D&D 5E 5E and Backwards Compatibility

[Mark CMG]

Yeah, I think there might be another factor at play here as well. I wonder if many 3.XE fans want to downplay backwards compatibility for fear that would mean too many 4Eisms in 5E while many 4E fans would rather not see too much backpedaling toward pre-4E game mechanics. While I think we will see plenty of both, the less each camp pushes for backwards compatibility, the less they have to recognize how many things from games other than their own system of choice might manifest in 5E. Still, the entire idea of a game that evokes all editions does lend itself to avoiding the press from fans for backwards compatibility with any particular edition.

I'm going to say there won't be any backwards compatibility, because anything you could directly use from previous editions will reduce the products you need to buy new. The splatbook business model requires system incompatibility.

It's true that this has always been the opposing mindsets of publishers and fans with any new edition (D&D or otherwise), but it's also always been a more prominent concern for the fanbase then I am seeing this time around. That's what striking me as so notable.

 

[Tom Servo]

I'm not too worried about backward compatibility mainly because I just want the designers to create a really well crafted game with a "D&D feel". Backward compatibility would fetter and constrain many design decisions.

Also, I don't even know how it could be backward compatible. Compatible with a certain era perhaps (either pre-2nd, 3.0-3.75, or 4th); but compatible with everything? I just don't see how.

That said many of the adventure modules will always be usable with a bit of conversion work. Cut-and-paste a few monsters and traps with their modern equivalents along with a solid understanding of the rules and you are good to go.

 

[Jan van Leyden]

I assume "compatibility" in 4e style: take some old adventure and either replace the hard data with new analoga - the easy way which will yield a neither-flesh-nor-fish result - or re-invent the scenario with 4e-styled encounters.

The other style of compatibility - just take some old material and run it with DDN rules - is something I don't want to see, as it would signal the re-emergence of an old edition as opposed to the birth of a new one. And I already own all the old editions, no need to be offered it again.

 

[Hassassin]

I hope it will have some compatibility in the sense that adventures for older editions can easily be converted. I don't expect or even wish for anything beyond that.

 

[Kaodi]

Are we talking about actual backwards compatibility or do we really want to talk about ease of convertability?

 

[Siberys]

The last edition that was backwards-compatible was 2e. I need only to be able to convert my character thematically, not mechanically. Ditto on adventures, and monsters, and pretty much everything.

 

[KesselZero]

Every once in a while one of the designers will say something that makes it sound like they're going for some amount of actual backwards compatibility (wish I could pull up examples, but I don't have 'em at my fingertips). I agree that that's basically impossible, so I think what they may be referring to is an ease of conversion. Something like Tomb of Horrors was "converted" to 4e, but became a very different adventure with similar flavor. My best guess as to what they're going for is the ability to fairly easily convert old adventures to a new ruleset that is capable of maintaining the feel, types of challenges, and mechanical goals of the original (so for example, a 5e conversion of ToH would be back to the save-or-die [or just die] stuff though the SoD mechanic might be different). That way you could play old adventures with your 5e characters but it would feel similar to playing them back in the day.

Just a guess.

 

[Mark CMG]

Are we talking about actual backwards compatibility or do we really want to talk about ease of convertability?

That's a good question. I wonder how much 3PP support that is system-neutral will develop during the 5E era and, if there is little or no support via a WotC third party license, if many fans will consider 3PP system-neutral products as a viable alternative.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

That's a good question. I wonder how much 3PP support that is system-neutral will develop during the 5E era and, if there is little or no support via a WotC third party license, if many fans will consider 3PP system-neutral products as a viable alternative.

Has Green Ronin ever talked about how their systemless update to Freeport has gone? It's supported now by six or seven different systems (and is generally more awesome for having the stats not taking up room in the hardcover). Obviously they're an unusually big fish in this pond, but it might be suggestive.

 

[nightwalker450]

No backwards compatibility. They need to make this system the best that it can be, not make sure you can pull whatever from a previous edition directly into it.

I just expect each edition to make it easier to create the character I imagine, I'll fit it into the mechanics I just don't like working terribly hard. I shouldn't have to have 8 multiclasses, or Paragon level in order to build my character.