D&D (2024) Why no new packs since late September?

[UngeheuerLich]

The bolded is already false. All sheets have to be changed to reflect 1st level feats.

No, it is not. The characters can be played as they are. They are not completely correct, but still work.

For a bard, it makes no difference if they use their ability as a bonus action or a reaction. Both work within the same rule system.

You could just interpret the new classes as PHB 2 classes: it is not the bard, but the troubardor and it happens to have similar abilities that work a little different and all the classes of PHB 2 happen to have an extra feat at level 1 (not unlike the fighter level 6 feat).

 

[Maxperson]

No, it is not. The characters can be played as they are. They are not completely correct, but still work.

I could say the same about my 3e characters. His skills roll d20 to beat DCs. His bonuses to hit beat AC. The spells do damage or have DCs to be beaten. The mechanics for him still function in a 5e game. The abilities are different from base 5e sure, but then so are the 5.5 changes. 3e abilities are more extreme than the 5.5 changes, but they would still function.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I could say the same about my 3e characters. His skills roll d20 to beat DCs. His bonuses to hit beat AC. The spells do damage or have DCs to be beaten. The mechanics for him still function in a 5e game. The abilities are different from base 5e sure, but then so are the 5.5 changes. 3e abilities are more extreme than the 5.5 changes, but they would still function.

A bit of a stretch, isn't it?

You don't honestly want to tell me, that you don't notice a difference between +20 bab and +6 prof bonus at level 20?

 

[dave2008]

A bit of a stretch, isn't it?

You don't honestly want to tell me, that yoi don't notice a difference between +20 bab and +6 prof bonus at level 20?

Not to mention completely different defenses! I didn't play 3e but I assume they had Fortitude, Reflex, and Will saves in the classes?

 

[FitzTheRuke]

The closest equivalent we have seen in D&D before to playing with a mix of 5e and 1D&D characters is 4e and Essentials. While there were a number of 4e fans that cried foul (similar to what we're seeing here) that Essentials characters were too different to play alongside base 4e characters, they really weren't. It worked fine.

There was then, and there is here, a far, far bigger difference between a poorly optimized character and a fully optimized one. Between some classes and others. Between some player's grasp of maximized turn tactics and others. Between PHB-only versions and mixed-splatbook characters.

The fact is, not all characters are created equal, nor are all players. While a base 5e character and a 1D&D character don't line-up exactly the same they line up as well as any mix of PCs do.

And certainly far better than mixing a character from a different numbered "edition". While it's always been possible to do that, it has always taken a bit of work, and is almost always better to just rebuild the character using whatever rules the current game is using. This last will probably STILL be true (that it will be easiest if all PCs are using the newest rules, rather than a mix) - it doesn't currently look like it will be at all difficult to drop a "pure" 5e character into a 1D&D game, or vice-versa.

 

[dave2008]

The fact is, not all characters are created equal, nor are all players. While a base 5e character and a 1D&D character don't line-up exactly the same they line up as well as any mix of PCs do.

This. I agree that at this time there appears to be as much, or less, difference between a 1D&D playtest class and a '14 PHB class than there is between different '14 PHB classes. If the '14 PHB works at your table, the 1D&D playtest classes (that we have seen so far) do to.

 

[aco175]

I was just on the DnD site earlier and there are no articles posted since September and some areas since April. Not sure what is going on, not even a Black Friday posting or anything. It seems like even less reason to visit their site.

 

[the Jester]

no.
it's so they can sell new players handbooks, and old campaigns and monsters manuals.
A new edition would need to rewrite everything at once.

Switching from 4d6 damage to 2d6+7 is not charging the math.

It might maintain the same average result, but it definitely changes the math.

Or taking the +10 damage from sharpshooter and adding 1d6 from hunters mark. (Feel free to check the math).

It really does.

To be fair, no one ever wanted a 2014 ranger in their party. Or a 2014 monk.

Perhaps not in your group. I've seen a lot of love for both.

 

[dave2008]

I was just on the DnD site earlier and there are no articles posted since September and some areas since April. Not sure what is going on, not even a Black Friday posting or anything. It seems like even less reason to visit their site.

I think they are trying to make DnD Beyond the main source for D&D news. There are regular articles on that platform.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

No, it is not. The characters can be played as they are. They are not completely correct, but still work.

For a bard, it makes no difference if they use their ability as a bonus action or a reaction. Both work within the same rule system.

You could just interpret the new classes as PHB 2 classes: it is not the bard, but the troubardor and it happens to have similar abilities that work a little different and all the classes of PHB 2 happen to have an extra feat at level 1 (not unlike the fighter level 6 feat).

While this may be true, it's going to be pretty awkward to have two different "bard" classes at the same table, or having to constantly re-interpret how your class abilities work under the latest rules. Even if you rename one class on the character sheet, the rulebook will still say "bard". Can you play like that? Sure! Do you want to? Probably not, at least I don't

So I expect that regardless of how true the claims of backwards compatibility turn out to be, once the dust has settled most groups will use either 5e or 1D&D characters exclusively. If WotC wants to avoid splitting the community, they should focus on making 1D&D so awesome that almost everyone will want to switch, rather than pursuing a futile quest for backwards compatibility.