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

[UngeheuerLich]

Not a stretch at all if your criteria is "it works." Would I notice the difference? Yep! Just like I would notice the difference between getting a 1st level feat and not getting one, and my ranger having wildly different abilities than your ranger.

You don't honestly want to tell me that I couldn't roll 1d20+20 and compare it to the 5e monster's AC and then deal damage, do you? Because if I can do that, it works. That it's not balance isn't relevant, since having a 1st level feat vs. not having one, and having wildly different powers as a ranger is also not balanced. The 3e example is just a more extreme example of "it works."

I think we are done here. If you can't see the difference between my example and yours, there is no point in arguing.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

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.

No disagreement here, except for the last sentence. I think it is a bonus that you could still play the old adventures more or less by the book if you don't have time to upgrade them.

 

[dave2008]

Isn't it a new edition if my old PHB isn't compatible with a new PHB?

The issue is people use different definitions of compatible.

Look at LevelUp (A5e), it claims compatibility with O5e* (and I agree), yet it completely rewrote every class, changed some mechanics (like exhaustion) and added others (like expertise dice and universal maneuvers) to make an "advanced" 5e (A5e). EnPublishing considers A5e as part of O5e. You can use any O5e adventure or monster with A5e PCs and vice versa. However, A5e is much, much more of a change than anything WotC has proposed so far in the 1D&D playtest yet many people are screaming that this it is incompatible. So, what is incompatible to some is the same damn system to others.

*O5e = original 5e

PS - There is also the question whether or not compatibility = new edition. If it is compatible, but changes things, is it a new edition or an extension of the current edition. That is clearly a disagreement on these forums as well.

I think everyone agrees if it is incompatible it is a new edition. So whether or not it is a new edition often comes down to ones interpretation on the level of compatibility required.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

The issue is people use different definitions of compatible.

Look at LevelUp (A5e), it claims compatibility with O5e* (and I agree), yet it completely rewrote every class, changed some mechanics (like exhaustion) and added others (like expertise dice and universal maneuvers) to make an "advanced" 5e (A5e). EnPublishing considers A5e as part of O5e. You can use any O5e adventure or monster with A5e PCs and vice versa. However, A5e is much, much more of a change than anything WotC has proposed so far in the 1D&D playtest yet many people are screaming that this it is incompatible. So, what is incompatible to some is the same damn system to others.

*O5e = original 5e

PS - There is also the question whether or not compatibility = new edition. If it is compatible, but changes things, is it a new edition or an extension of the current edition. That is clearly a disagreement on these forums as well.

I think everyone agrees if it is incompatible it is a new edition. So whether or not it is a new edition often comes down to ones interpretation on the level of compatibility required.

Exactly.

And, just closer to home: some of us have house-ruled and modified the 5e core nearly beyond recognition. I'm still playing 5e, and many of my changes are bigger than anything WotC has released so far for 1D&D. Yet, nobody would ever pretend my game is not ''compatible'' with 5e. I play the published adventures and create fight against the MM monsters just fine. Adding a free feat at level 1 has to be the most common house rule I've seen, and nobody bat an eye! We dont really use Feats at my table, but I dont ban them, so quite often only one player has some while the rest of the group does not. Still compatible, there's no one confused by that!

What a strange debate.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Exactly.

And, just closer to home: some of us have house-ruled and modified the 5e core nearly beyond recognition. I'm still playing 5e, and many of my changes are bigger than anything WotC has released so far for 1D&D. Yet, nobody would ever pretend my game is not ''compatible'' with 5e. I play the published adventures and create fight against the MM monsters just fine. Adding a free feat at level 1 has to be the most common house rule I've seen, and nobody bat an eye! We dont really use Feats at my table, but I dont ban them, so quite often only one player has some while the rest of the group does not. Still compatible, there's no one confused by that!

What a strange debate.

Also: we roll our characters.
So after level 4, a character who rolled well and took a feat is indistinguishable from a character who rolled bad and got a free feat.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I am not fond of the debates in this thread, but I have to ask....

