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

[SpellObjectEnthusiast]

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

Because I don't like encouraging Gamemasters to feel compelled to change what/how they run in order to appease. Particularly when doing so will increase the amount of work they're putting in significantly, given that 5e/5.5e are high prep games.

 

[TwoSix]

Because I don't like encouraging Gamemasters to feel compelled to change what/how they run in order to appease. Particularly when doing so will increase the amount of work they're putting in significantly, given that 5e/5.5e are high prep games.

Can’t say I agree.

The large majority of the changes to 5.5 are in player-facing, character creation subsystems. The complexity add as a GM to integrate is quite low.

 

[OB1]

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.

I really haven't found that weapon mastreries slow things down that much in 2 years of playing 2024. At most they make a martial turn take closer to the time of a half caster like the ranger or paladin. And half casters with masteries still don't take as long to resolve as a typical full caster turn.

More importantly, weapon masteries are FUN! The pure martial PCs I've seen with them enjoy the heck out of them, it makes their turns a bit more exciting, and it really gives them some fun advantages in combat.

I strongly recommend keeping weapon masteries for PCs who create 2024 characters.

BTW, I ran a year long campaign with a mix of 2024 and 2014. I did exactly what you suggested in the OP, 2014 PCs used all 2014 character build rules and spells, 2024 used all 2024 build rules and spells. The biggest difference between the class setups is that 2014 tends to have slightly higher nova capabilities, while 2024 has a higher baseline.

 

[Clint_L]

Because I don't like encouraging Gamemasters to feel compelled to change what/how they run in order to appease. Particularly when doing so will increase the amount of work they're putting in significantly, given that 5e/5.5e are high prep games.

I'm going to trust that the OP is quite capable of making informed decisions and has already decided that they want to run both.

Here's the amount of extra work I normally do as a DM to incorporate both the old and new rules: zero. Are you actually running such a campaign? What is all the extra work it is creating for you?

 

[Clint_L]

I really haven't found that weapon mastreries slow things down that much in 2 years of playing 2024. At most they make a martial turn take closer to the time of a half caster like the ranger or paladin. And half casters with masteries still don't take as long to resolve as a typical full caster turn.

Strongly disagree here.

First, I don't find that caster turns typically take longer than martial character turns, unless they are casting a complicated spell at higher levels. Most of the time, their turn involves an attack roll, plus some damage dice, or a saving through and an effect. But on the other hand, martial characters also start doing a bunch of extra stuff on their turns at higher levels.

And mastery adds significant time to my games, especially when working with new players or unfamiliar players, which is exactly what the OP describes. Maybe you are playing only with veterans who know the rule inside out, but at my games masteries consistently add confusion, players are forever forgetting to use them and then trying to backtrack, and the extra rolls alone add more time. The flow chart of their turn is much more complicated.

As for more fun, I'm going to give my players TwoSix's option of taking a flat +2 to strength or dexterity instead, and I bet most of them take it.

So for my games, your statement is just flat wrong. With weapon masteries, those player turns typically take much longer than for other players. It's by far my most disliked element of 5.5e.

 

[Voadam]

Be aware of some of the minor generally applicable rule differences (as opposed to things like classes or individual spells) that you as a DM have to choose between such as how to handle surprise, 14 style where you get a surprise round or 24 where you just get advantage on the initiative check.

 

[OB1]

Strongly disagree here.

First, I don't find that caster turns typically take longer than martial character turns, unless they are casting a complicated spell at higher levels. Most of the time, their turn involves an attack roll, plus some damage dice, or a saving through and an effect. But on the other hand, martial characters also start doing a bunch of extra stuff on their turns at higher levels.

And mastery adds significant time to my games, especially when working with new players or unfamiliar players, which is exactly what the OP describes. Maybe you are playing only with veterans who know the rule inside out, but at my games masteries consistently add confusion, players are forever forgetting to use them and then trying to backtrack, and the extra rolls alone add more time. The flow chart of their turn is much more complicated.

As for more fun, I'm going to give my players TwoSix's option of taking a flat +2 to strength or dexterity instead, and I bet most of them take it.

So for my games, your statement is just flat wrong. With weapon masteries, those player turns typically take much longer than for other players. It's by far my most disliked element of 5.5e.

Fair enough, you're experience is your experience, as is mine. I've had masteries with both experienced and inexperienced players, and didn't have an issue with either after a few sessions, though if I remember correctly it did take those coming from 2014 rules maybe a session longer than the newbies to consistently remember to use them (a stuck in the old ways problem, i think).

At most, it's adding a single saving throw 2 or 3 times per turn, along with 2 or 3 attacks. That's 4-6 die rolls, similar to the average amount of saves the DM is making against hypnotic pattern or fireball.

In general, those with masteries tend to use the same ones in a single fight (haven't seen them played at levels where you get to choose) but compared to the analysis that goes on from a wizard or druid as to which spell or power to use I just don't see how it comes close to the amount of time that full casters take deciding what to do and then resolve the saving throws of AOE spells.

I'll sing the praises of materies forever. Just last session, our Ranger had the Slow property likely save the sorcerer's life, while I used my fighter's rapier vex along with action surge to nova a difficult enemy, getting 3 attacks with advantage after the first hit and the chain continued. It feels great to get that kind of momentum going as a fighter.

Al that said, if you're going to get rid of masteries, at least give an extra feat (which they can use to take the +2 ASI feat if they want) instead of forcing the +2. I've only seen the +2 ASI feat taken maybe 20% of the time with 2024 rules.

 

[Zardnaar]

I really haven't found that weapon mastreries slow things down that much in 2 years of playing 2024. At most they make a martial turn take closer to the time of a half caster like the ranger or paladin. And half casters with masteries still don't take as long to resolve as a typical full caster turn.

More importantly, weapon masteries are FUN! The pure martial PCs I've seen with them enjoy the heck out of them, it makes their turns a bit more exciting, and it really gives them some fun advantages in combat.

I strongly recommend keeping weapon masteries for PCs who create 2024 characters.

BTW, I ran a year long campaign with a mix of 2024 and 2014. I did exactly what you suggested in the OP, 2014 PCs used all 2014 character build rules and spells, 2024 used all 2024 build rules and spells. The biggest difference between the class setups is that 2014 tends to have slightly higher nova capabilities, while 2024 has a higher baseline.

I like weapon masteries but objectively they can slow the game down and make it more complex.

Whether or not thats a good or bad thing is subjective.

Newer players often forget they exist. Experienced players no bg deal.

 

[TwoSix]

At most, it's adding a single saving throw 2 or 3 times per turn, along with 2 or 3 attacks. That's 4-6 die rolls, similar to the average amount of saves the DM is making against hypnotic pattern or fireball.

I mean, if your standard is "well, it just makes a normal attack round have the same number of dice rolls as an AoE spell, no big deal", then we may have a different standard of "no big deal".

 

[Tigris]

I mean, if your standard is "well, it just makes a normal attack round have the same number of dice rolls as an AoE spell, no big deal", then we may have a different standard of "no big deal".

This is the worst case, and its less bad than a caster. And having weapon masteries helps that people not all are playing casters because martials are underpowered and boring.