Search results

I'm still unclear on what your idea of backwards compatibility entails. Can you explain what a system being revised and backwards compatible means to you... even better would be an example of a ttrpg that meets your criteria.

Cool. Thanks for explaining.... I dont agree with the reasoning but I at least understand the situation now... because i really wasn't getting it.

I'm asking for a statement where WotC mislead their consumers on the amount of support they would be offering for 2014 after '24 was released. I get if you didn't like their initial plan... and i give them props for responding to feedback, but where is the negativity around their actions coming...

Is there a record of this? Not saying I dont believe you but if it was stated many times it should be easy to finds statement and a quick Google search didn't return anything.

Did WotC ever state that '14 options would receive continuing support in DDB after the revised core was released?

So no class is using feats... then you use the rules for no feats from 2014 for all classes including 2024 classes... what's so hard about this?

The sentiment this sentence espouses right here is where it falls apart for me. It's like having backwards compatible videogames on newer systems... Yes you have to choose whether you want it upgraded to 4k at 60fps or running at 720p at 30fps. The fact it can't do all 4 at the same time doesn't...

You mean you don't care about a point you've brought up in multiple posts? Okay so now it's a bizarre subset, well then why are you bringing them up, especially since an (arguably) larger subset of the community that wanted backwards compatibility are happy with what WotC did and by your own...

Archetypes? EDIT: Also people who have actually played with both (including myself) are telling you that mixing them hasn't caused any problems.

Well what confused me is there are posters here, playing '24 who have no problem with backwards compatibility, so when you make sweeping statements about said compatibility not working and/or those who wanted it being dissapointed and I see the opposite... and have my own experience in playing...

They didn't though... especially if you use the updated monsters, they fixed it.

The funny thing is '14 was too easy for players but it's not compatible because... '24 is too easy for players. Huh?

Emphasis mine... What? The Dev team was pretty explicit about how compatibility worked in a general sense (Use things replaced in '24 vs. '14. You can play with characters from either but they need to be created with their rules, etc.) and gave enough information that anyone who thought this...

I'm suggesting that you should, if you want to speak intelligently on a subject, have knowledge of said subject. No, I'm really not... that sentence made no sense.

I just wanted to confirm that you're speaking with no first hand knowledge... regardless of caveat, you don't actually know what you're talking about Didn't miss it, just wanted to confirm it so I could decide whether going back and forth would garner a better understanding. However you don't...

Now I'm curious... link for further information?

You realize there was no evidence presented that WotC deals with bigots. I get not dealing with WotC because of decisions they've made around D&D or MTG...but getting in bed with bigots, at least to my knowledge, isn't one of them... of course I asked @Mournblade94 earlier if he had some kind...

The Whataboutism... It is strong in this one.

Lol... I guess Tasha's wasn't compatible with 5e then...smh.

Don't care about what?? So you don't like 5e are not interested in playing 5e revised and are basing your oppinion on second hand information, that doesn't really support what you are claiming. Mainly that 5e and 5e revised aren't compatible. Wait... you think OD&D and AD&D 2e are...