Isn't it a new edition if my old PHB isn't compatible with a new PHB?

Depending on the usage of “edition”.

But what we have seen represents more of anew ed of the 5e core books, than D&D in general, if that makes sense.

A D&D edition, in the wotc era, means a new game, essentially, and a whole new line of books. That isn’t happening. 5e is continuing.

The key thing is, the new core books will be compatible with the supplementary books, and thus are the same game.

I mean sure, errata doesnt make an edition change, but the way its phrased above sounds like one to me. (no disrespect intended)

That’s fine, it’s a nitpicky argument anyway. It doesn’t matter whether it is or isn’t, what matters is that we won’t have a system that we can’t easily use previous supplements and adventures with.

 

[dave2008]

Exactly.

And, just closer to home: some of us have house-ruled and modified the 5e core nearly beyond recognition. I'm still playing 5e, and many of my changes are bigger than anything WotC has released so far for 1D&D. Yet, nobody would ever pretend my game is not ''compatible'' with 5e. I play the published adventures and create fight against the MM monsters just fine. Adding a free feat at level 1 has to be the most common house rule I've seen, and nobody bat an eye! We dont really use Feats at my table, but I dont ban them, so quite often only one player has some while the rest of the group does not. Still compatible, there's no one confused by that!

What a strange debate.

I'm in the same boat as well. My house rules change quite a bit from 5e, but it is still 5e to us and I'm 99% confident that we will be able to continue with '24 D&D too.

 

[Maxperson]

The issue is people use different definitions of compatible. Look at LevelUp (A5e), it claims compatibility with O5e* (and I agree), yet it completely rewrote every class, changed some mechanics (like exhaustion) and added others (like expertise dice and universal maneuvers) to make an "advanced" 5e (A5e). EnPublishing considers A5e as part of O5e. You can use any O5e adventure or monster with A5e PCs and vice versa. However, A5e is much, much more of a change than anything WotC has proposed so far in the 1D&D playtest yet many people are screaming that this it is incompatible. So, what is incompatible to some is the same damn system to others.

Yeah. We have different definitions. I don't agree that LevelUp is compatible. Having looked at the playtest documents and some stuff since, I wouldn't allow playtest classes to play along side 5e classes. The LevelUp versions are better. To use an earlier term, they don't play well together. The differences are greater than those of 5.5e vs. 5e.

I would and do use monsters from my monstrous menagerie book in my 5e game, though. They're simply updated, better versions of monsters, similar to ones that are homebrewed by DMs.

Someday I hope to convince my group to make the switch to LevelUp, but until then monsters will remain the only thing that makes it into the game.

 

[Minigiant]

I think that the "think of da' noobs" elements like the crit changes in origins got way more negative & thought out reasoned criticism than expected & that similar but reversed probably happened with the baby steps towards depth & nuance/modularity over simplicity in expert packet. When that happened the loud voices in the room/corporate chain responsible for simplicity at all costs in 5e found their position quickly becoming untenable in ways that made room for things that were kneecapped to get more attention.

I think this too.

If5e displayed one thing is that the designers dont play their in house games how most groups do. They made alot of assumptions about the player base that just wasn't true.

So it is very likely the feedback doesn't match what they planned so much that they had to change a lot.

 

[mellored]

Having looked at the playtest documents and some stuff since, I wouldn't allow playtest classes to play along side 5e classes.

Since you still haven't done any..
Guess it is up to me to do the math and see if your right. Which ranger can kill the other one fastest.

Level 1 human ranger. 16 Dex, 16 Con
Old: Crossbow expert, 15 AC, 13 HP, favored foe
New: toughness, 16 AC (defensive), 15 HP, hunters mark

Old: 2*((1d6+3+1d4) * 50%+ (1d6+1d4 * 5%)
= 2*((9*.5)+(6*.05))
= 9.6 damage per round.
= 1.5625 turns to kill.

New: 1d8+3+1d6*55% + 1d8+1d6*5%
=11*.55+8*.05
=6.4 damage per round
= 2.1666 turns to kill.

So there you go. The old ranger is more powerful.