D&D (2024) WotC is right to avoid the word "edition."

[UngeheuerLich]

I think that's actually fair to say. PF was designed with the idea that you could take any 3.5 material and use them in PF with a few tweaks - and that was generally true and with fewer than were necessary to go from 3.0 to 3.5, in my experience. I used quite a few 3.5 adventures with my PF game. I usually had to add a combat maneuver bonus and defense and very little else.

Now I think UngeheuerLich's list ends up overstating the individual effect of a lot of specific changes. For example, reworking some of the classes wasn't a huge problem - most of them could be ported between 3.0/3.5 with a little reworking - extra skill points, some different bonus proficiencies, etc. Same with the changes in skills and feats.
Bigger changes, in my mind, included changes to damage resistance, weapon sizing, and spell durations. Those made a pretty noticeable impact, particularly on the behavior of players.
But the big issue was just the broad scope of changes overall and I don't think any of the player or 3PP communities really expected how far they'd go or how many changes there would be. Cumulatively, it really made for a lot of little changes all over the place that made it harder to use cross-edition materials and utterly killed a lot of 3rd party 3.0 materials marketability. Also, quite a few of the changes seemed strongly related to an idiosyncratic vision of D&D that may have been held by a few of the WotC staffers at the time. So while I think some of the updates were absolutely worthwhile (updated bards and rangers in particular), I can totally see how a lot of people felt burned by the experience.

Thank you for filling in. Some feats wer huge: natural casting? The druid can now shapeshift and cast spells.
That was huge. But of course, I agree with your assessment about the amount of changes which had the biggest impact.

Also: The game became even more codified and less adaptable. And it went further away from its ADnD roots.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

In terms of whether it is compatible, yes, everything so far is compatible.

I see no evidence of this.

if you can walk into a AL game with a character made useing the 2014 PHB I will relent, but I doubt that will happen

 

[GMforPowergamers]

They were trying out bits of 4e design in the late 3.5e books (notably "Book of 9 Swords"), and even Star Wars Saga Edition. That's probably not a good barometer of the compatibility of the finished works.

by his version of compatibility you would have to imagine someone taking a swordsage and someone else taking a jedi to a 4e table and saying "close enough right?"

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I'm like 99% sure that there will be a sidebar saying that any feat printed without a level is a level 4 feat by default. I'm also reasonably sure that most feats are going to be level 4, and higher level feats will be restricted to feats that give access to higher level spells or interact with higher level features.

I would love to see a "add this spell to your spell list" for higher level spells... but again I would much rather we have higher power and higher option/complexity martials first

 

[TwoSix]

I would love to see a "add this spell to your spell list" for higher level spells... but again I would much rather we have higher power and higher option/complexity martials first

Well, at least the "adding a spell to your spell list" is actually feasible.

 

[Parmandur]

I see no evidence of this.

if you can walk into a AL game with a character made useing the 2014 PHB I will relent, but I doubt that will happen

AL is insignificant numerically for the game
Statistically, that means no more than any random home game. Being compatible in Beyond is orders of magnitude more significant.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

AL is insignificant numerically for the game

but it shows how the company running it doesn't even allow the old book...

Statistically, that means no more than any random home game. Being compatible in Beyond is orders of magnitude more significant.

no it isn't. What happens on a website doesn't matter, all that matters is if you can play the game that way or not.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I would love to see a "add this spell to your spell list" for higher level spells... but again I would much rather we have higher power and higher option/complexity martials first

I don't see higher complexity martials coming from WotC...ever, really. It's not in their business model, and their research doesn't support needing it enough.

Fortunately, there are plenty of 3rd party products to serve that desire out there.

 

[Parmandur]

but it shows how the company running it doesn't even allow the old book...

no it isn't. What happens on a website doesn't matter, all that matters is if you can play the game that way or not.

Beyond is how 10 million people playbthe game. AL is a campaign of, last I heard, 100,000 people. And their rules are from the AL admins, not WotC. It's not the "official" waybtonplaybD&D, it's a nice big welcoming marketing home game, in essence.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I don't see higher complexity martials coming from WotC...ever, really. It's not in their business model, and their research doesn't support needing it enough.

Fortunately, there are plenty of 3rd party products to serve that desire out there.

I'm not asking to make the game more complex... just to introduce a class that is similar to a full caster worth of complexity on a weapon wielder.