D&D General Kobold Press Going Down a Dark Road

[Bolares]

Math doesn't care about anyone's feelings.

And that’s why I broke up with math

 

[Remathilis]

Given we don't know what OneD&D will look like yet, all the weird argument over it seems misplaced. It is likely to be more compatible than many of the alternate systems we see right now (such as LevelUp or whatever Kobold Press is working on). But maybe not! We don't know yet.

We don't know, but given we can glimpse into the playtests of both BF and 1D&D, I'm going to say they have more in common than KP is willing to admit. BF was made to sound like it was going to be 5e with replacements for the stuff not in the SRD, but KP began to tinker and Surprise! they are making the same types of changes WotC is making.

Racial ASI: gone.
Feat/Talent at 1st level.
Race having cultural elements moved/siloed.
Unified spell lists
Greater access to inspiration/luck
New class features
Subclasses having a unified progression (possibly, we have limited reference in BF, but the wizards subclass features were moved to match the fighters in the limited info we have)
Spells, talents/feats and other elements are revised.

As far as using supplements like Xanathar or such, you're going to need to do the same amount of conversion to make it work with BF as you will with 1DD. I'm sure you will be able to run a 2014 fighter, a BF wizard and a 1D druid at the same table in the abstract, but each one is going to end up needing some work to be compatible. In that, BF is Two D&D, One D&D's brother from another mother.

 

[nevin]

with all the printing and binding options for PDF's why is this even an issue. As long as you have the PDF you can print and bind as many copies as your players need.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

And that’s why I broke up with math

Really? That's why I find math so hot.

 

[Parmandur]

And that’s why I broke up with math

Touché

 

[Parmandur]

We don't know, but given we can glimpse into the playtests of both BF and 1D&D, I'm going to say they have more in common than KP is willing to admit. BF was made to sound like it was going to be 5e with replacements for the stuff not in the SRD, but KP began to tinker and Surprise! they are making the same types of changes WotC is making.

Racial ASI: gone.
Feat/Talent at 1st level.
Race having cultural elements moved/siloed.
Unified spell lists
Greater access to inspiration/luck
New class features
Subclasses having a unified progression (possibly, we have limited reference in BF, but the wizards subclass features were moved to match the fighters in the limited info we have)
Spells, talents/feats and other elements are revised.

As far as using supplements like Xanathar or such, you're going to need to do the same amount of conversion to make it work with BF as you will with 1DD. I'm sure you will be able to run a 2014 fighter, a BF wizard and a 1D druid at the same table in the abstract, but each one is going to end up needing some work to be compatible. In that, BF is Two D&D, One D&D's brother from another mother.

Yeah, that's the weird part: how similar they hashing out to be.

 

[Iosue]

This whole debate is also weird to me. Given I've written before about the interoperability of the entire TSR era, I don't get this at all. Perhaps it's because people have become more used to the discontinuities between 3e, 4e, and 5e?

I hear you. By any measure, 2nd Edition was a huge overhaul, far beyond anything they’ve suggested for 2024. Classes completely revised, entirely new initiative system, XP for treasure abandoned, monsters buffed. And yet, it seemed to me that even at the time we didn’t think of it as a different game, just the same fundamental game engine given a dressing up.

After going through that, it’s hard to get worked up over the minor cosmetic changes they are contemplating for 5e. It’s going to be the same fundamental engine.

 

[Oofta]

D&D Beyond will drop support for those "Legacy" products at some point, when maintaining the codebase that supports them starts getting in the way of adding new content. We'll probably still be able to access the text of those books, but their content won't be integrated in the character builder etc.

I don't see any reason to believe that other than someday there won't be a DDB as we know it, of course. I see nothing to indicate such a radical departure from the structure of the game that old stuff will be completely invalid. Certain functionality might be limited, I see no reason for it to go away anytime in the foreseeable future.

 

[Bolares]

Really? That's why I find math so hot.

OKAY OKAY, MATH BROKE UP WITH ME! ARE YOU HAPPY NOW?

 

[GMforPowergamers]

You're missing some subclasses and feats, yeah. But I contend that the bulk of the game material is still present.

I would argue that makeing new subclasses and feats is the easy part once you have the class frame work

 

[GMforPowergamers]

We don't know, but given we can glimpse into the playtests of both BF and 1D&D, I'm going to say they have more in common than KP is willing to admit. BF was made to sound like it was going to be 5e with replacements for the stuff not in the SRD, but KP began to tinker and Surprise! they are making the same types of changes WotC is making.

