D&D (2024) Do you still feel that One D&D is "Compatible" with 5E?

[Enrahim2]

For me compatibility means that adventures and setting remain relevant and not that an 5E and a 5.5E (6E) druid can play side by side.

How do you envision adventures and settings becoming irrelevant with the current suggested changes?

 

[aco175]

Compatible up to when the new books are published and they stop selling old ones and any 'official' stuff like new modules, conventions, AL games, and DDBeyond stop allowing the old, crappy stuff. You will be able to get by in your home game well enough until the other update errata comes out after about a year. You can then ignore it or comply.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

Having a 2014 Druid and a playtest Druid in the same group is no more messy than having a fighter and wizard in the same group and we have been doing that since the beginning of 5e.

We haven’t actually playtested the new Druid yet, by we did exactly that (new with old) for all the previous play tests and it was no more, and usually less, disrupt live than have different classes at the same table.

Agreed.

The quote of mine you are responding to here was about using the subclass from the one version with the base class from the other version, not using two versions of the base class at the same table. I see no problem with using different versions of the base class at the same table as long as players have reasonable expectations.

Truly I have now devoted a ridiculous amount of verbiage to defending one quick aside that you probably shouldn't mix subclasses between versions of the base class, which I thought was just blindingly obvious, or I would have explained it better in the first place. And really by "you shouldn't" I just mean you have to know what your doing and make some tweaks, because the designers aren't designing around supporting you doing that.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

On the contrary, people are successfully mixing and matching in practice, and the packet explicitly states that they intend people to do so and will make sure the final version is fully compatible o. the Subclass Level (more 5E > OmeD&D than the other way around, as far as polish is concerned I'm sure) for older books to remain viable. I haven't done a deep dive for all the available options except for the Bard...but all the 5E Bard Subclasses work juat fine with the Bard packet, I can verify 100%. Bardic Inspiration is changed, but the options still work fine.

Interesting. I refuse to think about the atrocity that is the OneD&D Bard so I'm not surprised I'd have a blindspot on that front.

 

[Parmandur]

Interesting. I refuse to think about the atrocity that is the OneD&D Bard so I'm not surprised I'd have a blindspot on that front.

It really seems to hold for all the Classes released so far: the existing 5E Subclasses will work fine as is, and the packets have repeatedly committed to filing off the negligible hard edges by publication. They are dead serious about Xanathar's and Tasha's remaining viable sources of playable Subclasses for the 2023 core books.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

It really seems to hold for all the Classes released so far: the existing 5E Subclasses will work fine as is, and the packets have repeatedly committed to filing off the negligible hard edges by publication. They are dead serious about Xanathar's and Tasha's remaining viable sources of playable Subclasses for the 2023 core books.

Well, I would consider it unfortunate that they placed that particular unnecessary design constraint on themselves. But we'll see.

 

[Parmandur]

Well, I would consider it unfortunate that they placed that particular unnecessary design constraint on themselves. But we'll see.

Personally, I appreciate their dedication to keeping my books relevant,and think it makes OneD&D stronger by providing definite boundaries.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

Personally, I appreciate their dedication to keeping my books relevant,and think it makes OneD&D stronger by providing definite boundaries.

My perspective is that I have the 5e base classes to play my 5e subclasses with, and if for some reason I someday want to play a 5.5 base class I would have the subclasses designed for those to play with them. It is enough of a constraint on design to allow these two different versions of classes to play at the same table without also enforcing compatible parts on them. Interswapable subclasses may feel like an important feature now during playtest when there is only one subclass for each new class version, but it is not a feature of particularly great long term value once the game is published.

 

[Parmandur]

My perspective is that I have the 5e base classes to play my 5e subclasses with, and if for some reason I someday want to play a 5.5 base class I would have the subclasses designed for those to play with them. It is enough of a constraint on design to allow these two different versions of classes to play at the same table without also enforcing compatible parts on them. Interswapable subclasses may feel like an important feature now during playtest when there is only one subclass for each new class version, but it is not a feature of particularly great long term value once the game is published.

But it is of long term value if WotC wants to keep selling the Rules Expansion box set for the next decade as a OneD&D set, which they have indicated is the entire point of Monsters of the Multiverse introducing OneD&D versions of almost every non-PHB Species and OneD&D Monster stats.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Having a 2014 Druid and a playtest Druid in the same group is no more messy than having a fighter and wizard in the same group and we have been doing that since the beginning of 5e.

We haven’t actually playtested the new Druid yet, by we did exactly that (new with old) for all the previous play tests and it was no more, and usually less, disrupt live than have different classes at the same table.

Look, I realize you are a unicorn...probably one with rainbows...but I find your absence of cynicism and negativity, on the Internet of all places, to be completely inappropriate. D&D is the by far the dominant player in the market, and is owned by a for-profit, publicly traded corporation. With lawyers on staff. So, by definition, everything they do is bad. And wrong. And done for the wrong reasons.

Get with the program, spike nose.