D&D (2024) Jeremy Crawford: “We are releasing new editions of the books”

[Burt Baccara]

A historical retrospective around edition change marketing could be a fun read. WotC has tried a lot of quite different strategies over the years, from "this is better and solves all the problems!" to "this isn't actually a change at all!"

There is the perennial fav, "most streamlined, easiest to learn for new players edition ever."

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

You're technically right that they wouldn't all be the same people. But it's pretty apparent that there are people who want it all to crash and burn, so yeah, there are going to be people who will pounce if they smell blood, and try to hurt Wizards as much as possible no matter what happens. They aren't subtle about it. Wizards has had some blunders. And some people will never let that go.

this seems pretty much an attack on people that disagree with you. I am NOT reporting it hopeing I am reading it wrong. But are you saying that if we think this is middle ground waffeling we are trying to "hurt wotc"?

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

If Crawford had not doubled-down on the, "it's the same edition" claim he keeps making, sales of all books between now and 2024 might drop. It's just a money thing.

I wonder why we should buy ANY book that has subclass features at wrong levels and feats that will need to be updated? Isn't this why between 3e and 4e they put out system neutral books?

 

[mamba]

This makes sense, and were I to actually decide to play 1D&D Id probably do the same. Here's where I'm confused, has WotC ever clarified what their definition of backwards compatibility is? I interpreted it as if one player is playing a 2014 PC then they'd use the rules in the 2014 PHB, if another is playing a 2024 PC then they'd use the 2024 PHB. Am I wrong? Seems like its going to be using a little from both the 2014 and 2024 rules.

the only one I am familiar with is something like ‘can be used alongside each other’. There will be some more guidance coming I assume, once they are closer to a final version.

I expect that at some level you will have to decide on one or the other rather than ‘to each their own’, for example what conditions there are and what they do

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

I just don't think it's all that confusing. Better than the class tables in the 1e DMG, and it still allows different classes to actually be better or worse at attacks, which 5e certainly doesn't do (nor did 4e before it, I believe).

there are plenty of ways to allow for different attacks without resorting to some things add some subtract do them in the right order then look at a negative target number.

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

Wait, yes to which? You get 2014 subclass levels 1-3 all at once at 1D&D level 3, or you don't get 2014 subclass levels 1-2 and just get options from level 3 forward?

Though now I'm wondering if there's a third interpretation, you ignore the One D&D subclass slots entirely and use the complete 2014 progression for your subclass.

Again, maybe they went into more detail in a video or something?


I certainly hope so.

I think if I read it right you take the 5e subclass remove the levels and instead line up as 1st 2nd 3rd ect (if you got multi ability's at a level you keep them grouped) then assign them at the new levels...

so a wizard would get all the 2nd level features at 3rd level

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

pretty sure WotC is clear about this not being the case with 1DD either

as clear as mud

 

[Parmandur]

My point is this. Will 1D&D be backwards compatible with 5E, probably, But with lineages, class features, feats, spells, weapon properties etc changing, will it be practical to do so probably not. If I understand correctly as of the last playtest aren't feats no longer considered optional? Hypothetically, if I was starting to DM a game of 1D&D and had 6 players excluding myself and 1 of those players decided "eh I'm just gonna play a 5E PC", I'd probably tell them to take a hike unless they made a real convincing argument. I wouldn't want to pull double duty reading/referencing 2 sets of books. The playtests and the community's feedback is not the be all and end all, I am certain that yes they will definitely take it all into consideration but OTOH I can almost guarantee that the final playtest and actual releases will be slightly different. At some point the playtests and surveys will close but that does not mean the final design is complete. Of course, this is all just my opinion, and I could be glaringly wrong.

Feats are now a core rule, but one of the Feats is am ASI boost, so nothing is changed.in practical terms. People are already playing with rules from 2014 at the same table as playtest packet rules, including things like a 2014 Druid next to a 2024 Druid, and nothing is going wrong. The Species, Feats and Classes are exception based rules, so nothing in the actual play is all that different from people trying a new Class.

The playtest process, based on 9 years of UA process, is likely to bring the proposals down from where they are now, closer to the 2014 baseline.

 

[Parmandur]

This makes sense, and were I to actually decide to play 1D&D Id probably do the same. Here's where I'm confused, has WotC ever clarified what their definition of backwards compatibility is? I interpreted it as if one player is playing a 2014 PC then they'd use the rules in the 2014 PHB, if another is playing a 2024 PC then they'd use the 2024 PHB. Am I wrong? Seems like its going to be using a little from both the 2014 and 2024 rules.

That's an area where DM interpretation will probably be necessary, but I would say for Spells, always the newer one applies, but old Class features are welcome. The new Class chassis all work with the 2014 Subclasses, even Warlock, just fine. So slapping a 2014 Subclass and Rave on a 2024 Class isn't a problem.

 

[mamba]

as clear as mud

nah, they are very clear, there just are people who try to muddy the water for whatever agenda of theirs