D&D General There are no "Editions" of D&D

[doctorbadwolf]

I agree to an extent that the rules should be updated based on feedback, but I also can't help shake the feeling that the goal posts for what constitutes an "evergreen edition" keeps getting shifted to preserve the idea that WotC has held onto the idea that 5e is an evergreen edition rather than One D&D being a new edition.

I don’t especially care about the whole evergreen edition thing, frankly. IMO the proposed changes just don’t qualify as a new game.

It's not a "new option." If you take an existing 5e background, you must use a conversion document to do so, which includes a list of feats to pick from.

No, you don’t. You can just play the 2014 background. You will have 1 less feat than you could have, but it’s not like the game will somehow not work for you.

Also, both are 5e backgrounds.

It is a conversion. It may be a small one. But a small amount of paint is not no paint.

And thus far, it is not just the feat. If you play a level 5 Bard, you have to convert your character. If you play almost any kind of Ranger, you have to convert your character.

No, you don’t. You literally can just play a 2014 version. You can even play a character that is partly one and partly the other.

It isn't a huge change...BUT NEITHER WAS 3.5e. A converted Wizard was nearly identical, for example, while a Ranger was somewhat different, as was a Druid. This isn't complex. There's a small but meaningful conversion process, which puts this at approximately the level of gap between 3.5e and 3.0. Most people saw that as a significant design break—enough to get upset about it. Why should a clear 5.5e get a pass simply because WotC is doing damage control this time?

It isn’t getting a pass. My initial reaction to the announcement was anger, because what I saw an article and took it at face value. Then I watched the announcement and explanation videos, and chilled out.

When the first UA came out, and then the second, and I have seen no reason to revert to that initial reaction.

Especially when we haven’t even seen revised second passes of these ideas yet, much less the final version.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

It is just an option. We have played ‘14 characters without the 1sr level feat along side playtest characters with the new feat. Not an issue, they play just fine at the same table

Exactly. It’s no more an issue than someone making thier character with just the PHB vs other players having all the options.

 

[Maxperson]

It is just an option. We have played ‘14 characters without the 1sr level feat along side playtest characters with the new feat. Not an issue, they play just fine at the same table

But they are objectively weaker than the ones with the feat. 3e fighters play just fine next to 3e wizards, too.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

But they are objectively weaker than the ones with the feat. 3e fighters play just fine next to 3e wizards, too.

In the four adventures we played they didn’t feel any weaker, and that is all that matters

 

[Maxperson]

In the four adventures we played they didn’t feel any weaker, and that is all that matters

And I enjoyed playing 3e fighters even with clerics and wizards in the group. Feelings don't equate to objectivity. They ARE weaker, which makes a difference to a lot of people.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

And I enjoyed playing 3e fighters even with clerics and wizards in the group. Feelings don't equate to objectivity. They ARE weaker, which makes a difference to a lot of people.

But are they?

 

[Reynard]

But are they?

Demonstrably yes.

 

[Maxperson]

But are they?

Objectively yes. Character with no feat is weaker than character plus feat. I'm not just talking combat. Feats objectively make you better at something, usually more than one something.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

Demonstrably yes.

They were no weaker in our area playtest . Perception = reality.

If they are not perceived and being weaker, they are not weaker.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

Objectively yes. Character with no feat is weaker than character plus feat. I'm not just talking combat. Feats objectively make you better at something, usually more than one something.

They were no weaker in our area playtest . Perception = reality.