D&D 5E I feel like the surveys gaslit WotC about """"Backwards Compatibility""""

[Corinnguard]

Having written and converted a bunch of subclasses for 2024, A5E, and TOTV

Which subclasses did you convert for A5e?

If I recall correctly, "feat chains" dont exist in 5e. For good reason. Again, "feats should be nice, not required."

Level Up has Synergy Feat Chains for anyone who wants to multiclass between two classes. They're sort of like Level Up's take on a Prestige class.

Ex. The Bladechanter

Synergy Feat
Prerequisite
3 levels in fighter, 3 levels in wizard, Fighting Style (Two-Weapon Fighting)

Bladechanting is the art of unifying and maintaining intense physical and intellectual strains, allowing movement and thought to become one as a beautiful and deadly dance of blades.

If you wield a melee weapon in each hand, you may use them to perform seen spell components and as a spellcasting focus for wizard spells. In addition, whenever you are concentrating on a spell while using melee weapons as a spellcasting focus in this way, you enter a special trance-like state called bladechanting. If you lose concentration on your spell while bladechanting, you also stop bladechanting. While bladechanting you gain the following benefits:

• While you are wearing no armor, light armor, or medium armor, you gain a bonus to your Armor Class equal to your Intelligence modifier.
• Whenever you would need to make a concentration check to maintain a spell due to taking damage, you may spend 2 exertion to automatically succeed.
• When you hit a target with a melee weapon attack, you can use your reaction and choose a spell of 1st-level or higher, casting it through your weapon. The spell must have a casting time of 1 action and target a single creature or have a range of Touch. If a spell cast in this way requires an attack roll and targets the same target as the triggering melee weapon attack, it also hits as part of that attack. You may choose not to deal damage with a melee weapon attack used to cast a spell.

This is the first feat in the chain. There are two more-Whirling Incantor and Eldritch Whirlwind Master.

 

[Kobold Stew]

I think "gaslit" is wrong: all evidence shows the designers were open to major changes, but those didn't occur. There are a number of reasons. One, as you note, is backwards compatibility. The people who wanted/demanded it were very loud, and I think appeared over represented on the boards. It became a sacred cow, which meant that more uniform subclasses etc. just didn't have a chance.

Second was the feedback policy. They wanted to be liked, which is always a problem. The 70% threshold, however it was calculated (and certainly none of us know), was always vague and without granularity. That meant that the feedback could not easily distinguish between "I don't like this" and "There might be something here, but it needs refinement." Would or should all the experiments have made it? No. But I am certain it would be a more exciting release had it not been for the deep conservatism of many players.

Third, conservatism. There's a whole thread on this. I think if there is blame, it really likes at the recalcitrance of players who are especially vocal. But I don't think anyone was gaslighting anyone.

The list could go on.

I agree with you that Backwards Compatibility was a poor motivation. In my mind, it shoudl never have been a concern. It was given a disproportionate weight, and that in the end, limited the innovation in what we received.

I'm one of the players who is downplaying 2014 materials. It's not that I don't want them in my game, but I am choosing not to use them because I've (for the most part) made those characters. (The exception is MotM, which I'll continue to play with until a post-2024 savage-species-equivalent comes out. Once it does? I'll remove it from what I draw on for myself.)

Some of the things not carried forward, though, I am pleased to see gone. I'm tired of Green Flame Blade as a cantrip, and all of the just-overpowered-enough-that-other-choices-are-too-weak options. Are they all gone? No. Will others be reintroduced? Of course. But I want to see greater variation in character builds, not more of the same.

But that's me, and there are a lot of players out there that feel different. I want them to feel excited to play as well.

 

[DEFCON 1]

And yet they still reproduced their core books again with not a lot different and expected people to fork over another $150 for the privilege.

So what? Those who didn't want the new books didn't buy them... those that were fine with the $150 did.

I don't know why you have such an issue with people who are perfectly fine spending $150 on D&D material doing so. I mean, are you just mad that you didn't get to spend $150 yourself because the value wasn't there? $150 burning a hole in your pocket with nothing to spend it on?

 

[Micah Sweet]

I don’t think that was caused by 5.5 though, you were complaining for longer than that

The things I was complaining about were changes to the game and WotC's design philosophy (particularly their attitude towards their own lore) which were continued and strengthened in 5.5.

 

[Stormonu]

I'm in the camp Backwards Compatibility is key. There's no reason to invalidate hundreds of dollars worth of content I already have; this isn't a video game console they are selling. I'm sicking of buying stuff I already own because someone wants to try something slightly different.

Just make better options, or better yet, if you want to get creative make them bolt-on systems to what exists or optional alternatives to the chassis.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I'm in the camp Backwards Compatibility is key. There's no reason to invalidate hundreds of dollars worth of content I already have; this isn't a video game console they are selling. I'm sicking of buying stuff I already own because someone wants to try something slightly different.

Just make better options, or better yet, if you want to get creative make them bolt-on systems to what exists or optional alternatives to the chassis.

My answer to that was to simply get off the edition treadmill, but if it's important to stick to the current offering it makes sense to feel differently.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I recall WotC saying that surveys and demand was pushing them to maintain backwards compatibility...but doesn't that seem kind of silly given the above information?

It always was silly, and as with a great many things, WotC blindly chasing arbitrary percentages in badly-constructed surveys is not nearly the effective design principle people think it is.

 

[zottel]

On the grand scheme of things, hard to say. But for me, absolutely right. the game went in a direction I have no interest in, which is totally fine. I think, though, if they went further than the little step, at least something interesting would have come from it. As it stands, to me it's neither here nor there.
I'll stay with 5e, including some third party content, and try some more OSR and other systems in general.

 

[Parmandur]

One, as you note, is backwards compatibility. The people who wanted/demanded it were very loud, and I think appeared over represented on the boards.

If anything, I would wager that viewpoint is underrepresented on boards like this.

 

[Stormonu]

My answer to that was to simply get off the edition treadmill, but if it's important to stick to the current offering it makes sense to feel differently.

I too have dumped the edition treadmill and have been voting against 5.5 with my wallet. They've had about 8 editions to get this right and if they can't be happy with that, a 9th isn't going to fix it.