Racial ASI: gone.
Feat/Talent at 1st level.
Race having cultural elements moved/siloed.
Unified spell lists
Greater access to inspiration/luck
New class features
Subclasses having a unified progression (possibly, we have limited reference in BF, but the wizards subclass features were moved to match the fighters in the limited info we have)
Spells, talents/feats and other elements are revised.

the funny part is both (to me) feels like half messures. we need an overhaul not a tinker... and both are changing enough to be too diffrent but not enough to be remade... it's 3.5 not 4e

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

I don't see any reason to believe that other than someday there won't be a DDB as we know it, of course. I see nothing to indicate such a radical departure from the structure of the game that old stuff will be completely invalid. Certain functionality might be limited, I see no reason for it to go away anytime in the foreseeable future.

I hope you're right. But the trend in software seems to be that developers are quite eager to drop old functionality to focus on what is new and hot.

 

[Bolares]

it's 3.5 not 4e

Those were the comparisons the D&D executive producer used when asked about the subject. They never promised a completelly new edition, they are marketing it as an update. The only one saying otherwise is Kobold Press

 

[Micah Sweet]

Math doesn't care about anyone's feelings.

Neither does WotC, apparently. And can we please lay off the obsession with math as the most (or perhaps only) important part of the game?

 

[Micah Sweet]

We don't know, but given we can glimpse into the playtests of both BF and 1D&D, I'm going to say they have more in common than KP is willing to admit. BF was made to sound like it was going to be 5e with replacements for the stuff not in the SRD, but KP began to tinker and Surprise! they are making the same types of changes WotC is making.

Racial ASI: gone.
Feat/Talent at 1st level.
Race having cultural elements moved/siloed.
Unified spell lists
Greater access to inspiration/luck
New class features
Subclasses having a unified progression (possibly, we have limited reference in BF, but the wizards subclass features were moved to match the fighters in the limited info we have)
Spells, talents/feats and other elements are revised.

As far as using supplements like Xanathar or such, you're going to need to do the same amount of conversion to make it work with BF as you will with 1DD. I'm sure you will be able to run a 2014 fighter, a BF wizard and a 1D druid at the same table in the abstract, but each one is going to end up needing some work to be compatible. In that, BF is Two D&D, One D&D's brother from another mother.

You shouldn't have to convert anything if its still the same edition.

 

[Reef]

I hear you. By any measure, 2nd Edition was a huge overhaul, far beyond anything they’ve suggested for 2024. Classes completely revised, entirely new initiative system, XP for treasure abandoned, monsters buffed. And yet, it seemed to me that even at the time we didn’t think of it as a different game, just the same fundamental game engine given a dressing up.

After going through that, it’s hard to get worked up over the minor cosmetic changes they are contemplating for 5e. It’s going to be the same fundamental engine.

We were the same. I don't know if it's just because we were young, or because there was no internet to tell us we were wrong. But we mixed editions from BX through 2e without thinking about it. Granted, we didn't so much mix classes, but we happily used monsters and adventures from any edition. I don't think any of even had the 2e monster books.

Someone wanted to use a new race from some Dragon article three years back? Sure. Magic items from The Companions set? Why not? The differences in monsters between editions never even came up. Was the balance out of whack? Maybe. But we had fun. And it was just our group, so as long as everyone was happy, well, we were happy. It's one of the times that shows how much of a double-edged sword the internet can sometimes be.

So I have a hard time getting worked up about the changes we've seen so far with OneDnD. It can't be any less compatible with straight 5e as BECMI to 1e to 2e was.

 

[Bolares]

Neither does WotC, apparently. And can we please lay off the obsession with math as the most (or perhaps only) important part of the game?

what?

 

[Reef]

Neither does WotC, apparently. And can we please lay off the obsession with math as the most (or perhaps only) important part of the game?

You keep making it sound like WoTC is throwing the whole lot of us under the bus. I understand you aren't happy, and haven't been for a long time (from the sounds of it). And there's probably a group of people who agree with you. But there's also a large number who aren't having anywhere near the same reaction you are.

 

[Micah Sweet]

We were the same. I don't know if it's just because we were young, or because there was no internet to tell us we were wrong. But we mixed editions from BX through 2e without thinking about it. Granted, we didn't so much mix classes, but we happily used monsters and adventures from any edition. I don't think any of even had the 2e monster books.

Someone wanted to use a new race from some Dragon article three years back? Sure. Magic items from The Companions set? Why not? The differences in monsters between editions never even came up. Was the balance out of whack? Maybe. But we had fun. And it was just our group, so as long as everyone was happy, well, we were happy. It's one of the times that shows how much of a double-edged sword the internet can sometimes be.

So I have a hard time getting worked up about the changes we've seen so far with OneDnD. It can't be any less compatible with straight 5e as BECMI to 1e to 2e was.

The problem is, the culture has shifted away from mixing similar games into everyone playing the new thing, because that's where the big companies think the money is. There will always be homebrewers and DIY gamers, but the industry is I think moving towards something easier to monetize for a given company, as opposed to the industry as a whole.

 

[Micah Sweet]

what?

Ask @Parmandur .