I didn't forget. That was for compatibility with all the subclasses not in the 2014 PHB (both 3rd party at WOTC). Making sure that your Everything Guide or Wildemount setting or 3rd party subclasses would continue to work. They never said it would work with 2014 PHB subclasses. This is the first time I've heard them say that you can use anything from the 2014 PHB with 2024 rules, which is more than I was expecting.
Absolutely not, given WotC's messaging has consistently been that you could interoperate old and new versions of the same classes, and according to @Parmandur, that still is the messaging. One of you is wrong.
Flatly, no. This is not what WotC have said previously. WotC have been very specific about interoperability, and that you could use the 2014 and 2024 versions of the same classes at the same table and so on. That no-one would need to update or change their character, and that this was all optional.
They've been saying it pretty often since the beginning. Like literally they've said "You can use 2014 characters at a 2024 table".
I mean in terms of mixing a build. They have said, and it continues to be true, that you can use a 2014 built character next to a 2024 character in adventures published pre and post 2024. The compatibility rule is that anything reprinted in 2024 superceeds anything prior to 2024 when building a 2024 character. So if you build a 2024 Wizard with the 2014 Necromancer subclass, you use 2024 species, spells, feats and backgrounds. But you can also build a 2014 Wizard Necromancer and use 2014 species, spells, feats and backgrounds and play in a 2024 rules based game.
You must be coming away from either my posts, their posts, or both with a very different meaning than I am, because I read all of their posts and I don’t see anything in them that disagrees with what I’m saying.
Alright. Clearly there’s a breakdown in communication happening somewhere, because from what it sounds like you’re saying, you and I have been reading/hearing completely different things from WotC, but I rather doubt that’s actually the case. Most likely I imagine something in how I am expressing the point is hitting the wrong way. That’s likely my fault, and perhaps it would be best to disregard my post(s) on the matter and go with what @Parmandur said, since as far as I know I am in complete agreement with them on this matter, but their phrasing seems to be significantly more palatable to you.
No. Watch the new video. It seems like you are just trying to be difficult. It is simple. They recommend replacing any new class, feat, etc. with the 2024 version. However, anything can still be used. In the new video Jeremy is asked this and he explains the recommendation would be to use the 2024 rules with a 2014 class instead of vice-versa because the 2024 rules know what is up with the 2014 rules, but the 2014 rules know nothing about the 2024 rules.
Oh, good, that was my takeaway, too?
It must be a language gap of some kind. Your posts seem to be ruling out a bunch of stuff @Parmandur and @OB1 are saying is the case, but as suggested I'll go with what they're saying.
I wasn't the one who made this quote. It was made by @EzekielRaiden on post #129. I replied back to him on post #132. Go back and read it.
I would recommend Ginny Di video that was juat posted, she actually holds Crawfords feet to the fire on Backwards compatibility to the point where she even gets a near-admission that it is a new edition, but they are not calling it a new edition because they want it to be clear people can use all their old stuff and it will play nice.
