D&D 5E (2024) D&D 2024 Is Now OFFICIALLY Called "5.5e"

doctorhook · 2026-03-04T03:30:11+0000

It’s somewhat wild to me that this thread is still debating the meaning of “compatible”…

Scribe · 2026-03-04T03:32:39+0000

doctorhook said:
It’s somewhat wild to me that this thread is still debating the meaning of “compatible”…

Since we won the great 5.5 debate, its time to move on to the next glorious victory.

Remathilis · 2026-03-04T03:44:35+0000

doctorhook said:
It’s somewhat wild to me that this thread is still debating the meaning of “compatible”

This a community who will debate endlessly that Moldvay, Metzner and the Rules Cyclopedia are three distinct and not fully compatible versions of Basic D&D. This is just another iteration of compartmentalizing and othering.

Li Shenron · 2026-03-04T06:28:33+0000

Morrus said:
But if you gave them different names, would you say the new classes and new spells are compatible with the existing game? If not, are new classes and new spells ever compatible with the existing game?

But if so, it's just a labelling issue, not a compatibity issue.

I would say that if they had made new classes with new names, I would probably not have called it a "compatibility issue" but definitely a "balance issue", since the new classes would be similar but straight better than the old.

I can also expand a bit my example on spells, since this actually happened just a few weeks ago at our table...

We play with the original 5e core rules. My Cleric PC hit level 4 and got to choose a new cantrip. I didn't want to pick cantrips that other PCs already had. I haven't used or seen in use the Resistance cantrip for a long time, I remembered that it granted a bonus on saving throws, but when I looked up on DnDBeyond (which I don't use much usually) I noticed it granted elemental resistance and for a moment I just thought that maybe I had forgotten about this extra option. Fire resistance is just what another PC needed that day, so I happily used Resistance in the game. Eventually I noticed the saving throw bonus was actually gone from the spell... and only then I realized I should have looked at the "legacy" version of the spell. The 2024 version or Resistance is like a completely different spell now. But this is NOT an issue, because at least both versions look fairly balanced, to the point that I would have no problem allowing a PC having both of them (at the cost of 2 cantrips, of course). We talked about it at the table, whether I should keep using the 2024 version or correct myself and continue with the 2014 version, and our DM instinctively ruled that "yeah you can always choose either a 2014 or 2024 spell version for your character, because 2024 and 2014 5e are compatible". While it sounded good for me to have a small extra strategic choice in my character design with the two versions of Resistance, the DM's blanket ruling rang a bell of danger to my ears...

Next session, I was using DnDBeyond again, and that's when I noticed that Cure Wounds and Healing Word now heal DOUBLE in 2024 compared to 2014. That has a very significant effect on encounter balance. Now choosing one version over the other is not really a choice. Given the option, who would be so dumb as to choose the 2014 version? So to me, this is a compatibility issue, because it makes no sense for both versions of these spells to co-exist in a game. The DM agrees with me, and replaced the blanket rule with handling each spell individually in the future.

Toe Knee Nose · 2026-03-04T06:54:29+0000

Li Shenron said:
Next session, I was using DnDBeyond again, and that's when I noticed that Cure Wounds and Healing Word now heal DOUBLE in 2024 compared to 2014. That has a very significant effect on encounter balance. Now choosing one version over the other is not really a choice. Given the option, who would be so dumb as to choose the 2014 version? So to me, this is a compatibility issue, because it makes no sense for both versions of these spells to co-exist in a game. The DM agrees with me, and replaced the blanket rule with handling each spell individually in the future.

See, but here's the thing.

It really doesn't make any difference. Not really. In 2014, you cast cure light wounds and get an average of 5 hp back. In 2024 you get 10. Wow, double. Huge difference. Except, in play, 5 hp almost never makes any difference in an encounter. The only time it would make any difference is if a baddy hit you for enough damage to down the character, by 5 or less. It's a really, really niche event.

That's the problem when we talk about this sort of thing. People look at the numbers in a vacuum and think, "Oh, my god!!! It's a huge difference." But in actual play, the number of times this would actually make a difference is so small that it's a rounding error. It might, might, make a difference in one or two encounters over the course of an entire campaign. The only real difference is that the cleric doesn't need to long rest quite as often, because you burn less spells between rests on recharging HP.

Considering there are so many ways to regain HP between long rests, and the odds that you will actually need to cast healing in combat, in play, the two spells make no difference at all.

So, yes, these are perfectly compatible and actually make very little difference in play. Most of the difference is simply psychological. I'm actually struggling to think of the last time that anyone at the table actually cast Cure Light Wounds. Between the warlock's Healing Light, short rests, potions, and various other sources of healing, CLW has become a rarely seen spell.

Li Shenron · 2026-03-04T07:40:51+0000

Toe Knee Nose said:
See, but here's the thing.

It really doesn't make any difference. Not really. In 2014, you cast cure light wounds and get an average of 5 hp back. In 2024 you get 10. Wow, double. Huge difference. Except, in play, 5 hp almost never makes any difference in an encounter. The only time it would make any difference is if a baddy hit you for enough damage to down the character, by 5 or less. It's a really, really niche event.

