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

[AlViking]

For the most part we use a mix but if there us a new 2024 rule we use that unless we discuss it as a group and decide to use the old one. There's a couple of things I use the old rules like stealth, but if you want to use a subclass or spell that the new version doesn't we just always use the old one.

If there's ever a discussion about which one to use, we all use whichever option we picked.

 

[Zardnaar]

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.

This is pretty good.

I do something similar but would allow small buffs or suggestions.

A favored sould for example would get the domain spells.

Hell may allow some 5.0 classes to buff 2024 ones (eg 5.0 assassins, gloomstalkers etc).

 

[Distracted DM]

I've run 5e, 5.5e, A5E, and/or ToV characters in the same party. Basically you just need to pick a "core system." What system are you gonna use for feats, spells, equipment, etc- after that's chosen, the characters are to each their own.

 

[Jacob Lewis]

I recently brought one of my 5e characters from Beyond into a 5.5e game. It was my first time using the 2024 rules, so I was learning the new system as I went along. When I looked closer at specific rules and compared options that might've changed for my character, I realized just how different 2024 actually was from the 2014 rules. More importantly, I realized that the people at the table (including the DM) hadn't even noticed until i started pointing them out.

Was it an issue? Not really, unless you're someone like me who just prefers things to be clean, simple, and neat. Once I understood  why changes were made and the intent behind them, I could no longer ignore them. Things worked different (and better IMO) for a reason.

For example, I learned that the Observant feat no longer gave my character a +5 bonus to passive Perception and Investigation checks. That was a schtick for my character, but I could see how the change improved play at the table by curtailing an (admittedly) annoying and frustrating aspect under the original rules. Instead, he could get Expertise in one of those skills, and use Search as a bonus action.

Of course, this would still be a good choice if the group was actually following the new rules to use the new Search (and other) actions correctly. As it turned out, they had glossed over the new rules (except the crunchy bits that interested them, like character classes, spells, etc), and assumed everything worked exacrly the same as before.

My "practical advice" is this: You can do whatever you like. Just be aware that "compatibility" doesn't mean "frictionless". Be prepared to make compromises, adapt on the fly, or just outright ignore things that aren't improtant to the group. It's easier not to overthink it, and just go with the flow.

But if it matters to you, or anyone else at the table, consider that 2024 attempts to address and improve many of the problematic issues people have complained about (and dealt with) for years. Allowing old options to come back is potentially inviting those same issues back. Which begs the question, why not just keep using the old rules instead?

Just food for thought.

 

[TwoSix]

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.

I've had 2 PCs make characters with weapon masteries. After 2 sessions of "oh, I had advantage on that attack, I forgot" and "oh, that guy has to make a save or be prone, I forgot", I asked if they wanted to keep the masteries OR get a free +2 to Str or Dex.

Haven't seen weapon masteries since, and everyone is happier.

 

[Thraic Ogmund]

I've run 5e, 5.5e, A5E, and/or ToV characters in the same party. Basically you just need to pick a "core system." What system are you gonna use for feats, spells, equipment, etc- after that's chosen, the characters are to each their own.

Agreed. I have done the same, using ToV as the "core system." Therefore I use weapon options in place of weapon mastery, we employ the luck system, etc. I offer characters made using 2014 rules four discretionary attribute points to try to compensate for missing a feat and general power creep. If a character is made blending 2014 and ToV or 2024 rules (e.g. using a 2014 race, and therefore background as well, or subclass), I give two points. Characters made using only ToV and/or 2024 rules get no boost.

 

[SpellObjectEnthusiast]

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

If you like 5e and prefer it, then just run 5e? I'm sure you'd have no problem finding players even limiting them only to 5e rules and options.

 

[bedir than]

My "practical advice" is this: You can do whatever you like. Just be aware that "compatibility" doesn't mean "frictionless". Be prepared to make compromises, adapt on the fly, or just outright ignore things that aren't improtant to the group. It's easier not to overthink it, and just go with the flow.

repeating because I agree

 

[Clint_L]

If you like 5e and prefer it, then just run 5e? I'm sure you'd have no problem finding players even limiting them only to 5e rules and options.

He gave his reasoning, and integrating 5e and 5.5e takes almost no effort, so why not?

 

[Clint_L]

Follow-up: I think some of the discussions on this forum can give the impression that the differences between the two rule sets are far more significant than they turn out to be in actual play. That makes sense; this is a forum where we like to find things to argue about, and also we tend to blow stuff out of proportion, this being the Internet. For example, we had a massive thread about what a disaster the new stealth rules are, but I've had zero issues with players being confused about stealth.

In actual practice, a lot of people use elements of both rule sets without major issues, because the vast majority of things are either the same or slightly clarified. There are very few substantial changes, and when they are, they are either a new system grafted on (weapon masteries) or the old system rebalanced (creature hit points and attack types). The core of the game is the same.