D&D General Practical advice for running 5.5e and 5e PCs side by side

[Pamphylian]

Apologies if there has been a definitive thread on this that I'm missing.

For various reasons, for an upcoming game, I'm leaning toward allowing both 5.5e and 5e PCs. 5e has many classes/subclasses I want to allow (and I personally prefer how many of the races, classes and spells function), and variant rules/options in the DMG/XGtE want to use, but I suspect some/many players (open table setting) will want to use 2024 PCs. My general goals are in facilitating exploration oriented west marches style play and a brisk pace of combat.

What are best practices for making this work well (rules, techniques, adjustments, etc.)? Or, will suck so much that it's not even worth contemplating?

My initial inclination is that 2024 PCs level fully within 2024 options/rules, and same for 2014 PCs. (Both generally use the spells versions of their respective editions (or maybe, they can choose?). If a demon offers a pact to a PC that grants a level of Warlock, a 2024 PC would get a 2024 level dip, and a 2014 PC would get a 2014 dip. 2014 PCs get racial stat adjustments, 2024 PCs from their background (Let me know if there's a better way!). A few specific questions:

• My understanding is that the recommendation is to use 2024 base rules instead of 2014 rules for rulings in this case (2014 having less forward compatibility than 2024 backward compatibility). Is this the case? What are the biggest areas of 2014 forward compatibility failures? Can I still basically use 2014 DMG variant rules and Xanathar's downtime rules wholesale if using 2024 rules?
• 2024 PCs seem in general to be more powerful than 2014 PCs. I'm not too worried about power disparities in general (I expect to have PCs of different levels adventuring together). But I can see the downside of the same class/level just being strictly worse between editions - choices become obsolete and verisimilitude suffers. The biggest(?) thing that stands out are the upgrades in healing spells in 2024 (healing ~doubled). Would there be any issue simply harmonizing those and calling it a day (I'd likely do this down, nerfing 2024 a bit, because I like attrition based tension, but maybe up, since players are more likely to accept a buff than a nerf)? Secondarily, any issue with enforcing the metal armor restriction on both 2014 and 2024 druids?
• On the economics side of things, I'm hoping to 1) use Gold-for-XP based leveling (based on expected wealth per level) and 2) maintain money as a useful and interesting resource as much as possible. It seems like starting gold is different between 2014 and 2024, I'd be tempted to harmonize that (in a 2014 almost certainly). Are there any other significant differences in economics between editions (particularly on the player facing PHB side, like equipment prices) I should watch out for?
• EDIT: I'm hoping to use an extra feat as a reward for nerfing oneself in a fun way (you die at 0 hit points, or stats determined by rolling 3d6 down the line) - is this reasonable for feats in both editions?
• Any other tips/tricks to making this work smoothly from those who have tried it?

Thank you in advance!

 

[TwoSix]

I just let people mix freely, and have had no problems with it. D&D Beyond, with both 2014 and 2024 unlocked, is a good resource for checking any weird interactions. Obviously, if somebody does something like double-dipping on starting ASIs, don't allow that.

As for spells, I just let people use what they're comfortable with. If they like the 2024 version better than the 2014, they can swap to that, and vice versa. People figure out what versions of which spells are better pretty quick, in my experience.

 

[Tigris]

In general when wanting 2014 and 2024 options I would do it like this:

• Use 2024 classes as base, there is no reason to use any 2014 classes, rhey are overall just worse balanced.
• Allow 2014 subclasses with the 2024 classes unless that subclass is redone then use the new version
• If you pick a 2014 race use a 2014 background and just get a origin feat for free on top
• If you use 2024 races use 2024 backgrounds
• All spells redone in 2024 use that version
• All spells not redone you can use the old version
• EDIT! Same for feats. Feats which are redone in 2024 use those. In general only allow half feats

This way works really good, you have many options and its relatively well balanced. There are still some subclasses from 2014 which are a bit too weak, but its way better than if you use things like a 2014 champion fighter with a 2014 wizard. In general the 2024 spells are better except for completely broken spells from 2014 and you dont want them.

 

[Clint_L]

Yeah, don’t overcomplicate it. I mix both freely and it’s not difficult. Any issues are easily resolved through common sense, but there isn’t much. I would definitely make weapon masteries available to all classes who get them in 2024, though (or ban them entirely, my preferred option). They are the biggest power difference in martial classes, but they also slow combat down quite a lot more than you would think.

 

[Misanthrope Prime]

There are a few cases where 2024 revisions have different base class features than 2014 classes, but I think by and large the 2024 class chassis are "2014+TCE optional rules baked in+a balance pass" and they're almost always a straight upgrade (which is factored into the CR of 5.5e monsters; they can take and dish out more damage per round, so if you DO keep 2014 classes, be careful about 2024 monsters). RAW you can use old subclasses with modern classes, and in many cases they're actually improved. I am currently, for instance, playing a Whisper's Bard from XGE with the 2024 bard chassis, who is much more combat capable because they can make weapon attacks with true strike.