That's the problem when we talk about this sort of thing. People look at the numbers in a vacuum and think, "Oh, my god!!! It's a huge difference." But in actual play, the number of times this would actually make a difference is so small that it's a rounding error. It might, might, make a difference in one or two encounters over the course of an entire campaign. The only real difference is that the cleric doesn't need to long rest quite as often, because you burn less spells between rests on recharging HP.

Considering there are so many ways to regain HP between long rests, and the odds that you will actually need to cast healing in combat, in play, the two spells make no difference at all.

So, yes, these are perfectly compatible and actually make very little difference in play. Most of the difference is simply psychological. I'm actually struggling to think of the last time that anyone at the table actually cast Cure Light Wounds. Between the warlock's Healing Light, short rests, potions, and various other sources of healing, CLW has become a rarely seen spell.

I don't think you understood my reasoning, at all. If your answer is more or less "who cares", then ok, let's move on.

mamba · 2026-03-04T07:52:44+0000

Li Shenron said:
Eventually I noticed the saving throw bonus was actually gone from the spell... and only then I realized I should have looked at the "legacy" version of the spell. The 2024 version or Resistance is like a completely different spell now. But this is NOT an issue, because at least both versions look fairly balanced

this is neither a compatibility issue nor a balance issue then…

Li Shenron said:
Next session, I was using DnDBeyond again, and that's when I noticed that Cure Wounds and Healing Word now heal DOUBLE in 2024 compared to 2014. That has a very significant effect on encounter balance. Now choosing one version over the other is not really a choice. Given the option, who would be so dumb as to choose the 2014 version?

no one, and guess what, that is exactly how many should choose it when you follow WotC’s guidance of using the 2024 option where available and the 2014 where not

Compatible is not another word for identical…

Toe Knee Nose · 2026-03-04T08:32:45+0000

Li Shenron said:
I don't think you understood my reasoning, at all. If your answer is more or less "who cares", then ok, let's move on.

That's not quite what I said though. It's not "who cares". It's it doesn't actually make a difference in play.

People are making this big issue about how 2024 is so different from 2014 and, honestly, I'm not seeing it. I'm mixing and matching all the time and it hasn't noticeably impacted the game. Something like Level Up is a far, far larger change to the system than 2024 and yet we talk about Level Up being compatible. Same as a bunch of other 5e adjacent systems.

These rules are compatible. If you use either version of Cure Light Wounds, it will make very little difference in play. The differences seem to be more psychological than anything.

Weiley31 · 2026-03-04T12:11:24+0000

Morrus said:
Fireball B (or something catchier) and the problem goes away.

"I cast FIREBALLER!!"

AlViking · 2026-03-04T12:17:48+0000

Li Shenron said:
I would say that if they had made new classes with new names, I would probably not have called it a "compatibility issue" but definitely a "balance issue", since the new classes would be similar but straight better than the old.

I can also expand a bit my example on spells, since this actually happened just a few weeks ago at our table...

We play with the original 5e core rules. My Cleric PC hit level 4 and got to choose a new cantrip. I didn't want to pick cantrips that other PCs already had. I haven't used or seen in use the Resistance cantrip for a long time, I remembered that it granted a bonus on saving throws, but when I looked up on DnDBeyond (which I don't use much usually) I noticed it granted elemental resistance and for a moment I just thought that maybe I had forgotten about this extra option. Fire resistance is just what another PC needed that day, so I happily used Resistance in the game. Eventually I noticed the saving throw bonus was actually gone from the spell... and only then I realized I should have looked at the "legacy" version of the spell. The 2024 version or Resistance is like a completely different spell now. But this is NOT an issue, because at least both versions look fairly balanced, to the point that I would have no problem allowing a PC having both of them (at the cost of 2 cantrips, of course). We talked about it at the table, whether I should keep using the 2024 version or correct myself and continue with the 2014 version, and our DM instinctively ruled that "yeah you can always choose either a 2014 or 2024 spell version for your character, because 2024 and 2014 5e are compatible". While it sounded good for me to have a small extra strategic choice in my character design with the two versions of Resistance, the DM's blanket ruling rang a bell of danger to my ears...

Next session, I was using DnDBeyond again, and that's when I noticed that Cure Wounds and Healing Word now heal DOUBLE in 2024 compared to 2014. That has a very significant effect on encounter balance. Now choosing one version over the other is not really a choice. Given the option, who would be so dumb as to choose the 2014 version? So to me, this is a compatibility issue, because it makes no sense for both versions of these spells to co-exist in a game. The DM agrees with me, and replaced the blanket rule with handling each spell individually in the future.

So then it seems like your definition of compatible would be "no changes whatsoever". That's not what the word means and I'm not sure what changes if any they could have made that would have worked with your definition.

If you want to continue playing 5e then stick with it or hash out how you're going to mix and match the rules. But for us? We just converted over the characters and continued to play and there wasn't much of a difference.

There was a bit of grumbling that we no longer had half elf or orc distinguished by anything other than story and it took a bit of adjusting, but for us it's the same game. I still use "old" rules if they haven't been replaced and that old stuff works just fine with the new. That to me is what makes it compatible and something I could not have done switching from 4e to 5e.

What kind of changes, if any, could have been done to keep it compatible for you?