Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Shardstone" data-source="post: 9644683" data-attributes="member: 6807784">The 2024 5R rules changed a lot across the Unearthed Arcana surveys. After a certain point, however, the more experimental rules were rolled back to go back to classic 2014 paradigms. This was done in the name of backwards compatibility -- the ability to use old subclasses and adventures with the game.However, was that goal actually worth anything?First, the subclasses. WotC has been reprinting old subclasses with new shine, bringing them up to date with their modern design sensibilities. There weren't that many subclasses released in 2014 in the first place, and the ones released could have been given an appendix on "converting old subclasses" for those that started before Level 3. Thus, the reasoning for wanting to use old subclasses completely doesn't matter.Next, the adventures of the game. The thing is, the UA versions of 2024 kept the core things necessary to use those old adventures: hit points, conditions, AC, Abilities, and Skills were all the same. Thus, it wouldn't have mattered if the game was redesigned to have Class Groups and Class Group Spell Lists, or if Bard could choose its spell list and Warlock its spellcasting ability; none of these things have any impact on using old adventures at all.Also, the math of the game changed, which means that 2024 characters are already overtuned for 2014 adventures in the first place. You can still run them relatively fine, but you'll have to either tune-up your stat blocks or put more effort into encounter design to match the stronger PCs.Lastly, even though some people are mixing-and-matching, a lot of people are showing clear hesitation at using old materials with new materials. A lot of people are also talking about how they only want to use new materials, either because they are new or because they are better. So it sounds like a lot of people don't even benefit from backwards compatibility anyway.I recall WotC saying that surveys and demand was pushing them to maintain backwards compatibility...but doesn't that seem kind of silly given the above information? I'm not sure what benefit there was to removing standardized class levels for old subclasses if old subclasses are going to be reprinted anyway. I'm not sure what benefit there was to maintaining this half-done backwards compatibility at all.Thoughts? Opposing opinions?</blockquote>

Verification