VanguardHero
Adventurer
This is in fact my plan!
Level Up (A5E) Is Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition compatible with D&D 5E?
- Thread starter Waller
- Start date
Sword of Spirit
Legend
One thing I'm interested in (which can probably be better examined when we've all had time to digest the rules more) is what tweaks can be made to O5e classes to make them more comparable to A5e classes. (For those who wonder why I would care to do so, I'll explain at the end of the post).
I haven't done the math and gone over it with a fine toothed comb, but my first impressions are:
1. Some A5e classes are about equal to O5e classes in combat performance (I'd guess Fighter and Adept fall in that category).
2. Some A5e classes are better than O5e classes even in combat performance (someone gave the example of the Wizard and I think Sorcerers and Warlocks are even more so).
3. All A5e classes are better than O5e classes in non-combat pillar participation. (Since this was, you know, an important design goal, that's as it should be, lol.)
Now we get to my hypothetical house rules. Again, without having thoroughly read them, it looks like for most of the A5e classes, you could give their respective "Knacks" to O5e classes, and the O5e classes would still not become better than the A5e classes. (Rangers and Rogues are the ones I think this could most likely actually be a problem for.) Now, if you give the O5e classes the Knacks from A5e, and some of those classes are still inferior to A5e classes, then that gets trickier.
What I'm looking into is whether it might be balanced to say that an O5e class can either get the "knacks" from A5e, OR a free ASI/Feat at 1st-level. Again, I don't expect everyone to have a firm grasp on how balanced that would be at this point, but thoughts and feedback would be appreciated.
As to my reasoning for doing this. One of my main reasons for including Level Up in my game is to provide more options for players. I like O5e, and don't want to completely replace it. I'm planning on allowing both versions of the classes, and most of the subclasses (which can be mixed and matched). I'm going to switch probably most of my core rules to A5e, but some might stay O5e. I need to analyze it fully and make the hybrid that works best for my group. I would like O5e classes to remain relevant, both in case someone just prefers them ("But I love Action Surge and getting two extra feats!") and for players that want something simple. So I need to find a way to make sure you are always getting something worth having from picking an O5e class over the A5e version. One way I can do this is to add the bonus class features from Tasha's Cauldron of Everything to the O5e classes and not the A5e classes, but some of them will need more. For instance, assuming I do so, the O5e Wizard has precisely 2 things they get that A5e doesn't by 20th-level: 1) They can cast a 2nd-level spell at-will (misty step at-will is not nothing), 2) They can change a cantrip known on a long rest. In every other way the A5e Wizard is superior, usually the entire way. Now, if I gave the O5e Wizard the choice of either getting the A5e Elective Studies, or getting a free ASI/Feat at 1st level, that might do the job. If you want simple, starting with a +2 to Intelligence will always be your friend. If you really want to switch your cantrips or you want an at-will 2nd-level spell in epic tier, then you can still get some exploration features, even though you'll be overall less flexible and effective probably.
I haven't done the math and gone over it with a fine toothed comb, but my first impressions are:
1. Some A5e classes are about equal to O5e classes in combat performance (I'd guess Fighter and Adept fall in that category).
2. Some A5e classes are better than O5e classes even in combat performance (someone gave the example of the Wizard and I think Sorcerers and Warlocks are even more so).
3. All A5e classes are better than O5e classes in non-combat pillar participation. (Since this was, you know, an important design goal, that's as it should be, lol.)
Now we get to my hypothetical house rules. Again, without having thoroughly read them, it looks like for most of the A5e classes, you could give their respective "Knacks" to O5e classes, and the O5e classes would still not become better than the A5e classes. (Rangers and Rogues are the ones I think this could most likely actually be a problem for.) Now, if you give the O5e classes the Knacks from A5e, and some of those classes are still inferior to A5e classes, then that gets trickier.
What I'm looking into is whether it might be balanced to say that an O5e class can either get the "knacks" from A5e, OR a free ASI/Feat at 1st-level. Again, I don't expect everyone to have a firm grasp on how balanced that would be at this point, but thoughts and feedback would be appreciated.
As to my reasoning for doing this. One of my main reasons for including Level Up in my game is to provide more options for players. I like O5e, and don't want to completely replace it. I'm planning on allowing both versions of the classes, and most of the subclasses (which can be mixed and matched). I'm going to switch probably most of my core rules to A5e, but some might stay O5e. I need to analyze it fully and make the hybrid that works best for my group. I would like O5e classes to remain relevant, both in case someone just prefers them ("But I love Action Surge and getting two extra feats!") and for players that want something simple. So I need to find a way to make sure you are always getting something worth having from picking an O5e class over the A5e version. One way I can do this is to add the bonus class features from Tasha's Cauldron of Everything to the O5e classes and not the A5e classes, but some of them will need more. For instance, assuming I do so, the O5e Wizard has precisely 2 things they get that A5e doesn't by 20th-level: 1) They can cast a 2nd-level spell at-will (misty step at-will is not nothing), 2) They can change a cantrip known on a long rest. In every other way the A5e Wizard is superior, usually the entire way. Now, if I gave the O5e Wizard the choice of either getting the A5e Elective Studies, or getting a free ASI/Feat at 1st level, that might do the job. If you want simple, starting with a +2 to Intelligence will always be your friend. If you really want to switch your cantrips or you want an at-will 2nd-level spell in epic tier, then you can still get some exploration features, even though you'll be overall less flexible and effective probably.
