Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Rant" data-source="post: 8456145" data-attributes="member: 7033019">Again, we are back in the vagaries of what “compatibility” means. I think it is possible to run a table with two different rule sets at work. I think it is possible to run D&amp;D modules with Level Up rules. This makes it about as compatible as Pathfinder - which is a different system. It isn’t compatible with D&amp;D rules that it overwrites by definition, by overwriting them, but a table could run two different rule systems side by side without either losing anything, it seems.That means “compatible” to some people and not to others. To me, no. While I could run a Pathfinder and D&amp;D combined table that’s an experimental game, not a compatible game. But to some with less concern they might consider it compatible.It’s too vague of a term to have a solid objective answer. It’s clearly less compatible with D&amp;D 5e than a true expansion like Tasha’s and more compatible with D&amp;D 5e than a system with entire differently paradigms like Chaosium’s, if that’s what you are asking. It doesn’t meet my benchmark for compatibility. The ability to run an experimental game with two different rule set involves running two different rule sets. It’s a neat idea. It’s not compatibility, it’s a workaround for a lack thereof.Also, I still have no details on what that playtesting looked like. Given that there are numerous last minute edits at play in the rules the version seem in print may have never been playtested save by the players. I asked specific questions about how the play test was done, what kind of builds and rules were used. “Two years of playtesting” is not an answer to that.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Rant, post: 8456145, member: 7033019"] Again, we are back in the vagaries of what “compatibility” means. I think it is possible to run a table with two different rule sets at work. I think it is possible to run D&D modules with Level Up rules. This makes it about as compatible as Pathfinder - which is a different system. It isn’t compatible with D&D rules that it overwrites by definition, by overwriting them, but a table could run two different rule systems side by side without either losing anything, it seems. That means “compatible” to some people and not to others. To me, no. While I could run a Pathfinder and D&D combined table that’s an experimental game, not a compatible game. But to some with less concern they might consider it compatible. It’s too vague of a term to have a solid objective answer. It’s clearly less compatible with D&D 5e than a true expansion like Tasha’s and more compatible with D&D 5e than a system with entire differently paradigms like Chaosium’s, if that’s what you are asking. It doesn’t meet my benchmark for compatibility. The ability to run an experimental game with two different rule set involves running two different rule sets. It’s a neat idea. It’s not compatibility, it’s a workaround for a lack thereof. Also, I still have no details on what that playtesting looked like. Given that there are numerous last minute edits at play in the rules the version seem in print may have never been playtested save by the players. I asked specific questions about how the play test was done, what kind of builds and rules were used. “Two years of playtesting” is not an answer to that. [/QUOTE]

Verification