D&D (2024) Dungeons and Dragons future? Ray Winninger gives a nod to Mike Shea's proposed changes.

[GMforPowergamers]

I hope 50e PH includes:
• Psion
• Artificer
• Warlord
• Swordmage

I would buy it in an instant if that was the case

 

[Bill Zebub]

Which books? Can you use Sword and Fist at the same table as the 3.5 PHB?

My very first character (made for me by an older kid who knew how to play) was an "Elf" (class & race) with 18/33 strength.

So, yeah, you can mix editions.

 

[Reynard]

My very first character (made for me by an older kid who knew how to play) was an "Elf" (class & race) with 18/33 strength.

So, yeah, you can mix editions.

The question wasn't whether editions of D&D have ever been backwards compatible, but what that backwards compatibility means. I would say that 3.5 was backwards compatible with 3.0 for most DM facing materials. For the most part, you could use 3.5 monsters, situational rules and adventures with 3.0 with minimal fuss because it did not alter the underlying assumptions or math. But it was not backwards compatible in regards to most player facing stuff, because that is where 3.5 made the most changes.

 

[TwoSix]

I would buy it in an instant if that was the case

If they add 3 new classes, then I'd definitely buy it.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Sure, but they also absolutely sucked the pleasure out of reading the book (for me).

This is a completely alien mindset for me. I don't read D&D books to get pleasure from them. I play the game for pleasure and I read the books to be able to play the game. In a way, reading the books is basically homework required to get to the fun part of the hobby.

If I want pleasure from reading a book, I'll read a novel. This is part of why I normally don't really enjoy the little notes from Mordenkainen, Tasha, and Volo in 5e books. In my opinion, the word count devoted to those is a waste of space that could have been devoted to giving me more content to inspire my campaigns.

 

[Parmandur]

This is a completely alien mindset for me. I don't read D&D books to get pleasure from them. I play the game for pleasure and I read the books to be able to play the game. In a way, reading the books is basically homework required to get to the fun part of the hobby.

If I want pleasure from reading a book, I'll read a novel. This is part of why I normally don't really enjoy the little notes from Mordenkainen, Tasha, and Volo in 5e books. In my opinion, the word count devoted to those is a waste of space that could have been devoted to giving me more content to inspire my campaigns.

It's another of those both/and things: fun to read books, like 5E books have been consistently, make for a fun prep experience. Without that...the homework is just work.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

It's another of those both/and things: fun to read books, like 5E books have been consistently, make for a fun prep experience. Without that...the homework is just work.

But it's homework either way. Adding them doesn't significantly change my experience reading the books except for taking away from the content I might have gotten if they weren't there. And my players and I get enough enjoyment from just seeing the new options and theory-crafting characters/campaigns. Taking away from that enjoyment by adding blurbs that are neither lore nor mechanics is a bad thing, in my opinion.

 

[Parmandur]

But it's homework either way. Adding them doesn't significantly change my experience reading the books except for taking away from the content I might have gotten if they weren't there. And my players and I get enough enjoyment from just seeing the new options and theory-crafting characters/campaigns. Taking away from that enjoyment by adding blurbs that are neither lore nor mechanics is a bad thing, in my opinion.

Less than ideal for you, perhaps, but fun is part of the experience for others.

D&D has lurched wildly between one extreme to the other over the years, and the 5E design philosophy I would say represents a good balance.

 

[Charlaquin]

This is a completely alien mindset for me. I don't read D&D books to get pleasure from them. I play the game for pleasure and I read the books to be able to play the game. In a way, reading the books is basically homework required to get to the fun part of the hobby.

If I want pleasure from reading a book, I'll read a novel. This is part of why I normally don't really enjoy the little notes from Mordenkainen, Tasha, and Volo in 5e books. In my opinion, the word count devoted to those is a waste of space that could have been devoted to giving me more content to inspire my campaigns.

Also, I found 4e a much easier read than 3e. And don’t get me started on Gary’s writing.

 

[Micah Sweet]

This is a completely alien mindset for me. I don't read D&D books to get pleasure from them. I play the game for pleasure and I read the books to be able to play the game. In a way, reading the books is basically homework required to get to the fun part of the hobby.

If I want pleasure from reading a book, I'll read a novel. This is part of why I normally don't really enjoy the little notes from Mordenkainen, Tasha, and Volo in 5e books. In my opinion, the word count devoted to those is a waste of space that could have been devoted to giving me more content to inspire my campaigns.

I think you and I have long agreed to disagree on a great many things. I can't think of a version of the game both of us would enjoy equally.