on, unless the DM invents a bunch of stuff from whole cloth, or directly ignores various things.

As I understand it a little of people hybridization them. Eg 2E xp in 1E, 1E assassin in 2E etc.

Wouldn't the need to "hybridize" at all at least imply that the 1e->2e transition wasn't superficial, but rather contained a mix of things that were extremely similar and things that were meaningfully different?

 

[Zardnaar]

Sure, but by that same token, 3e, 4e, and 5e are all "compatible enough" if they're "stripped down" far enough. They all use the D20 substrate and a bunch of common terms. (E.g. 3e's "Attack of Opportunity" is identical to 4e/5e's "Opportunity Attack"; "Swift Action", "Minor Action", and "Bonus Action" are functionally equivalent; etc.) "Compatible enough stripped down" doesn't really tell us very much, because for some that might mean "minor, mostly-cosmetic changes" and for another it might mean "well you can technically make anything work with anything so long as you're willing to do enough work."


Yeah, folks act like munchkins invented the "Monty Haul" campaign. Even I, with nearly-zero 1e experience, know that even official adventures sometimes showered players with loot. Indeed, that may be one of the few ways 5e really does resemble the earlier editions, rather than being all "feel" and "advice": tons of money and little to spend it on, unless the DM invents a bunch of stuff from whole cloth, or directly ignores various things.


Wouldn't the need to "hybridize" at all at least imply that the 1e->2e transition wasn't superficial, but rather contained a mix of things that were extremely similar and things that were meaningfully different?

In 4E terms the differences between 1E and 2E are essentially errata. +1 or 2 here and there eg on thaco table.

You can use a 1E MM as is in 2E or vice versa. It's probably less than say 4E and essentials.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Sure, but by that same token, 3e, 4e, and 5e are all "compatible enough" if they're "stripped down" far enough. They all use the D20 substrate and a bunch of common terms. (E.g. 3e's "Attack of Opportunity" is identical to 4e/5e's "Opportunity Attack"; "Swift Action", "Minor Action", and "Bonus Action" are functionally equivalent; etc.) "Compatible enough stripped down" doesn't really tell us very much, because for some that might mean "minor, mostly-cosmetic changes" and for another it might mean "well you can technically make anything work with anything so long as you're willing to do enough work."


Yeah, folks act like munchkins invented the "Monty Haul" campaign. Even I, with nearly-zero 1e experience, know that even official adventures sometimes showered players with loot. Indeed, that may be one of the few ways 5e really does resemble the earlier editions, rather than being all "feel" and "advice": tons of money and little to spend it on, unless the DM invents a bunch of stuff from whole cloth, or directly ignores various things.


Wouldn't the need to "hybridize" at all at least imply that the 1e->2e transition wasn't superficial, but rather contained a mix of things that were extremely similar and things that were meaningfully different?

We never really thought of it as "hybridizing" when we mixed 1e and 2e. We just used whatever we wanted from either edition in our game. Nothing really felt like it needed work to fit.

 

[TheSword]

It is bad web design and also awful for accessibility compliance. It takes multiple steps to find the correct entry even using your method, it requires multiple steps.

For the glossary in DDB, it is a awful design. There is not quick search for the entry. You either scroll or run control F. That is it.

In 5.0, you could search and find it immediately. Each entry in their appendix A: Conditions, was searchable. It also had a clickable entry on the right side to go immediately to a condition if you wanted.

5.5 on DDB is just worse from a technical standpoint and it is terribly designed for accessibility.

The impression I get is that it’s due to the search algorithm taking into account number of views for its rankings. The old versions have been seen so many times it overwhelms everything else. I guess it comes down to whether you want number of times viewed to be relevant in a search function - I probably would.

The good news is that the top results are 2014 legacy is clearly noted in the search result. As is the rule itself which I think makes it pretty easy to find the right version. There are only two alternatives after all. I just typed incapacitated in the search bar and one click. I don’t really understand how this is multiple stages or particularly complicated. Short of them putting all things 2024 at the top, (which would then pee off the 2014 folks) I don’t see what you expect them to do.

We have the same at work where a search of our intranet often turns up old policies or documents at the top, so we use the links instead. Beyond is much better because it tells you if something is legacy.