D&D (2024) So Will 'OneD&D' (6E) Actually Be Backwards Compatible?

[TerraDave]

I'm going to disagree there about the Monsters. I guess it depends on what you mean by "greater," but I think they are trying to make monsters easier to play / more interesting, but the don't seem more powerful.

If they don’t fix the MM monster math, this is a total waste of time.

 

[dave2008]

If they don’t fix the MM monster math, this is a total waste of time.

@TerraDave What do you mean by that? What do you feel is wrong with the monster math? I have my issues, but I am guessing yours are different.

FYI, they have already previewed the '24 monster design, so...

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

My definition of compatibility has far less to do with published adventures (which almost never run) and far more with how the rules of character creation and play (PC and DM side) actually work and interact.

Well we know character creation will be different - it already is with more recent supplements. So by that measure we are already incompatible!

I think that is to narrow of a definition of compatibility.

 

[Clint_L]

Well we know character creation will be different - it already is with more recent supplements. So by that measure we are already incompatible!

I think that is to narrow of a definition of compatibility.

I agree - look how much it has already changed since 2014. There has never been fixed character creation in 5e. Feats have gone from optional to expected to (soon) mandatory, there are way more sub-classes, a whole class has been added, new optional abilities for every class (some quite consequential - rangers), spells, etc.

DDB handles all of it quite smoothly. I haven't seen anything yet on the One tests that will be hard for it to incorporate.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Haven't seen anything one way or the other.

But I would lean towards not requiring a new purchase.

Pure guess though.

Pretty sure you will need to buy the next editions PHB.

There are enough notable changes I would consider it an edition change. However the material we have so far is backwards compatible, and I imagine it will stay that way.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Well we know character creation will be different - it already is with more recent supplements. So by that measure we are already incompatible!

I think that is to narrow of a definition of compatibility.

Correct. By my definition they are already incompatible, and I expect it to get further away.

 

[Clint_L]

Pretty sure you will need to buy the next editions PHB.

There are enough notable changes I would consider it an edition change. However the material we have so far is backwards compatible, and I imagine it will stay that way.

I had to buy MotM, and I already owned Volo's and Mordenkainen's. It was super cheap, but I still kind of regret it as MotM didn't change much, except spell lists, and I preferred the old method so I mostly use the old versions of monsters.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

I had to buy MotM, and I already owned Volo's and Mordenkainen's. It was super cheap, but I still kind of regret it as MotM didn't change much, except spell lists, and I preferred the old method so I mostly use the old versions of monsters.

I mostly prefer the newer style, and there are going to be further monster refinements. New Encounter Building and Revised Monsters are explicitly coming in the playtest.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I mostly prefer the newer style, and there are going to be further monster refinements. New Encounter Building and Revised Monsters are explicitly coming in the playtest.

I'll definitely be interested to see those. It seems like they could be refined quite a bit.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Correct. By my definition they are already incompatible, and I expect it to get further away.

How are they incompatible when they can be easily used alongside current stuff, and the playtest is outright using them with current stuff?