Blue
Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
Agreed. I was looking for rough neghborhood - a DC 17 and DC 18 are similar. I was looking for things that had a big difference. If the standard DCs for Hard and higher difficulties needed to be moved up +5 because of skill inflation, or if we were moving out of bounded accuracy such that T3-4 characters can't use the same DC chart - that sort of thing.
I honestly believe you wouldn't put out a product if you didn't think it was great. Pardon me but I have some additional questions if it will fit my particular needs which is why I was getting more granular on compatible.
I have a table that likes 5e, isn't interested in learned other game systems, and if we introduce A5E it will be added to an existing O5e hardcover campaign and be playing right alongside existing O5E characters in a sort of "Super-expansion" sort of way. I was trying to find out how well it will mesh, including things like resource attrition as well as how close it is in the various pillars of play. I tried to make those questions broad for others who were looking for using both O5E and A5E material for their particular circumstances.
I'm not trying to be pedantic, but I can't think of a clearer way of explaining what we mean by compatibility than how I did. You got my bestest words there! I think I've made it clear that I believe it meshes very well and has done in both O5E adventures we ran with it.
That's a bit inaccurate, as Level Up is, specifically, a different rule system. That's evidently by design. It's not an add-on, its a replacement for all the core rules. So yes, it is exactly like they use a different rule system, because they do. Level Up classes use the Level Up rule system, D&D classes use the D&D rule system.
No, again, there are lot of differences beyond those. A bunch of core feats work differently than the D&D feats they replace. A bunch of Level Up spells work different than the D&D spells they replace. A bunch of core rules work differently from the D&D rules they replace, like critical hits, Press the Attack as a universal combat option, the armor and weapon tables, and many, many more.
Different does not mean "bad" but it does mean "different." Replacing rules is different from adding on to rules. A game expansion adds new options, it doesn't change existing rules. A rule replacement is a new system. Level Up is a new system, a new game, that's compatible with the adventures of another game.
Waller
Hero
If a new class or feat or a new spell means it's a different rule system, then every D&D book is a different rule system, because they all have new feats and spells and monsters and stuff.
Faolyn
(she/her)
But those are not different in the sense you have to rewrite an adventure to use them.
Absolutely right, which is why it is compatible with "adventures" despite being a different system. It is not compatible with D&D classes, or D&D rules, because it is a different rule system that overwrites D&D.
No, that is inaccurate. Tasha's is a poor comparison - it adds to rules and options, it does not change core rules and remove existing options.
As explained earlier, D&D rulebooks that add new spells and feats are 'additive.' They are not 'replacing' existing content and rules. There is a huge different between a 'rule expansion' and a 'rule replacement.'
Tasha's Cauldron is a rules expansion for 5e D&D. Pathfinder's Advanced Player's Guide is a rules expansion for Pathfinder 1. Pathfinder 1 was a 'rules replacement' for 3.5 D&D, and Level Up is a 'rules replacement' for 5e D&D.
Last edited:
Faolyn
(she/her)
We already know the classes are different, since that's a major point of the game.
But I'd think you'd have to go through an adventure and find the places where the games are actually incompatible to the point that an A5e character couldn't play in it without making huge changes.
Like, you mention Press the Attack/Fall Back--but that's just a combat action. That's not going to affect the adventure, just the combat. You could let an o5e PC use that without problem, just like you could let them use Sprint.
This is becoming a bit circular, but that does not address the things Level Up "takes away" from O5E builds. The original Great Weapon Master, Sharpshooter, and Polearm Master are key for many martial builds in O5E. Many Wizards rely on O5E Counterspell. D&D classes no longer have access to rules elements they relied on, while Level Up classes are built with those rule changes in mind.
They are different rule sets, and yes, Level Up can be used for D&D adventures, but it cannot be used alongside "D&D characters," since D&D characters rely on "D&D rules" and "D&D feats" and "D&D spells." Level Up has Level Up rules, Level Up feats, and Level Up spells. They are different. Different games, that work with the same adventures, yes, but not alongside the classes and rules from other games.
This is demonstrably untrue. We are playing a game right now with O5E characters playing alongside A5E characters. I suspect that you have not played in such a game.
