D&D (2024) Playtest: Is the Human Terrible?

[Parmandur]

If only we could with what WotC says backwards compatibility means, specifically. Unfortunately, they didn't really provide a concise answer.

The playtest FAQ is quite clear, really:

What does backward compatible mean?

It means that fifth edition adventures and supplements will work in One D&D. For example, if you want to run Curse of Strahd in One D&D, that book will work with the new versions of the core rulebooks. Our goal is for you to keep enjoying the content you already have and make it even better. You’ll see this in action through the playtest materials, which you will be able to provide feedback on.

 

[Maxperson]

The playtest FAQ is quite clear, really:

What does backward compatible mean?

It means that fifth edition adventures and supplements will work in One D&D. For example, if you want to run Curse of Strahd in One D&D, that book will work with the new versions of the core rulebooks. Our goal is for you to keep enjoying the content you already have and make it even better. You’ll see this in action through the playtest materials, which you will be able to provide feedback on.

Supplements, not just adventures. AND nothing there about us having to do any work, which meshes with the definition of backwards compatible. It's just a pipe dream on their part. It can't be done.

 

[Parmandur]

Supplements, not just adventures. AND nothing there about us having to do any work, which meshes with the definition of backwards compatible. It's just a pipe dream on their part. It can't be done.

They saybthe books will work, not that no conversion is required. The first playtest makes every Race ever published for 5E compatible, and the "work" required on anyone's part is basically nonexistent.

 

[Maxperson]

They saybthe books will work, not that no conversion is required.

They also do not say conversion is required, so it defaults to the definition of backwards compatible.

The first playtest makes every Race ever published for 5E compatible, and the "work" required on anyone's part is basically nonexistent.

So I can use 2014 races without having to give them a feat to make up the deficit created by the new rules?

Edit: Never mind. I'm mixing up races and backgrounds The point still stands, though, just with backgrounds.

 

[Parmandur]

They also do not say conversion is required, so it defaults to the definition of backwards compatible.

So I can use 2014 races without having to give them a feat to make up the deficit created by the new rules?

Edit: Never mind. I'm mixing up races and backgrounds The point still stands, though, just with backgrounds.

The Background section has the sidebar about jowntonhandle ASI: that sidebar makes every Race option in the prior 8 years compatible (even beyond all the Race options since Tasha's being identical in design logic to the playtest iterations here).

I will be giving feedback praising that, and saying that some clarity about how to make older Backgrounds play nicely would be nice. Seems an easy fix, honestly.

 

[Micah Sweet]

You know, honestly, I'm trying to find an example you won't twist, and I'm just going to jump to the end.

Let us say you win, Wizards in their next announcement says "We lied. This is actually 6E and we will be releasing a conversion document that explains how to integrate the majority of your 5E supplements into the game. We will say which races can be ported easily, which feats need levels, which spells go in which lists"

What changes? What fundamental shift has occurred?

You keep taking the claim that the 2024 book is going to be backwards compatible with 5e adventures and supplements to mean that no rules in the Player's Handbook will be changed. But they've already changed Volo's Guide and Mordenkainen's tome by releasing Mordenkainen's Monsters of the Multiverse. Was that an edition shift? No one seemed to think so, you are claiming it wasn't, but if a Player's Handbook is released to change a Player's Handbook it must be at least a half edition shift and that's.... bad?

Why? It isn't exactly difficult to realize that a rewritten human is supposed to be rewritten, just like we don't use the Kobold or Orc that have -2 Intelligence, we won't use the old, out-of-date human. Because why would we?

Tasha's forward did feel a bit like an edition shift to me.

I do have a question. If this is meant to be the same edition, then shouldn't you be able to use the corebook rules you already have?

 

[Parmandur]

Tasha's forward did feel a bit like an edition shift to me.

I do have a question. If this is meant to be the same edition, then shouldn't you be able to use the corebook rules you already have?

I mean, yeah. The playtest assumes using the 2014 books, and they are endeavoring for sig ificant rules transparency here, so placing a 2014 Monster here or there or bringing an old character sheet shouldn't be a huge problem based on what we have seen. That everything since Tasha's is basically OneD&D but still works with the old core books Is sufficient testament to the plausibility that they can pull that off.

 

[Micah Sweet]

But if they aren’t going to keep the same system beyond some updates, that wouldn’t get them useful or reliable data.

They want people to test the "no DM-side crit" rule without providing the monster compensations they expressly said would balance it. How does THAT provide useful or reliable data?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yeah, they've said the same words multiple times in the past about this same kind of transition, and I am told I am being absurd for having any doubts it might play out the same way it has always played out in the past literally since the transition from 1e to 2e.

Lucy and the football. No one ever seems to believe it can happen again.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I mean, a significant part of the player base hadn't been born in 2003.

That sounds like they're using the fact that the bulk of their audience is young and unfamiliar with edition changes to try and get away with something.