 

[Pamphylian]

Yeah, don’t overcomplicate it. I mix both freely and it’s not difficult. Any issues are easily resolved through common sense, but there isn’t much. I would definitely make weapon masteries available to all classes who get them in 2024, though (or ban them entirely, my preferred option). They are the biggest power difference in martial classes, but they also slow combat down quite a lot more than you would think.

Ok great tip - will strongly consider banning those, as I want to maximize combat speed. On the one hand, I really like the idea of greater weapon differentiation, but weapon masteries seem to add additional rolls, etc. I've toyed with a idea of approximating the aim behind the old weapon vs AC AD&D tables but much simpler (bonus to hit plate armor with warhammers, etc.) - something like this seems extremely appealing.

 

[Tigris]

Ok great tip - will strongly consider banning those, as I want to maximize combat speed. On the one hand, I really like the idea of greater weapon differentiation, but weapon masteries seem to add additional rolls, etc. I've toyed with a idea of approximating the aim behind the old weapon vs AC AD&D tables but much simpler (bonus to hit plate armor with warhammers, etc.) - something like this seems extremely appealing.

Weapon masteries dont really add more slowdown to combat especially compared to what spells and cantrips do.

Its only a problem in the beginning when people dont know what their basic attacks do.

We play with them and what makes much a bigger difference is if people can roll their dice alltogether. (Advantage dice + noemal dice + damage already as one roll).

The biggest slowdown we have are still spells which are not 100% clear what they do and lead to discussion.


The only weapon mastery which can slow things down a bit is the one with the trip needing an extra saving throw.

 

[Misanthrope Prime]

Weapon masteries dont really add more slowdown to combat especially compared to what spells and cantrips do.

Its only a problem in the beginning when people dont know what their basic attacks do.

We play with them and what makes much a bigger difference is if people can roll their dice alltogether. (Advantage dice + noemal dice + damage already as one roll).

The biggest slowdown we have are still spells which are not 100% clear what they do and lead to discussion.


The only weapon mastery which can slow things down a bit is the one with the trip needing an extra saving throw.

The full complement of weapon masteries only come online for strength based characters, for the most part, and in my experience so many more martial builds are based off dexterity that whenever I'm DMing we're only contending with nick and vex, which don't slow down combat at all.

 

[Tigris]

The full complement of weapon masteries only come online for strength based characters, for the most part, and in my experience so many more martial builds are based off dexterity that whenever I'm DMing we're only contending with nick and vex, which don't slow down combat at all.

Sure weapon masteries add more variety to strength based character, which I think help strength to be a bit a stronger attribute.

I still think (as you say from your experience) that dex is better so yeah mostly using vex and nick which can be asily done with no slowdown.

 

[Li Shenron]

What are best practices for making this work well (rules, techniques, adjustments, etc.)? Or, will suck so much that it's not even worth contemplating?

I don't think there are any best practices. I think those who mix the two just use either as a baseline, allow characters from the other, and don’t care what happens.

• My understanding is that the recommendation is to use 2024 base rules instead of 2014 rules for rulings in this case (2014 having less forward compatibility than 2024 backward compatibility). Is this the case?

• 
  
  Recommendation by who? There is no hard Incompatibility, only stronger 2024 characters compared to 2014. It's not a matter of things not working, it's a matter of the game not being fair to all players.
  
  There are actually only a few "base rules" changes, such as regaining all spent HD on a long rest, or drinking a potion as a bonus action. You can cherrypick the version you prefer on each rule case. What has changed massively is characters material: classes, archetypes, races, backgrounds, feats and spells. If you take fully 2024-material characters and fully 2014-material characters, the game is easier for the first. But you can also consider not doing that, and maybe only allow both editions versions of classes/archetypes, while sticking to one version of everything else.
  
  

  Can I still basically use 2014 DMG variant rules and Xanathar's downtime rules wholesale if using 2024 rules?

  
  Yes, the "base rules" haven't changed much so the variants should work as before.
  
  

  . The biggest(?) thing that stands out are the upgrades in healing spells in 2024 (healing ~doubled). Would there be any issue simply harmonizing those and calling it a day (I'd likely do this down, nerfing 2024 a bit, because I like attrition based tension, but maybe up, since players are more likely to accept a buff than a nerf)?

  
  Yes exactly, as I said, stick to either the 2014 or 2024 version for everyone. Other spells did not get this kind of boost as a group and might coexist in both version (e.g. the Resistance cantrip).
  
  

  Secondarily, any issue with enforcing the metal armor restriction on both 2014 and 2024 druids?

  
  That was never a "rule" unless a very pedantic DM wanted it to be.
  
  

  [*]On the economics side of things, I'm hoping to 1) use Gold-for-XP based leveling (based on expected wealth per level) and 2) maintain money as a useful and interesting resource as much as possible. It seems like starting gold is different between 2014 and 2024, I'd be tempted to harmonize that (in a 2014 almost certainly). Are there any other significant differences in economics between editions (particularly on the player facing PHB side, like equipment prices) I should watch out for?

  
  I wouldn't give a minute of thought to starting gold values.
  
  

  [*]EDIT: I'm hoping to use an extra feat as a reward for nerfing oneself in a fun way (you die at 0 hit points, or stats determined by rolling 3d6 down the line) - is this reasonable for feats in both editions?

  
  No.