Look, I get that you have a bee in your bonnet, but your tendency to just repeat things that aren’t true over and over again until people give up is getting a little tired.
Faolyn
(she/her)
OK, imagine if you have an o5e fighter and an A5e wizard in the same party. You don't use maneuvers, but you do use A5e spells. Likewise, you can easily say that you're only using o5e spells, or only o5e feats, and still have A5e classes.
I think it's a question of "how" the O5E characters play alongside A5E characters. Are the O5E characters using the D&D versions of feats, spells, and core rules, or the Level Up versions? Again, everything ties together. A game with O5E characters and Level Up characters that uses the D&D 5e RPG rule set (core mechanics, feats, spells, and so on) is a different game from a Level Up game that adds D&D classes but uses Level Up rules, feats, spells, etc. If the O5E characters don't use O5e's feats, spells, and rules, they aren't fully functioning as "O5E characters." The same is true for Level Up characters used with O5E rules.
It may seem repetitive, because it is in fact the "same point" being rebutted by the same counterpoints. A new rule system like Pathfinder (original) was technically compatible with the classes from an old rule system, 3.5 D&D. Playing the classes from the two games together posed issues, however, for both balance and functionality. That's true for Level Up as well. The game is designed as a full replacement, not a "grab this or don't" optional rules add-on. That's totally fine, but it does mean a different kind of "compatibility" from what a lot of players would assume that means. Adventure path compatibility, yes, but it can't function with O5E classes if the feats, spells, and rules they relied on no longer exist in the same form.
I’m out.
Faolyn
(she/her)
If you're the DM, then you'd need to decide which version of the feats, spells, and rules you want to use for your game. If you're the player, you ask the DM.
You can, however, mix and match them. You can decide that the new combat actions are a thing in o5e. You can use the new versions of the spells or monsters, even if you use o5e PCs. You could decide to use o5e versions of spells in LU (which you'll have to, for all the spells that weren't converted due to not being in the OGL). You can have o5e people use LU weapons with all their new qualities--or you can have LU people use o5e weapons.
The game may be written as a "full replacement," in the sense that if you if you wanted to get into gaming and picked up the LU books instead of the PHB/DMG, you could play without problem. But you can pick and choose. As soon as my o5e players get out of the dungeon they're in, they're going to get some Journey/weather related stuff straight outta T&T.
I think since Morrus has said he's actually in a game that mixed o5e and A5e characters and it worked fine, that your argument doesn't work. I think maybe you need to try such a game and make note if parts don't work.
Satirical Bard
Explorer
Again (!): What you get from a polearm master + sentinel build might be different, but you can still build it. It's still there.
Seriously Rant, by your definition every freaking house rule to modify OP and UP feats and spells, or let sorcerers use spell points, or changes to resting rules, makes the game incompatible. It's utter nonsense.
You seem to be assuming the context is an existing mid-high level PC being ported into a LU campaign. But then the normal customs that apply to any new house rules or homebrew applies: have a mature conversation with your players and agree on what to do going forward with everyone's consent.
But if you just wanted to play an o5e fighter in an otherwise LU game [using LU feats, LU combat options, etc], the people who have actually playtested that over more than a year (unlike you and I) assure us it works fine mechanically.
Seriously Rant, by your definition every freaking house rule to modify OP and UP feats and spells, or let sorcerers use spell points, or changes to resting rules, makes the game incompatible. It's utter nonsense.
You seem to be assuming the context is an existing mid-high level PC being ported into a LU campaign. But then the normal customs that apply to any new house rules or homebrew applies: have a mature conversation with your players and agree on what to do going forward with everyone's consent.
But if you just wanted to play an o5e fighter in an otherwise LU game [using LU feats, LU combat options, etc], the people who have actually playtested that over more than a year (unlike you and I) assure us it works fine mechanically.
On these points, in short, a lot of the assumption that a rules replacement still works with the rules and classes its replacing - which is a difficult concept to wrap my head around - seems to hang on the broad notion that "it works." I don't know what form these playtests took beyond being assured that they did. Were they unoptimized, feat-free O5E classes alongside similar LU classes? Were they optimized builds leveraging feats and multi-classing? Were they mixed parties? Did they use Level Up rules or D&D rules, or mix the rules for their respective classes to use? Were O5E-only parties able to address the challenges of the new Exploration pillar mechanics without the aid of LU characters?
It's correct that I can't personally attest to "balance" until I try it myself. I can confirm that builds my players use right now would "not exist" effectively if I was to switch to Level Up's rules from D&D's rules, right now, because the feats/spells/rules they depend on to function aren't there anymore. That much is obvious from reading the core book.
I don't see why it's an issue, if it's intended to replace the core rules of D&D, for it to function alongside them, anyway. But that does seem to be a hang up, either due to a semantics difference or just different conceptions of what "compatibility" means to different people.
Last edited:
