D&D (2024) The impending mess that will be backwards compatibility

[UngeheuerLich]

if this is true how is it at all not just a new edition?

Because it uses the exact same chassis.
But that was explained so often, it won't convince you.

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

Because it uses the exact same chassis.
But that was explained so often, it won't convince you.

did you read the quote I was asking about? Because I am askin IF the new book replaces 99% of the old one how is that not a new edition?

 

[DarkCrisis]

So many people fighting against the so-called backwards compatibility like their isn’t a ton of gamers who have been around this block a million times not only with D&D but other games as well.

“I’ll use the old 5th Ed stuff it’s the same. You are all wrong". Sure Jan

 

[UngeheuerLich]

did you read the quote I was asking about? Because I am askin IF the new book replaces 99% of the old one how is that not a new edition?

Yes. I did. It still uses the same chassis. Only because I chose not to use outdated material, I still could.

I also use Xanathar's tool proficiencies and downtime activities if I use them at all and I use Tasha's optional ranger feature. I could as well rip those sides out of my PHB/DMG.
Noone called D&D after Xanathar/Tasha a new edition. So what is your point?

 

[mamba]

if this is true how is it at all not just a new edition?

because it does not break backwards compatibility

 

[Neonchameleon]

So many people fighting against the so-called backwards compatibility like their isn’t a ton of gamers who have been around this block a million times not only with D&D but other games as well.

“I’ll use the old 5th Ed stuff it’s the same. You are all wrong". Sure Jan

And the last time we went round this block was 4e Essentials - and we could and most of us did use the old 4e stuff alongside the new 4e stuff. The time before that was 3.5 and we couldn't. Those of us who have been around know that this doesn't always end the same way. A lot depends on the details.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Because it uses the exact same chassis.
But that was explained so often, it won't convince you.

That depends on what you consider the chassis to consist of. Things we know are being talked about changing that could be seen as part of the chassis include:

• The effect of Nat 1s and Nat 20s
• The weapons table
• The way skills work
• The way the Dash action works (from double your speed to a bonus move)
• The way difficult terrain works (or what it is)
• The way Exhausted works
• Grappling
• The way the Help/Assist works as an action
• Inspiration/"Heroic Inspiration"
• Hiding - Hidden is not a condition in 5e but is in One D&D
• The Influence action
• Invisibility
• Jumping (it's now an action)
• Light weapons and two weapon fighting
• Interrupting rests
• Search and study actions

Calling it "the exact same chassis" is overstating things. It's certainly a different version number even if the same model. And at that point it could go either way. (I come down on the same side of the fence you do based on what I've seen so far but that doesn't mean that it will necessarily go that way).

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

because it does not break backwards compatibility

2e was backwards compatible with 1e adventures

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

And the last time we went round this block was 4e Essentials - and we could and most of us did use the old 4e stuff alongside the new 4e stuff. The time before that was 3.5 and we couldn't. Those of us who have been around know that this doesn't always end the same way. A lot depends on the details.

very much so. 2e had at least 2 revisions maybe 3 depending on how you look at it, and it was always compatible. I am old enough to remember 3.5 not being compatible, and essentials was the easiest slide into.
I am just asking the question of when is enough change enough for us to count it and why WotC wants to change the term?

 

[UngainlyTitan]

So a couple of things strike me reading this thread. One, I believe the testimony of people that state that 2014 classes run side by side with 2024 classes. So about the spell. In my opinion the 2014 version of barkskin is pretty crap and if someone want to run it fine. On the other hand I would be inclined to ban the 2014 version of guidance. Not because I believe it to be very overpowered but having watched season 2 of Critical Role I find the constant guidance spam annoying. The 2024 version seems likely to be much less annoying. This says nothing about the compatibility.
What seems to me to be strictly not compatible are the changes to the actual rules. Like the proposed changes to stealth and invisibility or the proposed changed to dying.
There I think one would have to pick a lane and stick to it. However, unless I am mistaken all the places that one would have to pick a lane are adjudications that within the domain of the DM. The players would have need to know how certain things are rule on what what rules are being followed but they are still DM adjudicated rules.
This contrasts with the D&D 3 > 3.5 where skill were dropped, changed, split out or amalgamated and other character sheet changes were made that make the character sheets incompatible.
As to compatibility that will I expect be made at the individual table but in reality I really do not expect see mixed version play in actual practise and would be interested in hearing about it, if it occurs.